Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0072-0044
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2002-06-21T04:00Z

'
1
K,
n
EASTERN
RESEARCH
GROUP.
INC.

MEMORANDUM
TO:
Walt
Stevenson,
EPNCombustion
Group
FROM:
Jason
M.
Huckaby,
Eastern
Research
Group
DATE:
June
17,2002
m­
D­
3
SUBJECT:
National
Emission
Trends
for
Large
Municipal
Waste
Combustion
Units
[
Years
1990
to
20051
1.0
BACKGROUND
The
purpose
of
this
memorandum
is
to
present
national
emission
trends
for
large
Municipal
Waste
Combustor
(
EVIWC)
units.
Emission
trends
for
large
MWC
units
are
presented
for
dioxdhrans,
cadmium
(
Cd),
lead
(
Pb),
mercury
(
Hg),
particulate
matter
(
PM),
hydrochloric
acid
(
HCl),
sulfur
dioxide
(
S02),
and
nitrogen
oxides
(
NO,).
In
this
memorandum,
large
MWCs
are
those
with
a
combustion
capacity
greater
than
250
tons
per
day.
These
MWCs
are
regulated
under
40
CFR
part
60,
subpart
Cb.
The
enission
trends
are
presented
for
the
period
between
1990
and
2005.
The
Clean
Air
Act
(
CAA)
required
maximum
achievable
control
technology
(
MACT)
retrofits
at
all
large
MWC
units
by
December
2000.
Table
1
presents
a
summaiy
of
emissions
for
large
MWCs
for
year
1990
(
pre­
MACT)
and
2000
(
post­
MACT).
Substantial
emission
reductions
were
achieved.
A
separate
memorandum
presents
emission
trends
for
small
L
W
C
units
regulated
under
40
CFR
part
60,
subpart
BBBB
(
35
to
250
tons
per
day
capacity).
This
memorandum
for
large
MWCs
replaces
the
1999
national
emission
trend
memorandurn'
for
large
IvEVCs.
The
updated
PJIVVC
emissions
estimates
for
large
MWC
units
contained
in
this
memorandum
were
prepared
using
updated
emission
factors
and
volumetric
flow
data
based
on
recent
MWC
testing
and
MWC
operating
data.
This
information
is
discussed
below
under
Section
2.0
(
Results),
Section
3.0
(
Calculations)
and
Section
4.0
(
References).

C:\
SmallMWCUnventory\
LargelJnits\
LMWCemissians6ZO.
wpd
1
Table
1.
Emissions
for
Large
MWC
Units
for
Year
1990
and
2000
Pollutant
Percent
Emission
1990
Emissions
2000
Emissions
Reduction
(
tons
per
year)
(
tons
per
year)
Achieved
The
dioxin
emissions
are
presented
on
a
g/
yr,
toxic
equivalent
quantity
(
TEQ)
basis,
all
other
emksion
reductions
in
TPY.'
TEQ
dioxin
emissions
are
based
on
1989
NATO
Toxic
Equivalency
Factors.
g/
yr
=
gram
per
year
TPY
=
tons
per
year
2.0
RESULTS
Emissions
estimates
for
large
MWCs
were
prepared
for
years
1990,
1993,
1996,
1999,
2000,
and
2005.
Emissions
varied
with
time
as
MWC's
completed
retrofits
or
elected
to
close
rather
than
retrofit.
The
compliance
dates
used
in
the
emission
estimates
reflect
actual
retrofit
dates
and
include
staggered
retrofit
dates
for
MWC
facilities
with
multiple
MWC
units,
where
appropriate.
Inventories
of
NIWC
units
were
obtained
from
existing
inventory
memoranda
and
updated
with
recent
information
on
RlWC
unit
closures
and
air
pollution
control
device
(
APCD)
retrofits.
I
From
the
updated
inventory
of
MWC
units,
a
database
of
large
MWC
units
was
developed
for
the
years
of
1990,
1993,
1996,
1999,2000,
and
2005.
The
MWC
population
varies
with
time
as
older
MWC
units
closed
and
new
MWC
units
opened.
For
year
2000,
a
companion
large
MWC
inventory
has
been
prepared
to
document
the
final
large
MWC
population
and
APCD
application
following
MACT
retrofits.
2
A
summary
of
the
updated
inventory
for
large
MWC
units
and
total
MWG
capacity
is
presented
in
table
2.
A
graphical
representation
of
capacity
for
large
MWC
units
is
shown
in
figure
1.
The
emissions
projections
for
year
2005
assume
the
number
and
total
capacity
of
MWC
units
would
be
the
same
as
in
2000.

