AQ_F_0800107_20101005_PRMT_PmtApp

/ 1836 Eastchester Dr.
Suite 108
E5 LLUNS High Point,NC 27265
Energy y Solutions 0: 360.750.3583
F: 360.750.3483
Mr. Robert Fisher October 4,2010
Regional Air Quality Manager
North Carolina Department of Air Quality
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, NC 27889
Dear Mr. Fisher,
Please accept this application for a construction and operations synthetic minor air permit. The proposed
facility, a biomass cogeneration plant, is to be constructed adjacent to the existing Perdue Agribusiness
chicken processing and rendering plant in Lewiston Woodville, North Carolina.
With this completed application, we are providing;
• Permit application fee of$400.00
• Three(3)copies of the consolidated Air Permit Application, including two(2)bound and one(1)un-
bound copy.
o Air Permit Application
o Zoning/Public Notification Requirement
o Supplemental BACT Analysis as a New Renewable Energy Facility under NC Renewable
Energy Portfolio Standard
o Air Toxic Analysis Summary with Detailed Report
o Solid Waste Determination Application Packet
I look forward to answering any additional questions that you may have.
Sincerely;
Garald ottrell
President and General Manager —
Wellons Energy Solutions, LLC D E E
OCT - 52=
DAQ WARO

0 LLONS
Energy Solutions
Table of Contents
ArticleI. Project Summary............................................................................................................... 1
Section 1.01 Forms Al,A2&A3, A4 Facility Forms................................................................... 2
Section 1.02 Forms B, B 1 for Each Boiler.................................................................................. 5
Section1.03 Form B-6 .............................................................................................................. 14
Section 1.04 Forms C-4 for each Control Device..................................................................... 15
Section 1.05 Form D-1 Facility Wide Emissions...................................................................... 18
Section 1.06 Form D5 Supporting Calculations........................................................................ 21
Section 1.07 Multiclone Efficiency........................................................................................... 22
Section 1.08 Particulate Size Percentage Chart.........................................................................23
Section 1.09 Preliminary Boiler Performance Estimate............................................................24
Section 1.10 Diagram of Flue Gas Path.................................................................................... 25
Article II. Zoning Supporting Data.............................................................................................. 26
Article III. Supplemental BACT Analysis to Qualify as a New Renewable Energy Facility.......30
Article IV. Summary Report, Toxic Modeling Results................................................................. 53
Article V. Solid Waste Determination.......................................................................................... 54
ArticleVI. Maps&Drawings........................................................................................................63
Section 6.01 Map of Proposed Facility Location...................................................................... 63
Section 6.02 Satellite Image of Perdue Facility........................................................................ 64
Section 6.03 Layout of Perdue Farms Processing Plant, Rending and Supporting Operations 65
Section 6.04 Close-up of Proposed Location............................................................................ 66
Section 6.05 Facility Plan View Drawings ............................................................................... 67
Section 6.06 Machinery Elevation Drawings............................................................................ 68
Section 6.07 Facility Exterior Elevations.................................................................................. 69
Article VII. Full Report-Air Toxic Pollutant Modeling Analysis ............................................... 70
Article VIII. Wellons Energy Background Material..................................................................... 71

Article I. Project Summary
W. E. Partners II, LLC is a wholly owned subsidiary of Wellons Energy Solutions, LLC, which
maintains its primary office at 1836 Eastchester Drive, Suite 108, High Point, North Carolina.
Wellons Energy is a biomass cogeneration project developer, focusing on the design, build,
installation and operation of small, biomass cogeneration facilities for the production of high
pressure steam and electricity. The primary focus on our business model is to partner with North
Carolina based manufacturers that are utilizing fossil fuels for the generation of high pressure,
saturated steam. With the partnership between Wellons Energy and our customers, we are able to
provide a long-term renewable energy solution that is both economically and environmentally
favorable for all stakeholders.
Wellons Energy is majority owned by Wellons Inc.,a Vancouver, Washington based biomass boiler
manufacturer. Wellons has been a leader in providing biomass steam systems since 1965 and has an
impeccable track record of success in deploying biomass steam plants throughout North America
and Europe. In addition to the steam generation-only projects, 400 installations world-wide,
Wellons has successfully installed more than 40 cogeneration facilities and brings a long record of
success installing power generation equipment.
The proposed project will be located adjacent to the Perdue Farms chicken processing and rendering
facility in Lewiston Woodville, NC. The biomass facility will provide high pressure, saturated
steam to the rending operation, offsetting the use of fossil fuels, and provide electricity to Dominion
Power via a Power Purchase Agreement. The facility would be comprised of three (3), 600 HP
water-cooled, rotary grate biomass hybrid boilers rated at (350 psi design) 325 PSIG operating
pressure and one (1) steam turbine gen-set for cogeneration. The turbine inlet conditions will utilize
325 PSI saturated steam being directed to the steam turbine inlet, with the steam exhaust at 125
PSIG for distribution to Perdue.
The proposed facility will also incorporate biomass receiving and storage facilities, via a sheltered,
below grade, concrete bunker with reclaimer, and the necessary emissions control equipment. The
project will also include all buildings and accompanying ancillary support equipment.
