li ~ - - ~ nt;llty~ Offices nationwide. trinityconsu!tants.com

'--LJnsultants 

Okl"honna City, OK 73104 U.S.A.• (405) 228-3292. Fax (405) 228-3293 

March 17, 2008 

Mr. Phillip Fielder 

Engineering MAR 172008 ' Supervisor - Air Quality Division 

Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality 

707 N. Robinson 

Oklahoma City, OK 7310 I AIR QUALITY 

RE: 	 Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Analysis Revised CALPUFF Results 

Lafarge Tulsa Plant 

Dear Mr. Fielder: 


Lafarge Building Materials (Lafarge) submitted a BART waiver application on November 30, 


2006, with supplemental information provided at the Oklahoma DEQ's request on November 7, 


2007. In a letter dated December 12,2007, the Oklahoma DEQ indicated certain inconsistencies 


between modeled emission rates and those listed in the facility's Title V permit, issued November 


20, 2007. In addition, the DEQ also inquired about the construction date of Kiln No. I, 


indicating that it might be a BART -affected unit. 


While Kiln No.1 was indeed constructed outside of the BART applicability window, the 


modeled emission rates do need to be revised to reflect the ernl!:;sion rates presented in the 


facility's Title V permit. For most of the modeled sources, emission rates from the Title V permit 


have been incorporated into the updated model runs enclosed with this letter. Note that the 


previous model runs used NOx and S02 Kiln No.2 emission rates higher than the estimates listed 


in the Title V permit. In order to provide a conservative estimate ofvisibility impact, these 


higher Kiln No.2 emission rates were retained in the current model run. 


All other aspects of the CALPUFF model, including PM 10 speciation profile, stack parameters, 


and CALMET, CALPUFF, and CALPOST input parameters remain unchanged from the original 


modeling report submitted on November 29,2006. As summarized at the end ofthis letter, the 


Lafarge Tulsa Plant's visibility impact (based on the 98th percentile change in deciview [LldvD on 


its four neighboring Class I areas does increase marginally, but remains below BART exemption 


levels. 


SOURCE EMISSIONS 

A summary of maximum 24-hr emission rates for each of the BART -eligible units at the Tulsa 

Plant is summarized below. Emission rates have been updated to match the values listed in the 

most recent Title V permit. 
Mr. Phillip Fielder - Page 2 of 6 

March 17, 2008 

TABLE 1. MAXIMUM 24-HOUR A VERAGE EMISSION RATES 

Unit ID NOx PM10 S02 

Ibs/hr Ibs/hr Ibs/hr 

EP04 0.12 7.714 0.007 

EP05 -­ 0.857 -­ EP13 -­ 1.114 -­ EP15 576.00 50.30 960.00 

EP24 -­ 6.804 -­ EP26 -­ 0.857 -­ EP25 -­ 0.857 -­ EP17 -­ 9.214 -­ EP27 -­ 0.750 -­ EP28 -­ 0.643 -­

As in the original submittal, speciated PMIO emissions from the kiln are based upon FLM 

guidance for dry-bottom cement kilns operating with fabric filters. l A speciation profile is 

presented below. 

TABLE 2. CEMENT KILN PM10 SPECIATION PROFILE 

Particulate Matter Wt. Fraction 

Species 

PM Coarse 6.70% 

PM Fine (Fine Soil) 7.70% 

Elemental Carbon 0.00% 

Sulfates (inorganic 

condensable PM) 75.30% 

Secondary Organic Aerosols 

(organic condensable PM) 10.30% 

Total 100% 

A summary ofPM10 emissions from Kiln No.2 is presented below. 

TABLE 3. KILN SPECIATED PMJO EMISSIONS 

Unit ID PM (coarse) 

Ibs/hr 

PM (fine) 

Ibs/hr 

S04 

Ibs/hr 

SOA 

Ibslhr 

EC 

Ibs/hr 

EP15 3.370 3.873 37.88 5.181 -­

I http://www2.nature.nps.gov/airlPermits/ectlectCementKiln.cfm 
__~~__ 

Mr. Phillip Fielder - Page 3 of 6 

March 17, 2008 

MODEL RESULTS 


A summary of the top 25 visibility-impairing days at each of the relevant Class I areas over the 

modeled 2001-03 period is summarized in Tables 4 through 7 below. Shaded values indicate 

visibility impacts that exceed the 0.5 ~dv threshold for contribution to visibility impairment. As 

seen in these tables, the 98th percentile values indicate that the Tulsa Plant's contribution to 

visibility impairment is still below the 0.5 ~dv threshold at each of the neighboring Class I areas. 