C:\
S~
mallMWC\
hventory\
Ly\~
slrgeUnits\
LMWCemid
2
Table
2.
Summary
of
the
number
of
Large
MWC
Facilities,
Units,
and
Total
Combustion
Capacity
Year
Total
Combustion
Number
of
Large
Number
of
Large
Capacity
MWC
Units
(
tons
per
day)
MWC
Facilities
Using
this
new
large
NlWC
inventory,
emissions
were
calculated
for
eight
section
129
pollutants
using
updated
emission
factors,
volumetric
flow
rate,
capacity
and
AP­
42
type
emission
factors.
A
limited
amount
of
stack
test
data
was
also
used.
The
updated
emission
estimates
for
the
eight
pollutants
for
the
years
4990,
1993,
1996,
1999,2000,
and
2005
are
presented
in
table
3.

Table
3.
Summary
of
Emissions
Estimates
from
Large
MWC
Units
Dioxin/
Dioxin/
Furan.
Furall,
total
TEQ'
mass
Cd
Pb
Hg
PM
 IC1
so2
Year
(
g/
yr)
(
dyr)
(
TPY)
(
TPY)
(
TPY)
(
TPY)
(
TPY)
(`
IPY)

Equivalency
Factors.
gfyr
=
grams
per
year
TPY
=
tons
pes
year
C:\
SmallMWC\
Inventory\
LargeUnits\
LM
WCemissions620.
wpd
3
50,600
1
*
r
k
E.

A
graphical
representation
of
the
pollutant
emissions
data
for
the
above
years
is
shown
in
figures
2
through
18.
These
emissions
estimates
include
only
large
MWC
units
(
greater
than
258
tons
per
day).
These
emissions
trends
show
that
substantial
reductions
in
large
MWC
unit
emissions
have
occurred
since
1990.
These
emission
reductions
are
a
result
of
(
1)
retrofit
of
APCD
on
existing
MWC
units,
(
2)
retirement
of
several
existing
MWC
units,
and
(
3)
special
actions,
most
notably
EPA's
dioxin
initiative
and
the
voluntary
mercury
reduction
by
battery
manufacturers
3.0
CALCULATIONS
Nationd
MWC
emissions
are
a
function
of
three
variables:
(
I)
MWC
unit
inventory,
(
2
)

emission
factors,
and
(
3)
APCD
retrofit
or
closure
schedule.
The
updated
large
MWC
inventory
is
presented
in
attachment
1.
Updated
emission
factors
were
developed
for
the
most
common
MCDkombustor
combinations
using
the
average
performance
determined
from
the
test
data
Rom
the
large
MWCs
retrofits.
This
information
was
supplemented
with
AP­
42
emission
factors
for
less
common
AKBlcombustor
combination^.^
A
limited
amount
of
test
data
was
also
used.

See
attachment
2
for
a
listing
of
emission
factors
used.
See
table
4
for
identification
of
MWCs
where
test
data
was
used.

To
determine
annual
national
emissions
for
each
pollutant,
emissions
were
calculated
for
each
individual
h4WC
unit.
The
emissions
from
individual
units
were
then
summed
to
give
a
national
emission
rate.
The
calculation
of
individual
MWC
unit
emissions
was
conducted
using
plant­
specific
information
such
as
rated
unit
capacity,
unit
capacity
factor,
type
of
combustor,
and
type
of
APCD.
Emission
concentrations,
flow
rate
data,
and
capacity
factor
representative
of
typical
emissions
was
used
for
the
emission
calculations.
Table
4
lists
the
large
MWC
where
test
data
were
used
ira
the
calculations.