The air permit is being submitted with a voluntary fuel input restriction of 58,000 tons per year. On
a 100% utilization basis, the anticipated yearly green biomass fuel input is calculated as 88,300 tons
per year. With the anticipated 65%maximum utilization rate,the yearly facility wide emissions for
criteria pollutants are maintained at less than 100 tons on an annual basis. Therefore, W.E. Partners
is requesting that the facility be permitted as a synthetic minor source.
1IPage

Section 1.01 Forms A 1,A2&A3, A4 Facility Forms
FORM Al
FACILITY(General Information)
REVISED 11/01/02 NCDENR/Division of Air Quality-Application for Air Permit to Constructloperate Al
NOTE-APPLICATION WILL NOT BE PROCESSED WITHOUT THE FOLLOWING:
u Local Zoning Consistency Determination(d required)LJ Facility Reduction 8 Recycling Surrey Form(Form Ad) t:1jppl—non Fee
LJ Responsible Oficiaf/Authon¢ed Contact Signature L) Appmpnate Number of Copies of Application LJ P E.Seal(if required)
GENERAL INFORMATION
Legal CorporaldOwner Name. W.E.Partners II,LLC
Site Name: W.E.ParOnersil,LLCSite Address(911 Address)Line 1: 3536 Govemors Rd.Site Address Line 2
City: Lewiston Woodville State,
Zip Code: 27849 lCounty- --
CONTACT INFORMATION
PermiftlifIrechrikaf Comaet FadliWnspecdon Contact
NameTdle: Gerald B.Cottrell,kbrager Name/Tide: Garald B.CdtreH,Manager
Mailing Address Line 1: =6 Eadcheder Drive,Sin'Get Mailing Address Line 1: 1836 Eastehester Drive,Ste 108
Mailing Address Line 2: Mailing Address Line 2:
City: High Point State: NC Tip Code: 27265 City: High Point State: NC Zip Code: 27265
Phone No. area code) 360.750.3583 lFax No.(area code) 360.750.3483 Phone No.(area code) 360.750.3583 Fax No.(area code) 360.750.3483
Email Address: I viello s. Emait Address: aarald.cotl1reliCaNmIlons.com
Responsible 011iclal/Aurhonzed Contact invoice Contact
Name?nle. Gerald a Cottrell,Manager Narna?dle: Garold B.Cottrell,Manager
Mailing Address Line 1: 1836 Eastehestar Dfine,Ste 108 Mailing Address Line 1: 1836 Easthester Drive,Ste 108
Mailing Address Line 2 Mailing Address Line 2:
City: High Point State: NC Zip Code: 27265 City: High Point State. NC Zp Code. 27265
Phone No.(area code) 360.750.3583 I Fax No.(area code) 360.750.3483 Phone No.(area code) 360.750.3593 Fax No.(area code) 360.750.3493
Email Address raid. ottrell vnellons.com Email Addmss. uaraid.cottre110Nw1lcns.com
APPLICATION IS BEING MADE FOR
vj New Non-permitted Facility/Greenfield a Modification of Facility(permitted) a Renewal wth Modification
L Renewal(TV Only)
FACILITY CLASSIFICATION AFTER APPLICATION Check OnlyOne
L,reneral LiSmall Lprohibitory Small u Synthetic Minor LJ Title V
FACILITY Plant Site INFORMATION
Describe nature of(plant site)opembon(s) Facility ID No,
WE Partners H,LLC Is a bio-mass cogeneration facility thatwill be constructed to provide mWrarad steam for the Perdue Farms Incorporated facilities at Lewiston NC and electricity to
Dominion Power.Facility will owned by an Independent entity that has no common ownership with Perdue or Dominion Power.
Primary SIUNAICS Code: 4961 Curard/Prevous Air Permit No.
Expiration Data:
Facility Coordinates: Latitude: 36,0323'N L
orgi[uda: 7I 13'26'W
Does this application contain confidential data? L.l YES 14 NO
PERSON OR FIRM THAT PREPARED APPLICATION
Person Name: Garald Cottrell Finn Name: WellorK Energy Solutions,LLC
Mailing Address Line 1: 1836 Fasteheskir Drive,Site 108 Mailing Address Line 2
High Point State: NC --
Zip Code: 27265 County: Guilford
Phone No.(area code ) 360.750.35At Fax No.(area code) 360.750 3433 Erafi Addess
SIGNATURE OF RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL/AUTHORI2ED CONTACT
Name(typed): Gerald B.Cotball 11le: Manager,Wellons Energy Solutions,LLC
X Signature(Biue Ink).
2 1 P a g e

i
FORM A4
SURVEY OF AIR EMISSIONS AND FACIUTY-VVIDE REDUCTION&RECYCUNG ACTIVITIES
DATE: Do••tacaay haw an a irorm•mai mang•merd eyetem In pip?( )YES(x)NO S w,is tadllty ISO 14000 CerWW?( )yES ( )NO
F-ift Nmt•: W.E Pwtn•nt IL LLC P•m1N Number.
