New Source Review The Stink of Permitting Projects at High TRS - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

New Source Review –The Stink

• f Permitting Projects at High

TRS Landfills (and other Wonderful Landfill Gas Related Air Permitting Topics)

2018 S pring Conference – S WANA NJ

Michael A. Trupin Trinity Consultants

Today’s Discussion

˃ Discussed:



NEWS FLAS H!! There is S ulfur in your Landfill Gas and it could impact your air permitting & compliance.

♦ Not S

ampling your LFG for TRS may NOT be an option



Brief Review of NS R –To Understand Permitting Challenges



Elevated TRS in LFG – NS R Implications



Formaldehyde Emissions from GTE

˃ Not Discussed:



Waste streams responsible for S ulfur in LFG



How those little bugs get that S ulfur in your LFG



Advanced NS R/ PS D topics/ regulatory aspects



NS R/ PS D Avoidance S trategies (and all the nuances of the associated rules)

♦ Common Control; “ One time doubling” ; Air Permit “ Timing” ; etc.



S pecifics of NJDEP S tate of the Art (S OTA) Requirements

NSR in 60 Seconds (or so)

˃ Prevention of S

ignificant Deterioration (PS D) – Permits for Maj or S

• urces in

Attainment Areas

 40 CFR 52.21 – Federal PS

D Program

♦ NJ has delegat ed aut horit y t o implement t his

regulat ion

 Maj or for 1 Compound – Evaluate Applicability

for all compounds

˃ Nonattainment New S

• urce Review (NNS

R) – Permits for Maj or S

• urces in Nonattainment

Areas

 40 CFR 51, Appendix S

– Federal NNS R

 N.J.A.C. 7:27-18 – New Jersey’s “ NNS

R”

NNSR Rules in NJ

˃ N.J.A.C. 7:27-18 – Control and Prohibition of

Air Pollution from New or Altered S

• urces

Affecting Ambient Air Quality

 AKA. “ Emission Offset Rule”  AKA. “ S

ubchapter 18”

˃ EP

A “ Approval” for Regulation 7/ 25/ 1996

˃ S

poiler Alert!! – New Jersey NNS R Rules effectively represent potential to potential test AND include ALL increases/ decreases in contemporaneous period.

Attainment… Huh?!

˃ National Ambient Air Quality S

tandards (or NAAQS )

 Carbon Monoxide  Lead  Nitrogen Dioxide  PM-10  PM-2.5 – (S

O2 [and others] are Precursors)

 Ozone – (Regulated via NOx/ VOC Precursors)  S

ulfur Dioxide

SO2 (1971) NAAQS

SO2 (2010) NAAQS

PM-2.5 (1997) NAAQS

PM-2.5 (2006) NAAQS

PM-2.5 (2012) NAAQS

Who Really Cares?!

˃ PS

D – Maj or S tationary S

• urce (or

modification to existing non-maj or)

 MS

W Landfill (and associated source activity) with >= 250 TPY Potential to Emit (of any [non-GHG] regulated pollutant)

 Typically this does not include Fugitives

Who Really Cares?!

˃ NJ “ NNS

R” Initial Applicability Criteria

 Facility has PTE that equals or exceeds:

 Or, Increase of an air contaminant (in

application) equals or exceeds threshold.

 S

ubchapter 18 definition of PTE would typically include fugitive emissions.

EPA on Fugitives

“…the use of collection technology by other landfill sources, whether or not subject to EPA's proposed requirements or to State implementation plan or permit requirements, creates a presumption that collection of the emissions is reasonable at other similar sources. If such a system can reasonably be designed to collect the landfill's gas emissions, then the emissions are not fugitive and should be considered in determining whether a major NSR permit is required.”

• --John Seitz memo 1994 (Classification of

Emissions from Landfills for NSR Applicability Purposes)

Having Major Mod Issues!