The
following
equation
was
used
to
convert
pollutant
stack
concentrations
to
tons
per
year
(
TPU)
emitted:

PE=
C*
V*
T*
CF*
365
*
I.
1
C:
1Srna~
WC\
Znventory\
LargeUnits~
MWCem~
s~
ons620.
wpd
4
4
i.

t
E
Where:

PE
=
Pollutant
emission
rate
(
TPY);
C
=
Flue
gas
concentration
factor
(
Mg/
dscm
@
7%
02);
V
T
=
MWC
unit
capacity
(
tondday);
CF
=
Capacity
factor
(
dimensionless);
=
Volumetric
flow
factor
(
dscm
0
7%
02/
ton
of
waste
fired);

365
aaysiyr;
and
1.1
tQlXdbfg.

Table
4.
Large
MWC
Units
with
Test
Data
­
Based
Emission
Estimates
Facility
Name
1
State
I
Unit
Number
ll
Adkondack
RRF
NY
1
Adkondack
RRF
NY
2
C:\
SinallMWC\
lnventory~
r~~
Units\
LM
WCemissionsG20,
wpd
5
P
x
I
Relative
to
the
1999
estimates,
these
updated
estimates
have
been
prepared
talking
advantage
of
the
new
information
on
volumetric
flowrate
and
annual
capacity
factors
available
from
the
data
survey
of
the
MACT
retrofits
at
167
large
MWCS.~
The
volumetric
flow
factor
(
V)
for
rehse­
derived
fuel
(
IRDF)
units
was
updated
to
5,026
dry
standard
cubic
meter
per
ton
(
~
s
c
~
t
~
~
)
MSW
combusted,
based
on
a
W­
squared
analysis
of
MACT
compliance
test
d
a
k
4
Lkewise,
the
volumetric
flow
factor
(
V)
for
non­
RP>
F
units
was
updated
to
4,299
dscdton
MSW
combusted.
Based
on
the
same
MACT
compliance
test
data,
the
capacity
factor
for
all
units
was
updated
to
0.86
(
86%)
based
on
a
R­
squared
analysis.
A
companion
analysis
is
available
that
documents
the
actual
large
MWC
emissions
for
year
2000
using
year
2000
MACT
stack
test
compliance
data.
5
Those
data
agree
very
well
with
the
year
2000
estimates
contained
in
this
trends
memo
(
see
table
5).
i
Table
5.
Comparison
of
Actual
Versus
Estimated
Large
MWC
Emissions
for
2080
Actual
2000
emissions
based
on
individual
large
MWC
stack
test
compliance
data
(
Reference
5).

I,

Estimated
from
emissions
developed
following
procedures
in
this
memorandum
(
see
table
3).

I
4.
REFERENCES
I
1.
Memorandum
from
B.
Nelson,
Eastern
Research
Group,
Inc,
to
Walt
Stevenson,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
Summary
of
the
National
Emission
Estimates
for
Municipal
Waste
Combustion
Units.
A­
90­
45:
VIII­
B­
1.
September
30,
1999.

Memorandum
from
J.
Huckaby,
Eastern
Research
Group,
Inc.
to
Walt
Stevenson,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
200
1
National
Inventory
of
Large
Municipal
Waste
Combustion
(
WnWC)
Units.
A­
90­
45:
VIII­
B­
6.
June
17,
2002.
I
.
2.

I
3.
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
Compilation
of
Air
Pollution
Emission
Factors
AP­
42,
Fifth
Edition,
Volume
1:
Stationary
Point
and
Area
Sources.
February
1996.

C:\
SmallMWC\
Inven~
o~
L~
geU~
1its\
LMWCemi20
wpd
6
4.
Memorandum
from
Can
Kuterdem
and
Bradley
Nelson,
Alpha­
Gamma
Technologies,
Inc.
to
Walt
Stevenson,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
Perfonnance/
Test
Data
for
Large
Municipal
Waste
Combustors
at
MACT
Compliance
(
year
2000
data).
A­
90­
45;
VIII­
B­
4.
June
18,2002.

5.
Memorandum
from
Bradley
Nelson,
Alpha­
Gamma
Technologies,
Inc.
to
Walt
Stevenson,
U.
S
I
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
Emissions
from
Large
Municipal
Waste
Combustor
Units
(
MWGs)
Following
MACT
Retrofit
(
Year
2000
Test
Data).
A­
90­
45;
vm­
B­
3.
June
19,
2002.