Fw1 ID: -Bartle Environmental Comae. C."ma M w
Malang Addrq•Line 1: 3339 Go—nom Rd - _ _ Phone No. 380 700J6g3 Fax No.390 7504M
Mailing Addrm•Lim 2 �Cod- 2 Cou Bartle
Lewiston Woodville State: North Caroline . e10 oom
• • - - • Anv Air Emig-ions Source Reductiore in the Dent year?( )YES( )NO
ID a.,ve o oprt. ...npme..e nw.n E�Yr '• 0—R.e 1
s o.mep.Ema.a ae.e...e..mwe !a '4'
aa.eupn'owen Mp�emrRM Hens pn ei a.a.n.n Addition detail about tOlfrH
tm r.wnv.Dao ..p.rtre oao term ... m.p+mmrd
NA mwtacBay
-
• - • • Any Reductions or Reding Aclivhip In the past yeet?( )YES( )NO
ppllut.M nbr Cpp.ror Dn.R.tlecnen Oumity Emie.e pp.naly amnbd Iltl.—neMbn rtlNtyewn
eons O..crlglpn n�cnrry er Emi..len R.tluctlen Opt.—pi.—.aempd.r m em—d?Mtle,wgen Addition detail about wurce
R.cycl.e orgetluc.E aam.i.QUen15•.Coe.. (meryr) rp.n r.perl onal.eamnuN+
NA nswtecaay
a�
ne..u,.pp
4 � Page

1
FORMS A2, A3
EMISSION SOURCE LISTING FOR THIS APPLICATION - A2
112r APPLICABILITY INFORMATION - A3
REVISED 04/10/07 NCDENR/Division of Air Quality-Application for Air Permit to Construct/Operate A2
EMISSION SOURCE LISTING: New, Modified, Previously Unpermitted, Replaced, Deleted
EMISSION SOURCE EMISSION SOURCE CONTROL DEVICE CONTROL DEVICE
ID NO DESCRIPTION ID NO. DESCRIPTION
Equipment To Be ADDED By This Application(New, Previously Unpermitted,or Replacement)
ESB-1 Green wood fuel fired boiler MC-1 multi le cone collector
ESB-2 Green wood fuel fired boiler MC-2 multiple cone collector
ESB-3 Green wood fuel fired boiler MC-3 multi le cone collector
SB-1 Green wood fuel storage bunker none
Existing Permitted Equipment To Be MODIFIED By This Application
Equipment To Be DELETED By This Application
112(r) APPLICABILITY INFORMATION A3
Is your facility subject to 40 CFR Part 68"Prevention of Accidental Releases"-Section 112(r)of the Federal Clean Air Act? Yes No
If No,please specify in detail how your facility avoided applicability:
If your facility is Subject to 112(r),please complete the following:
A. Have you already submitted a Risk Management Plan(RMP)to EPA Pursuant to 40 CFR Part 68.10 or Part 68 150?
Yes 0 No Specify required RMP submittal date If submitted,RMP submittal date
B. Are you using administrative controls to subject your facility to a lesser 112(r)program standard?
Yes � No If yes,please specify:
3 P a u c

Section 1.02 Forms B, B 1 for Each Boiler
Form B-B1 for ESB-1
WOODWASTE COMBUSTION EMISSIONS CALCULATOR REVISION 12/1/2010-OUTPUT SCREEN
44
NCDENR
SOURCE/FACILITY/USER INPUT SUMMARY FROM INPUT SCREEN)
COMPANYW. E. Partners II,LLC FACILITY ID NO-:
PERMIT NUMBER:
EMISSION SOURCE DESCRIPTION: Biomass Boiler FACILITY CITY: Lewiston Woodvile
EMISSION SOURCE ID NO.: I ESB-1 FACILITY COUNTY: Berne
PARTICULATE CONTROL DEVICE: Multi-clone POLLUTANT CONTROL EFF.