These results indicate that the Tulsa Plant therefore qualifies for exemption from BART. 

TABLE 4. VISIBLITY IMPACT MODEL RESlTLTS FROM CANEY CREEK 2001-03 


Modeled Background Extinction by Species (%) Year Day 

Visibility 

Impact (Adv) 

Rank 

._~.~~~.~:!!_~Y~E~~.-,-e-1__--::.;o.:.,.:.48::..:,7_ 

_______2 .mn...__" ..... 0.465

3 0.312 

4 0.275 ....._..............._........._...................................••-....-....-:~-

• __.................._ ....._ ......___

5 • ______ m ___• __'" 0.273 60.17 39.2 ........., _____0.23 ....._ ....__________0 0.06 .__ 0.35 ,m" "'__2001 ..n .._ ..__24
_ 


6 0.247 63.94 35.71 0.13 0 0.01 0.2 2001 285 
 ...._..._--_...._.._-----_.............."""-""""" ,~---.-..-......-.-....-.----..--.--..-~~-...,...,---,--'" ",....."",...,._-----­

.............._7____ ............__.9:.?~!!L_.__._ ......33.61 .. _........§.§~~J_.____.Q_...____.Q:.qL_._.9.:..?I..?.QQ.J....._... __.. 


8 .... _ .._9.,.?Q.~_......_...___.................,?,6.1 73.12 ._........ .Q,~!............._._..Q._.................9.,Q~...........__0.3L _.... ?Q9J........ 357 


...................._..... ____... ....... QJ.~....................._.............._4~·98 50.44................... 0·?1.................._.Q............... 0.09,9.29 2002 .............?..9..!L..... 


......................IQ.... ____ ..9.,..1..§:1.......................................:1?:71 53.65 0.28 0 0.04 0.32 20q.~ ... _.?......... 


l1 0.182 60.89 38.52 0.22 0 0.06 0.3 2001 286 
 ...................,............,.•.....".. -"''''''''..".... 
,~

12 0.22 ° 0.06 0.25 .......?9.Q?....._.~.Q_ 

13 
 0.2 0 0.Q7 0.2 2003 3 
 --~""""~.~-~..­ 14 
 :......-_:~~_,0':'.:.3~1~~0'!-_~0~.0~7__._........Q:.?.............._2_00_1_ ....~2~89....... 


15 
 0.42 303 


16 


0~.•2~1__~0~__0~.1-'--_-=~4_~~_~ 2002 


0.161 31.24 67.75 0.36 0 0.11 0.54 2003 344 


1___...;;:17 0.156 40.52 58.96 0.18 0 0.02 0.31 2001 359 


0.55 2001 36
 I .................._.....;;....:,................__....+................._...:::..=.:::.....___I._..?~..::.~__.72.27 0.4 ......-.J? ....-Q:1!--==-4--=:.::.=-=-._•..•.......•- .... 


19 
 ...g:..1~.?...__...... ........?!!,.59 ........... 4QJ__ 0·l?..........................Q...................._._Q. .:;:.0c..:. 1_---...:::..:...:..;::.._+ 0.16 __

2002
 .._m.......
 5 


..............._2_0.._..........___._...............................gJ.?.. ................._........?.g:?~_..............§.g.:2_1__.9.:~2 ...............9.,:...:..18::..........._.::..:.:::.::............j 0.57 
 2001


21 
 ° -_....,........, 


0.134 47.32 51.75 0.34 o 0.08 0.51 2002 310
 """""""""""_,._,.."'_,.'''''''''~''''~ __ .............................................................................................. , .... , ..",..,,"""_..,_,_ """""""""""K"_'........ . 


98th Percentile 0.132 52.6 46.76 0.2 o 0.07 0.38 2003 347 


___2=3~__-/-_--'0:::..1.:.::.2:.:::.3___1__6_6._94__...... ..!.:~3 0.41 ...Q.. ..:;;..0.:..:;.07:.....-_..::.=..:........,--=="--... 
 0.64 2003 110


1___=2=-4~__-/-_--=0"-.1:=2=-2__1_34_.O'8__._......~_.7_7.___ 0._4?.__Q._......_O_.15_._-=..::::.::.....-I_==..:......... 
 0.53 2001 35