I
C:\
SmallMWC\
Inventa~~
a~
geUn1ts\
LMWCerms~
1ans620
wpd
7
Q)
m
4
b
Y­
o
i
i
L
I
I
I
I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I
I
0
0
0
0
I
I
I
I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
In
­
4­
63
(
v
T­
0,
9
0­
0
0­
o_
0­
0­
0­
9
z
co
b
a
T­
1
r
­
x
Q
vd
CS
m
.­

­­__*

I
I1
I
1
9
cu
­
P­

"!
c3
­
P­

Lo
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
m
c3
N
cu
0
0
0
Lo_
d­
d­
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0­
Lo!
0­
Lo_
0­
*­
e.
Lo
9
C:\
SmallMWCUnventor~
argeUNts\
LMWCemissions6ZO.~
pd
ho
0
0
cu
0
0
0
cv
a
0,
0,
T­
i
P
b
a
cv
"
E
b­
I
7
tc
I
I
I
I
I
I
U
t
i
l
0
2
I
!
I
I
I
Lo
0
0
cu
0
0
0
cu
t
s
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
0
0
0
0
9
Lo
0
0
0
0
9
0
0
0
Lo
9
x
cu
2
0
9
T­
T
9
x
m
2
Tj
d
c
I
I
I
I
I
Y
I
I
I
I
­­­
J
I.
I
E
I
I
I
I
­
_
c
m
­
3
2
I
I
I
1
I
0
0
0
0
9
1
1
1
0
0
0
m
cu
cu
7
0
m
1
0
0
0
9
9
0
Ln
Lo
­
3
­
3
R
­
8
:
0
9
9
0
o
>
:
:
8
13
C:\
SmallMWC\
Inventory\
LargeUnits\
LMWCemid
v)

c
a
.
c,
n­

Y
E
0
0
m
F
14
C:\
SmallMWC\
Xnventory\
LargeUnits\
LMWCemi.
wpd
*
L
­­*­
­_
I*"­,"­

I
I
I
%
w
3
23)

L
.­
n
a
0
T­

O
a
a
­

15
C:\
SmallMWC\
Inventory\
LargeUnitsUMWCe~
ssions62O.~
d
i
Y
I
Q)

tn
9
F
N
6)

0
m
m,

!
I
Lo
m
0
m
k
I
I
LD
0
0
cu
0
0
0
c\
1
I
I
I
I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0­
0­
Lo
0
Lo
c3
cu
cu
m
I
I
I
i
0
0
0
0
0
0
u3
0
Lo
0­
9
0­

T­
7
8
16
C.\
SmallMWC\
Inventory~
geUnits\
LMWCemis.
wpd
0
2
iz
P
3
02
I
I
17
C:\
SmallMWCUnventoryUa1geUNt~
WWCe~
ssions6~.
wpd
L
19
C
:
\
S
m
a
l
l
M
W
C
\
I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
~
g
e
U
n
i
t
s
\
L
M
W
C
e
d
9
4­
3
.
R
5
0
0
I
­
Tt
m
P
i
Q
0
0
N
L(
0
cw
cd
u
d
E
0
I
­
4
*
73
21
C:\
SmallMWC\
lnventory\
LargeUnits\
LMWCemi
wpd
b
u
.3
U
W
22
C:\
SmallM'WC\
Invento~~
geU~
ts~
MWCe~
ssions62O.~
d
t
24
C:\
SmalliMWC\
Invento~
y~
geUnits\
LhaWCe~
ssio~
s~
2O.~
d
i
C:\
SmallMWC\
Inventory~
geUnits\
LMWCemissions62O.~
pd
25
26
C:\
SmallMWC\
Inventory\
LargeUnits\
LMWCemid
1
i
4
27
C:\
SmallhlWC\
I1~
ventory\
LargeUnits\
LhlWCe~
ssions6ZO.~
pd
28
C
:
\
S
m
~
l
M
W
C
\
I
n
v
e
n
t
o
~
y
~
~
~
U
N
t
s
\
L
M
W
C
e
m
d
1p
0
Y
29
U
30
C:\
SmallM
WC\~
ventoiy\
LargeUnits\
LMWCemissions62O.~
d