SPREADSHEET PREPARED BY: Garald Cottrell FUEL HEAT VALUE: 4375 BTU/LB NOX T 0
ACTUAL FUEL THROUGHPUT: 1 58000.00 TOW R HHVUsedforGHGs TU70 : 0.00 PM 80
POTENTIAL FUEL THROUGHPUT: 88 300.80 TONIYR BOILER TYPE: Stoker PM10 77
REQUESTED MAX.FUEL THRPT: 58,000.00 TON(YR INO STACK TEST DATA USED PM2.5 33
METHOD USED TO COMPUTE ACTUAL GHG EMISSIONS: 0
CARBON CONTENT USED FOR GHGS AS A FRACTION): CARBON CONTENT NOT USED FOR CALCULATION TIER CHOSEN
CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS INFORMATION FOR THIS SOURCE
SOURCE OF EXPECTED ACTUAL POTENTIAL EMSSIONS
EMISSION (AFTERCONTROLSILMM) (BEFORE CONTROLS/LMrs) OFTERCOWROLSILMRS)
AIR POLLUTANT EMITTED FACTOR Ib/hr tons/yr Ib/hr tans/yr Ib/hr tonslyr
PARTICULATE MATTER(PM) Manu.Data 11.172 32142 55.86 244.6668 11.17 48.9334
PARTICULATE MATTER<10 MICRONS(PM,) Manu.Data 10.278 29.570 44.69 195,7334 10.28 45.0187
PARTICULATE MATTERQ.5MICF;DW(PM,,) Mam Data 5.614 16.151 8.38 36.7000 5.61 24.5890
SULFUR DIOXIDE(SO2) AP 42 0.740 7 129 0.74 r 3.2412 0.74 32412
NITROGEN OXIDES(NOx) Manu.Data 8.840 25.433 8.84 38.7192 8.84 38.7192
CARBON MONOXIDE(CO) Manu.Data 11.170 3213E 1 11.17 48.924E 11.17 48.9246
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS(VOC) AP 42 0.500 1.438 1 0.5 2.1900 0.50 2.1900
LEAD 0.0014 0.004 1 0.001411 0.0062 0.00 0.0082
OTHER
HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS INFORMAnON FOR THIS SOURCE
ACTUAL EMISSIONS POTENTIAL EMSSIONS EMISSION FACTOR
CAS (AFTER CONTROLS ILMiTS) (BEFORECONTROLS/LIM) (AFTER CoATROLS/LMOS) Iblmmstu
TOXIC I HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT NUMBER IhMr mlyr b/I1r IW r b/Ilr b/ T uncontrolled!contrdled
Acetaldehyde(rH) 75070 1.60E-02 140.4 244E-02 213,76 244E-02 213.76 8.30E-04 8.30E-04
Acetopherme(M 98882 6.18E-08 0.0 9.41E-06 0.00 9.41E-08 0.00 3.20E-0B 3.20E-09
Acrolein(rH) 107028 7.72E-02 676.7 1.18E-01 1030,18 1.18E-01 1030.18 4.00E-03 4.00E-03
Antirtgny&Compounds(H) SBC 1.53E-04 1.3 232E-04 2.03 232E-04 2,03 7.90E-06 7.90E-06
Arsenic 8 Compounds (TH) ASC 4.25E-04 3.7 8.47E-04 5.67 647E-04 5,67 2.20E-05 2.20E-05
Benzene(TH) 71432 8.11E-02 710.5 1.23E-01 1081,68 1.23E-01 1081.68 4.20E-03 4.20E-03
Benzo(a)py-m 50328 5.02E-05 0.4 764E-05 0,67 784E-05 0.67 2.60E-06 2.60E-06
Beryllium metal(un-reacted) (Also include in BEC)(TIH) 7440417 212E-05 .0.2 3.23E-05 0,28 3.23E-05 0,28 1.10E-16 1.10E-06
Cadmium Metal(elemental-reacted)-(Add WCDC)(r" 7440439 7.92E-05 0.7 1.21E-04 1.06 1.21E-04 1,06 4.10E-0fi 4.1 DE-06
Carbon teUachlorde(TH) 58235 8.69E-04 7.6 1.32E-03 11,59 1.32E-03 11.59 4.50E-05 4.50E-05
Chlorine(TH) 7782505 1.53E-02 133.6 232E-02 2Q1.48 2.32E-02 203.4E 7.90E-04 7.90E-04
CNorobemem(TH) 108907 8.37E-04 5.6 9.70E-04 8.50 9.70E-04 8.50 3.30E-05 3.30E.05
Chlorolorn 011) 87683 5.41E-04 4.7 8.23E-04 7.21 8.23E-04 7.21 280E-05 280E-05
Chromium-Other compds(I-)(add wlchrom acid to get CRC) 3.38E-04 3.0 5.15E-04 4.51 5.15E-04 4,51 1.75E-05 1.75E.05
Chromic acid(VI)(Add as comp.of-ICRB and CRC)(T/H) 7738845 6.78E-0S 0.6 1.03E-04 0.90 1.03E-04 0.90 3.50E-06 3.50E-06
Cobah compounds(H) COC 1.26E-04 1.1 1.91E-04 1.67 1.91E-04 1,67 6.50E-06 6.50E-06
Dinitrophenol,2,4.(H) 51285 348E-o6 0.0 5.29E-06 0,05 5.29E-06 0.05 1.80E-07 1.81E-07
Di(2-e0y1hexyl)phthalate(DEHP)(TF11 117817 908E-07 0.0 1.38E108 0,01 1.38E-0i3 0.01 4.70E-0B 4.70E-08