25 0.102 64.96 34.58 0.16 o 0.05 0.25 2001 333 

1 

Mr. Phillip Fielder - Page 4 of 6 

March 17, 2008 

TABLE 5. VISIBLITY IMPACT MODEL RESULTS FROM HERCULES-GLADES 2001-03 

Rank Modeled Background Extinction by Species (%) Year Day

Visibility 

Impact (Adv) S04 OC EC PMC PMF 

~=_+_...........:0:..:.:.3:.=.9.:....1__1---'3::::2::...:.1..:::.6,_§_6.8_4 ___~,:,1_, __"'________9____________"9":"1".,'''_ 0.51 2001 362 

,____.,--=-2___--1___ 0::..:..2=-4:.....-_--1----=:,.31:,,::.5=7 67.58 g:.??,__",_",,,, __,.Q,,,,,,,,,,,,,",,"Q:~_..:::.0.:...:..47'---1 ____2_00_3_,..,,~1""", 

3 0.234 85.48 14.02 _0~JL__q_,_"_,____,Q:9::.::3_--=.:0.::.:28,---+,,,__20_0~,,,_,_~,~"_ 

4 "---__-:.:.:::",____,___--=-__..::=_--=oc:.::.5'--1_,.?0_0_2 _",,_1,?,,_ 

5 0.23 2002 30 

2 0.22 0 0.08 0.39 2001 6 I-----=--------I----I!-J,?,L"'-,-,-'''''''' 46.5 _--.:.5c:::. 8c.c. ::::,.2,_--':''-'=__''';;''''''''_-==-=­

__ 0.23 0 0.05 0.35 2002 361 ""_,,_,___,,_,,_""""'_..?,,"_"'''''__--l__--''0c..:..1,54_,____ , 45.49 53.8:..c9__"-'='---_.-'-_""".::.:...:",:,. 

1""""_""''''''''''''''''''.,,••'''''''_''''''''''.''''.,•••_'''__~---=..:.c0.1,?__"""""'__",_4_2._23____§7.1:..::,6_--=0.2 0 0.04 0.37 

0.17 0 0.06 0.3 

0.16 0 0.04 0.23 ....------.~..~,,~-.-...­

___0.131 "_'K""""_KK_' __29.11 ~_~__M_...__

69.69 •.__•._ ..__._..___0.47 """"..."'~_""~._0 .... _ ...0.09 0.64 __._.___ .....____2002 .___47 . 


12 _",-==-,-,___+_..:::.54.:..:...;",;75::-"""_,,,,,"11:_62__,,_,_,,_0_.2_6 __,,_,,,,,,,""~_"'__ 0.03 0.34 2001 314 

"'",,___J.""'3__-'----1__--=c:..=..:..-__1--..:..:40::.::.2:::::..3"",_,,_","'_59_.33_.___._.__0_.2____,,9"'''' 0.02_Q:?'~_,_ . 2001_"_22_ 

__.""""""",,.",,_1;.....4___--1___=..:...:.:=--_--1--=29::..:..3=7 6=9.:.:..76=--_.:::.:0.,34 ,.".,_"_,,._...JL.... 0.08 0.45 - ...-..- .......---.. .. 2001 32 ~ 

__,_,__....:..1..:...5___ -..:::.:..:::..:....._--=.0,.28 0 """""""",,,9.:,11_,___ 0.5 _29..9..~"._",_.~?,_._", 

16 0:~§""''''''"''''"",'''""9""""",,'',,,_,_,9,:1,_,_,,_'''_,,J!&?__ --.?.9~_",__-,?,~,~", 

17 .95 0.25 0 0.03 0.4 2001 340 '''''''-,,-''''''-''''-.-'''''.....~ " .........."._.__................""".".­

·····'-"'''''''-''''',,'''''''''':'-.~t~"-'''''''_-_=__,:''''',,''''',,''''''~:'~;;=~"~~~~""'.: ,,,,:,::::;!::~~,,___-=-::::..:.:::::...::,---_...::..~:=~;,,---__~=--_-=-~:=~4-'-3--""!:-!:-r--~~-~-~"'~i1~,,= 20 0.083 46.73 52.46 "'''''''''''"'"''"''''''--------'"----"-----,,--''''--''''''''''''''''''''''''"""""'''''''-'''''''''''''--" ----------""'...:::.---= 0.22 0 -==----=----'::.:=----==--+-==-:.­ 0.07 0.52 2001 4 

21 0.07 47.88 51.73 0.17 0 0.02 0.2 2002 340 

98th Percentile 0.066 61.46 38.02 0.18 o 0.05 0.29 2001 11 

23 • • ............................ 0.066 , ..........m..""."'...................... 93.91 "_"mm...................._._~