˃ PS

D Maj or Modification

 Physical change in or change in the method

• f operation of a maj or stationary source

resulting in:

♦ S

ignificant emission increase of PS D pollutant AND significant net emission increase

NJ Sub 18 Applicability

˃ If initial applicability criteria is met, an application is

subj ect to S

• ub. 18 if proposed allowable emissions

would result in significant net emission increase of air contaminant AND the facility location is:



NA for respect ive crit eria pollut ant



At t ain. for respect ive crit eria pollut ant , and

♦ Net Increase yields increase in [ambient] in a NA Area and ♦ Increase in [ambient] equals/ exceeds S

IL in the NA Area



At t ain. for respect ive crit eria pollut ant , and

♦ Net Increase yields increase in [ambient] that equals/ exceeds

S IL, AND

♦ Net Increase yields increase in [ambient] that results in

violation of NAAQS

• r NJAAQS

This is significant (Sub 18)

˃ Increase that equals or exceeds:

Significant Net Emission Increase Determination (NJ “NNSR” Only)

˃

NI = IP + INP + IF + IA – DO – DC

˃

NI=Net Emission Increase at Facility

˃

IP=Any increase(s) in allowable emissions of the contaminant which

• ccurred during the contemporaneous period (as authorized by

permit)

˃

INP=Any increase(s) in allowable emissions of the contaminant during the contemp. period and which came from source/ control for which no permit was in effect

˃

IF=Increase in fugitive emissions during contempt. period

˃

IA=Proposed increase in allowable emissions of the air contaminant which is the subj ect of application

˃

DO=Any increase(s) in allowable emissions of the air contaminant during contemp. period, if offsets were secured

˃

DC=S um of all creditable emission reductions at the facility during

• contemp. period not including creditable emission reductions

previously used as emission offsets.

Definitions for NJ Netting

˃ Allowable Emission - …

based on the maximum rated capacity of the equipment, unless subj ect to Federally enforceable limits which restrict

• perating rate, hours, or both…

˃ Contemporaneous - …

five years prior to commencement of construction and period up to initiation of operation

˃ Creditable Emission Reduction…

typically based on the actual rate of emissions (equals average rate at which air contaminant was actually emitted during the 2 calendar years immediately preceding the permit application date)

This is significant (PSD)



Carbon Monoxide: 100 TPY



Nitrogen Oxides: 40 TPY



S ulfur Dioxide: 40 TPY



Particulate Matter: 25 TPY



PM10: 15 TPY



PM2.5: 10 TPY



Ozone: 40 TPY (VOC or NOx)



Pb: 0.6 TPY



Fluorides: 3 TPY



S ulfuric Acid Mist: 7 TPY



Hydrogen S ulfide: 10 TPY



Total Reduced S ulfur: 10 TPY



Reduced S ulfur Compounds: 10 TPY



Municipal Waste Combustor Organics: 3.5 E-6



Municipal S

• lid Waste Landfill Emissions (NMOC): 50 TPY



All Other NS R Pollutants: Any Emission Rate!!

Why do I care about this?!

˃ NNS

R Applicability (NJ S ub 18)

 Lowest Achievable Emission Rate (LAER)  Compliance certification  Emission Reductions (Offsets)  Alternative S

iting Analysis

 Conduct Ambient Air Quality Impact Analysis

˃ PS

D Applicability

 Best Available Control Technology  S

• urce Impact Analysis

 Additional Impacts Analysis  Evaluate Impact on Class I Areas

Landfill Source Examples – Painting the Picture

˃ S

• urces of Concern

 Landfill Emissions  Flare Emissions (Open or Enclosed)  Engine / Turbine Emissions

˃ The next slides provide example emission

rates for common landfill sources

 Do we have any NNS

R/ PS D Concerns? !

Flare Emissions

Open Flare Enclosed Flare PM2.5 11.17 11.17 PM10 11.17 11.17 SO2 64.46 64.46 NOx 45.21 39.89 VOC 3.44 2.63 CO 206.11 132.98

Notes:

• Based on 5000 cfm of LFG (50% CH4) to Flare
• Assumes 300 ppm Sulfur in LFG

Typical Flare Emissions

 SOTA Note: 2014 DRAFT Manual Proposed 95% removal of all TRS

• r 310 ppmv (corrected to 0% Oxygen)

Engine (Example) Emissions

• No. of Units:

1 1 6 4 CAT 3516 CAT 3520 CAT 3516 CAT 3520 NOx 22.17 12.94 133.02 51.76 CO 34.36 89.05 206.16 356.2 VOC 0.12 0.22 0.72 0.88 PM10 2.1 3.7 12.6 14.8 PM2.5 2.1 3.7 12.6 14.8 SO2 4.29 7.56 25.74 30.24 Notes:

• Based on 300 ppm Sulfur in LFG
• Assumes 333 scfm (50% CH4) for 3516
• Assumes 586 scfm (50% CH4) for 3520
• VOC Excludes HCHO
• Yes! You may have used different NOx or CO Factors

Typical (CAT) Engine Emissions

Quick Check on Gas Generation

Waste Accepted In-Place Total LFG Year TPY TPY

• Avg. cfm

1 365000 2 365000 365000 175 3 365000 730000 344 4 365000 1095000 505 5 365000 1460000 661 6 1825000 810 7 1825000 778 8 1825000 748 9 1825000 718 1,000 TPD Receipt (k=0.04/Lo=100) Waste Accepted In-Place Total LFG Year TPY TPY

• Avg. cfm

1 730000 2 730000 730000 350 3 730000 1460000 687 4 730000 2190000 1010 5 730000 2920000 1321 6 3650000 1620 7 3650000 1556 8 3650000 1495 9 3650000 1437 2,000 TPD Receipt (k=0.04/Lo=100)

The NSR Impact of TRS

500 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 46.9 1.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.1 10.1 200 4.3 8.6 17.2 25.8 34.4 42.9 1000 21.5 42.9 85.9 128.8 171.8 214.7 2500 53.7 107.4 214.7 322.1 429.4 536.8 5000 107.4 214.7 429.4 644.1 858.9 1073.6 10000 214.7 429.4 858.9 1288.3 1717.7 2147.1

*All table values are SO2 in Units of TPY.

Combusted LFG Flow in SCFM TRS Concentration (ppmv) Annual SO2 Emissions (TPY) at Constant Flow and Sulfur Concentration*

Another Look (via Concentration)

500 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 40 1863 931 466 310 233 186 100 4657 2329 1164 776 582 466 250 11643 5822 2911 1941 1455 1164

^All table values are TRS concentrations in Units of ppmv

Combusted LFG Flow in SCFM SO2 TPY Sulfur Concentrations (ppmv) Yielding Specific SO2 Annual Emissions at Various LFG Flows^

Fugitives for Modifications

500 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 46.9 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.8 1.1 1.3 200 0.6 1.1 2.3 3.4 4.6 5.7 1000 2.9 5.7 11.4 17.1 22.8 28.5 2500 7.1 14.3 28.5 42.8 57.0 71.3 5000 14.3 28.5 57.0 85.5 114.1 142.6 10000 28.5 57.0 114.1 171.1 228.1 285.2

*All table values are H2S in Units of TPY. Assumes 25% of Generated LFG is Fugitive

Annual H2S Fugitive Emissions (TPY) at Constant Flow and Sulfur Concentration* Generated LFG Flow in SCFM TRS Concentration (ppmv)

The Sulfur Take Home…

˃ If BACT/ LAER for S

O2 (cost is considered for BACT)

 Gas Treatment for S

ulfur Removal?

 S

O2 Removal via scrubbing?

 What is cost effective?

<$20K/ ton removed?

˃ If BACT for S

ulfur Fugitives

 Early installation of LFG Collectors (pre-

NS PS )?

 Increased Gas Collection Efficiency?

How?

The Sulfur Take Home (x2)

˃ PS

D (or S ub 18) Applicability for S O2

 Modeling of combustion emissions

♦ This is not a “ box checking” exercise ♦ NAAQS

issues could drive cont rol (if BACT or S OTA analysis did not )

˃ PS

D Applicability for TRS / H2S

 Modeling, Monitoring, Public Participation?

˃ NNS

R Applicability for S O2

 Offset Purchases

♦ Availabilit y could be maj or issue

And you think that Stinks… !

˃ Formaldehyde emissions from LFG combusting

engines and turbines are an agency focus nationwide

 Can assume engines have approximately 0.4 g/ bhp-

hr of HCHO emissions (or higher)

 A single CAT 3520 can potentially make the facility

a maj or source of HAP (i.e., 10 TPY)

 These HCHO emissions are VOC emissions!

♦ Impact to maj or source NNS

R status in Ozone NA Areas

 Risk Based Modeling may yield unacceptable public

risk at sensitive receptors

♦ How close are engines to property line/ receptors?

 S

OTA would need to be considered for VOC/ HCHO

Thank you!!

Michael A. Trupin Principal Consultant Trinity Consultants Princeton, New Jersey Office: 609-375-2665 Mobile: 215-478-1886 Email: mtrupin@ trinityconsultants.com