Ethyl benzene(H) 100414 5.99E-04 5.2 9.11E-04 7.98 9.11E-04 7.98 3.10E-05 3.10E-05
Ethylene dichloride(1,24chloroethane)(TH) 107062 5.60E-04 4.9 8.53E-04 7.47 8.53E-4 7,47 2.90E-05 2.90E-05
Formaldehyde(TT'9 50000 8.50E-02 744.3 1.29E-01 1133.19 1.29E-01 1133.19 4.40E-03 4.40E-03
Hexachlorodibenzo-pdioxin 1,2,3,6,7,8 m 57653a57 814E-10 0.0 9.35E-10 0.00 935E-10 0,DO 3.18E-11 3.18E.11
Hydrogen chloride(hydrochloric acid)(TH) 7647010 3.67E-01 3214.2 5.59E-01 4893.34 5,59E-01 4893.34 1.90E-02 1.90E-02
Lead and Lead compounds(M PBC 9.27E-04 8.1 1.41E-03 12.36 1.41E-03 12.36 4.80E-05 4.81E-05
Manganese 8 compounds(T}n MNC 3,09E-02 270.7 4.70E-02 412.07 4.70E-02 41207 1.80E-03 1.60E-03
Mercury,rapor(Include in MercuryBCompds)T1FQ 7439978 6.76E-05 0.6 1.03E-04 0.90 1.03E-04 0.90 3.50E-06 3.50E-06
Methyl bromide(H)(bromgmethane) 74839 290E-4 1 2.5 1 4.41E-04 3.86 4,41E-0d 3.86 1.50E-05 1.50E-05
Methyl choride(H)(chloromathane) 74873 I 4.44E-04 3.9 8.78E-04 5.92 6.78E-04 5.92 2.30E-05 2.30E-05
Methyl chloroform(TH)(1,1,1 tneNoroethane) 171558 1 5.99E-04 1 5.2 1 911E-04 7.98 9.11E-04 7.98 3.10E-05 3.10E-05
Methyl ethyl ketom M 78933I 1.04E-04 1 0.9 1 1.59E-04 1.39 1.59E-04 1.39 5.40E-06 5.40E-06
5 Page

Form B-B1 for ESB-1 Continued
Methylene chloride(TH)(dichloromethane) 75092 5.60E-03 49.1 8.53E-03 74.69 8.53E-03 74.69 290E-04 2.90E-04
Naphthalene (H) 91203 1.87E-03 16.4 2.85E-03 24,98 2.85E-03 24.98 9.70E-05 9.70E-05
Nickel metal(Component of Nickel&Compounds)(T/H) 7440020 &37E-041 6.6 9.70E-04 8.50 9.70E-04 8.50 3.30E-05 3.30E-05
Nttrophenol,4-(H) 100027 2.12E-06 0.0 3.23E-06 0.03 3.23E-06 0.03 1.10E-07 1.10E-07
Pentachlorophenol(TH) 87865 9.85E-07 0.0 1.50E-06 0.01 1.50E-06 0.01 5.10E-08 5.10E-08
Perchloroethylene(tetraohloroethylene)014) 127184 7.34E-04 6.4 1.12E-03 9,79 1.12E-03 9.79 3.80E-05 3.80E-05
Phenol(TH) 108952 9.85E-04 8.6 1.50E-03 13,13 1.50E-03 13-13 5.10E-05 5.10E-05
Phosphorus Metal,Yellow or White(H) 7723140 5.21E-04 4.6 7.94E-04 6.95 7.94E-04 6,95 2.70E-05 2.70E-05
Polychlorinated bipheryls (TH) 1336363 1.57E-07 0.0 2.40E-07 0,00 2.40E-07 0.00 8.15E-09 8.15E-09
Pdycyclic Organic Matter(H) POMTV 2.41E-03 21.1 3.68E-03 32.19 3.68E-03 32.19 1.25E-04 1.25E-04
Propionafdehyde(H) 123386 1.18E-03 10.3 1.79E-03 15.71 1.79E-03 15.71 6.10E-05 6.10E-05
Propylene dichloride(H)(1,2 dichloropropene) 78875 6.37E-04 6.6 9.70E-04 8.50 9.70E-04 8.50 3.30E-05 3.30E-05
Selenium compounds(F) SEC 5.41E-05 0.5 8.23E-05 0.72 8.23E-05 0.72 2.80E-06 2.80E-06
Styrene(T" 100425 3.67E-02 321.4 559E-02 48933 r 5.59E-02 489,33 1.90E-03 1.90E-03
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin,2,3,7,8- (TH) 1746016 1.66E-10 0.0 2.53E-10 0.00 2.53E-10 0,00 8.60E-12 8.60E-12
Toluene(TH) 108BB3 1.78E-02 166.6 2.70E-02 236.94 r 2.70E-02 236,94 9.20E-04 9.20E-04
Trichloroethylene(TH) 79016 5.79E-04 6.1 8.82E-04 7.73 r 8.82E-04 7,73 3.00E-05 3.00E-05
Trichlordluoromethane(CFC 111)(T) 75694 7.92E-04 0.9 1.21E-03 10.56 1.21E-03 10.56 4.10E-05 4.10E-05
Trichlorophenol,2,4,6-(H) 88062 4.25E-07 0.0 6.47E-07 0-01 6.47E-07 0,01 2.20E-W 2.20E-0B
Vinyl chloride(TH) 75014 3.48E-04 3.0 5.29E-04 4,64 5.29E-04 4,64 1.80E-05 1.80E-05
Xjlene(TH) 1330207 4.83E-04 4.2 7.35E-04 6.44 7.35E-04 6.44 250E-05 2.50E-05
'Total HAPs 075 6,575 1.14 10,011 1,14 10,011 0.0389 0,OW9