5.17 ................."''''_.................... 0.29 . 0.15 0.48 ~~-~,-"'. 2003 --'''-­ 229 

24 0.062 """"""""'-""''''-,,-,-, ,,,......,.....?9"'?_8___,_68:.!1""""."""""""..9.:,?.1.."",,,,,,,._."",,,,..Q,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ""g.:..::.0:;::8_~0:.:::.29 2001 335 

25 0.062 83.72 15.34 0.32 o 0.12 0.5 2001 147 
Mr. Phillip Fielder Page 5 of 6 


March 17,2008 


TABLE 6. VISIBLITY IMPACT MODEL RESULTS FROM UPPER BUFFALO 2001-03 


Rank Modeled Background Extinction by Species (%) Year Day 
__ 

0.171 43.44 _..::==----'0:.:;.3::,::9__.. 0. ...Q,g__ 0.53 .......?.9_03_..._..?.75 .... 

1,.6,,_4,..............,......._......... " ............... 2001 _ ...__2 .. 

0.161 

Mr. Phillip Fielder - Page 6 of 6 

March 17, 2008 

TABLE 7. VISIBLITY IMPACT MODEL RESULTS FROM WICIDTA MOUNTAINS 2001-03 


Rank Modeled Background Extinction by Species (%) Year Day 

804 N03 OC EC PMC PMF 


.J:~ea~_?:l-hr A..Y'~~~!_f------_---=0=.2=96,,--___, 73.93 25.56 0.19 o 0.05 0.27 2001 309 


2 0.256 33.93 65.12 0.33 


3 
 56.4 42.98 0.24 ---'--·-·····-··················-·-·f------==::..........--·+-"........._----­

4 0.252 _ ....43.05 

__....._--_ 55.87 ....... 0.39
 1----·--····..··_·_···_..· ------"==-----+ __ 78·3.L.._.......?1J_~_ 0.18 

1 4
 5:..::3.:..;;.0'-C__...:..;6:.:.;.28 O:.?.~........................9......................JI.:.Q~,__.___O.~ .................?o.9..L..........1.~.!?. 

6 . .::c8.:::;;52::..........--,::3:..:.;1.16 0.13 0 ...o.:.9.:?......,",., 0.18 ?'Q93 __ "",f;3_0. 


10
 1-·..·_···············_::··:_-_·_-_···········- - ...... 

1__.................._;;.1•.;1;;.,."."""_'_'" ..... _ .........._.0.,:,.,.... 


12 


13 


14 


..,_...................!..?...................... , ..._........__..._..9.:...1..1............ __....,~,1,:.?~ , . ...!..:~O':18 ... Q ...... g:.Q~" 0.31.. , ....?002 .,.,149. 


16 0.132 26.28 72.61 0.4 0 0.14 0.57 2001 25 
 """""""".................................................... """................................................."-,--,,,..,"--,,,........_,, ..................--~..- ...."""""""""""""""""""""""""""""",,..,..,.. """", ,..........,,--, 


_ ..................!.?_____................................9.:,~,?~.................._ .___.f:3.1..:~..i..,..,....."..~,8.21 0.19 .......Q.g&~__0__.21 .... ,.?QQ~...........279 ... 


18 _..... _.._...._....._..,Q,,1?~ ... _._ .... ~§.:.?.L.........1i~Q:21.............9..............9~~ ... .........g~..... ....?'o.Q?'._ .....J§~ .. 


0.123 93.9 4.67 0.5 0 0.17 0.76 2002 357 
 "'-""-.."'-.....,--~---+---::..::..:..:...._.........._-_....._........... .........,.._........._......._.........._... 


20 0.122 48.94 0.32 0 0.11 0.43 2001 223 


21 0.121 48.16 0.25 03 _._.._-_278
 ... 


98th Percentile 0.121 19.14 0.24 0 0.07 0.38 2001 78 


23 0.113 2.76 0.42 0 2003 223 


24 0.107 7.69 0.46 0 2001 225 


25 0.103 45.69 0.52 0 2003 305 


A copy ofmodel input and output files (matching the same set of data provided in the original 

submittal) is included in the attached DVD. If you have any questions or require any additional 

information, please feel free to contact either Eugene Chen or myself at (405) 228-3292. 

Sincerely, 

TRINITY CONSULTANTS 

Vern Choquette 

Principal Consultant