TOXIC AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS INFOR61A77ON PERNIT7ING PURPOSES
EXPECTED ACTUAL EMISSIONS AFTER CONTROLS/LIMITATIONS(FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES) EMISSION FACTOR
Ib/mmBtu
TOXIC AIR POLLUTANT CAS N im. IGRr Ib/day Myr uncontrolled controlled
Acetaldehyde(TH) 75070 1.60E-02 3.85E-01 140.4 8.30E-04 8.30E-04
Acrolein(TH) 107028 7.72E-02 1.85E+00 676.7 4.00E-03 4.00E-03
Arsenic&Compounds (TH) ASC 425E-04 1.02E-02 3.7 2.20E-05 2.20E-05
Benzene(TH) 71432 8.11E-02 1.95E+00 710.5 4.20E-03 4.20E-03
Benzo(a)pyrene (T) 50328 5.02E-05 121E-03 0.4 2.60E-06 2.60E-06
Beryllium metal(un-reacted) (Also include in BEC)(TM) 7440417 2.12E-05 5.10E-04 0.2 1.10E-06 I 1.10E-06
Cadmium Metal(elemental urrreacted)-(Add w/CDC)(T/H) 7440439 7.92E-05 1.90E-03 0.7 4.10E-06 4.10E-06
Carbon tetrachloride(TH) 56235 8.69E-04 2.09E-02 7.6 4.50E-05 4.50E-05
Chlorine(TH) 7782505 1.53E-02 3.66E-01 133.6 7.90E-04 7.90E-04
Ch loroberzene C" 108907 6.37E-04 1.53E-02 5.6 3.30E-05 3.30E-05
Chloroform(TH) 67663 5.41E-04 1.30E-02 4.7 2.80E-05 2.80E-05
Di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate(DEHP)(TH) 117817 9.08E-07 2.18E-05 0.0 4.70E-08 4.70E-08
Ethylene dichloride(1,2dichloroethane)(fH) 107062 5.60E-04 1.34E-02 4.9 2.90E-05 2.90E-05
Soluble Chromate Cmpds,as Chrome(VQ(TH) SOLCR6 6.76E-05 1.62E-03 0.6 3.50E-06 3.50E-06
Formaldehyde(TH) 50000 1 8.50E-02 2.04E+00 744.3 4.40E-03 4.40E-03
HeKachlorodiberzo-pdioxin 1,2,3,6,7,8 M 57653857 6.14E-10 1.47E-08 0.0 3.18E-11 3.18E-11
Hydrogen chloride(hydrochloric acid)(TFQ 7647010 3.67E-01 8.81E+00 3,214.2 1.90E-02 1.90E-02
Marxpnese&compounds(TFQ MNC 3.09E-02 7.42E-01 270.7 1.60E-03 1.60E-03
Mercury,vapor(Include in Mercury&Compds)(r/H) 7439976 6.76E-05 1.62E-03 0.6 3.50E-06 3.50E-06
Methyl chloroform(TH)(1,1,1 trichloroethane) 71556 5.99E-04 1.44E-02 5.2 3.10E-05 3.10E-05
Mettyl ethyl ketone M 78933 1.04E-04 2.50E-03 0.9 5.40E-06 5.40E-06
Methylene chloride(TH)(dichloromethane) 75092 5.60E-03 1.34E-01 49.1 2.90E-04 2.90E-04
Nickel metal(Component of Nickel&Compounds)(T(H) 7440020 6.37E-04 1.53E-02 5.6 3.30E-05 3.30E-05
Pentachlorophenol 01-f) 87865 9.85E-07 2.36E-05 0.0 5.10E-08 5.10E-06
Perchloroethylene(tetrachloroethylene)(TH) 127184 7.34E-04 1.76E-02 6.4 3.80E-05 3.80E-05
Phenol(rM 108952 1 9.85E-04 2.36E-02 8.6 5.10E-05 5.10E-05
Pdychlonnated bipherryls (TH) 1336363 1.57E-07 3.78E-06 0.0 P4.10E-05
8.15E-09
Styrene C" 100425 3.67E-0Z 8.81E-01 321.4 1.90E-03
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin,2,3,7,8- (TH) 1746016 1.66E-10 3.99E-09 0.0 8.60E-12
Toluene(TH) 108883 1.78E-02 4.26E-01 155.6 9.20E-04
Trichloroethylene(TH) 79016 5.79E-04 1.39E-02 5.1 3.00E-05
Trichlorctuoromethane(CFC 111)(T) 75694 7.92E-04 1.90E-02 6.9 Virryl chloride(TH) 75014 3.48E-04 8.34E-03 3.0 1.80E-05
Niene C" 1330207 4.83E-04 1.16E-02 4.2 2.50E-05 2.50E-05
6 1 P a g e

Form B-B1 for ESB-2
WOODWASTE COMBUSTION EMISSIONS CALCULATOR REVISION 1 2/112010-OUTPUT SCREEN
AC"A-- -
NCDENR
SOURCE/FACIUTY/USER INPUT SUMMARY INPUT SCREEN
COMPANYW. E. Partners II, LLC FACILITY ID NO.:
PERMIT NUMBER:
EMISSION SOURCE DESCRIPTION: Biomass Boiler FACILITY CITY: Lewiston Woodville
EMISSION SOURCE ID NO.: I ESB-2 FACILITY COUNTY: Berne
PARTICULATE CONTROL DEVICE: Mufti-clone POLLUTANT CONTROL EFF.
SPREADSHEET PREPARED BY: Gerald Cottrell FUEL HEAT VALUE: 4375 BTU/LB NOX 0
ACTUAL FUEL THROUGHPUT: 1 58 000.00 TON/YR HHV Used for GHGs(MABTU/TON): 0.00 PM 80
POTENTIAL FUEL THROUGHPUT: 88 300.80 TON/YR BOILER TYPE: Stoker PM10 77
REQUESTED MAX. FUEL THRPT: 58,000.00 TON/YR NO STACK TEST DATA USED PR 33
METHOD USED TO COMPUTE ACTUAL GHG EMISSIONS: 0
CARBON CONTENT USED FOR GHGS AS A FRACTION): CARBON CONTENT NOT USED FOR CALCULATION TIER CHOSEN
CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS INFORMATION FOR THIS SOURCE
SOURCEOF EXPECTED ACTUAL POTENTIAL EMISSIONS
EMISSION (AFTRCONTROLS/LMTS) (BEFORE CONTROLS ILars) (AFTERCONTROLS/LMTS)
AIR POLLUTANT WITTED FACTOR Whr tons/yr Ib/hr tonsyr Ib/hr tons/yr
PARTICULATE MATTER(PM) Manu.Data 11.172 32.142 55.WN 244.6668 11.172 48.9334
PARTICULATE MATTER<D MICRONS(PM,) Manu.Data 10.278 29.570 44.6880 195.7334 10.278 45.0187
PARTICULATE MATTERQ5 MICRONS(PW,) Manu.Data 5.614 16.151 8.3790 36.7000 5.614 24.5890
SULFUR DIOXIDE(SO2) AP 42 0.740 2.129 0.7400 3.2412 0.740 3.2412
NITROGEN OXIDES(NOx)j Manu.Data 8.840 25.433 8.8400 30.71921 8.840 38.7192
CARBON MONOXIDE(W) Manu.Data 1 11.170 32.136 1 '11A700 48.9246 11.170 48.92"
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS(VOC) AP 42 0.500 1.438 0.5000 2.1900 0.500 2.1900
LEAD 0.0014 0.004 0.0014 0.0092 0.001 0.0062
OTHER
HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS INFORMATION FOR THIS SOURCE
ACTUAL EMISSIONS POTENTIAL EMSSIONS EMISSION FACTOR
CAS (AFTER ONTROLS/LMTS) (BEFORECONTROLS/LMTS) (AFTER CONTROLS/LMTS) Ib(mmBtu
TOXIC/HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT NUMBER Ib/hr Ib/yr Ib/hr Ib/ r Ib/hr Ib/ r uncontrolled/controlled
Acetaldehyde(TH) 75070 1.60E-02 140.4 2.44E-02 213,76 2.44E-02 213.76 8.30E-04 8.30E-04
Acetophenone(H) 98862 6.18E-08 0.0 9.41E-08 0,00 9.41E-08 0.00 3.20E-09 3.20E-09
Acrdein(TH) 107028 7.72E-02 676.7 1.18E-01 1030,18 1.18E-01 1030A8 4.00E-03 4.00E-03
Antimony&Compounds (H) SBC 1.53E-04 1.3 2.32E-04 2.03 2.32E-04 2,03 7.90E-06 7.90E-06
Arsenic&Compounds (TH) ASC 4.25E-04 3.7 6.47E-04 5.67 6.47E-04 5.67 220E-05 2.20E-05
Benzene(TH) 71432 8.11E-02 710.5 1.23E-01 1081.68 1.23E-01 1081.68 4.20E-03 4.20E-03
Benzo(a)pyrene (T) 50328 5.02E-05 OA 7.64E-05 0.67 7.64E-05 0.67 2.60E-06 2.60E-06
Beryllium metal(un-reacted) (Also include in BEC)(T/H) 7440417 2.12E-05 0.2 3.23E-05 0,28 3.23E-05 0,28 1.10E-06 1.10E-06
Cadmium Metal(elemental un-reacted)-(Add w/CDC)(T/H) 7440439 7.92E-05 0.7 1.21E-04 1,06 1.21E-04 1.06 4.10E-06 4.10E-06
Carbon tetrachloride(TFQ 56235 8.69E-04 7.6 1.32E-03 11.5E 1.32E-03 11.59 4.50E-05 4.50E-05
Chlorine(TH) 7782505 1.53E-02 133.6 2.32E-02 203.46 2.32E-02 203,46 7.90E-04 7.90E-04
Chlorobenzene(TH) 108907 6.37E-04 5.6 9.70E-04 8.50 9.70E-04 &5D 3.30E-05 3.30E-05
Chloroform(TH) 67663 5.41E-04 4.7 8.23E-04 7,21 8.23E-04 7,21 2.80E-05 2.80E-05
Chromium-Other compds(H)(add w/chrom acid to get CRC) 3.38E-04 3.0 5.15E-04 4,51 5.15E-04 4.51 1 75E-05 1.75E-05
Chromic acid(VQ(Add as comp.of soICR6 and CRC)(T/H) 7738945 6.76E-05 0.6 1.03E-04 0.90 1.03E-04 0.90 3.50E-06 3.50E-06
Cobalt compounds(H) OOC 1.26E-04 1.1 1.91E-04 1.67 r 1.91E-04 t67 6.50E-06 6.50E-06
Dinitrophenol,2,4-(H) 51285 3.48E-06 0.0 5.29E-06 0-05 r 5.29E-06 0.05 1.80E-07 1.80E-07
Di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate(DEHP)(TH) 117817 9.08E-07 0.0 1 1.38E-06 0.01 r 1.38E-06 0.01 4.70E-08 4.70E-08
Ethyl benzene(H) 100414 5.99E-04 5.2 9.11E-04 7.98 r 9.11E-04 7.96 3.10E-05 3.10E-05
Ethylene dichloride(1,2-dichbroethane)(TH) 107062 5.60E-04 4.9 8.53E-04 7.47 r 8.53E-04 7.47 2.90E-05 2.90E-05
Formaldehyde(TH) 50000 8.50E-02 744.3 1.29E-01 1133.1E r 1.29E-0I 1133.19 4.40E-03 4.40E-03
Hex achlorodibenzo,"iox in 1,23,6,7,8 M 57653857 6-14E-10 0.0 9.35E-10 0,00 9.35E-10 0.00 3.18E-11 3.18E-11
Hydrogen chloride(hydrochloric acid)014) 7647010 3.67E-01 3214.2 5.59E-01 4893,34 5.59E-01 4893.34 1.90E-02 1.90E-02
Lead and Lead compounds(H) PBC 9.27E-04 8.1 1.41E-03 12.36 1.41E-03 12.36 4.80E-05 4.80E-05
Manganese&compounds(TH) MNC 3.09E-02 270.1 4.70E-02 412.07 4.70E-02 412.07 1.60E-03 1.60E-03
Mercury,vapor(Include in Mercury&Compds)(T/H) 7439976 6.76E-05 0.6 1.03E-04 0.90 1.03E-04 0.90 3.50E-06 3.50E-06
Methyl bromide(H)(bromomethane) 74839 2.90E-04 2.5 4.41E-04 3,86 4.41E-04 3.86 1.50E-05 1.50E-05
Methyl chloride(H)(chloramethane) 74873 4.44E-04 3.9 6.76E-04 5.92 6.76E-04 5.92 2.30E-05 2.30E-05
Methyl chloroform(TH)(1,1,1 trichloroethare) 71556 5.99E-04 5.2 9.11E-04 7.98 9.11E-04 1 7.98 3.10E-05 3.10E-05
Methyl ethyl ketone(T) 78933 1.04E-04 0.9 1.59E-04 1.39 1.59E-04 1 1,39 5.40E-06 5.40E-06
7 Page

i
Form B-Bl for ESB-2 Continued
Methylene chloride(TH)(dichloromethane) 75092 5.60E-03 49.1 8.53E-03 74.69 8.53E-03 74.69 2.90E-04 2.90E-04
Naphthalene (H) 91203 1.87E-03 16.4 2.85E-03 24,98 2.85E-03 24.98 9.70E-05 9.70E-05
Nickel metal(Component of Nickel&Compounds)(T/H) 7440020 6.37E-04 6.6 9.70E-04 8.50 9.70E-04 8.50 3.30E-05 3.30E-05
Nitro phenol,4-(H) 100027 2.12E-06 0.0 3.23E-06 0.03 3.23E-06 0.03 1.10E-07 1.10E-07
Pentachlomphenol(TH) 87865 9.85E-07 0.0 1.50E-06 0.01 1.50E-06 0.01 5.10E-08 5.10E-08
Perohloroethylene(tetrachlorcethylene)(TH) 127184 7.34E-04 6.4 1.12E-03 9.79 1.12E-03 9.79 3.80E-05 3.80E-05
Phenol(TH) 108952 9.85E-04 8.8 1.50E-03 13.13 1.50E-03 13.13 5.10E-05 5.10E-05
Phosphorus Metal,Yellow or While(H) 7723140 5.21E-04 4.6 7.94E-04 6.95 7.94E-04 6,95 2.70E-05 2.70E-05
Polychlorinated bipheryls (TH) 1336363 1.57E-07 0.0 2.40E-07 0.00 2.40E-07 0.00 8.15E-09 8.15E-09
Pdycyclic Organic Matter (H) POMTV 2.41E-03 21.1 3.68E-03 32,19 3.68E-03 32,19 1.25E-04 1.25E-04
Promnaldehyde(H) 123386 1.18E-03 10.3 1.79E-03 15.71 1.79E-03 15,71 6.10E-05 6.10E-05
Prop/lene dichloride(H)(1,2 dichloropropane) 78875 6.37E-04 6.6 9.70E-04 8.50 9.70E-04 8.50 3.30E-05 3.30E-05
Selenium compounds(H) SEC 5.41E-05 0.6 8.23E-05 0.72 8.23E-05 0.72 2.80E-06 2.80E-06
Styrene(TH) 100425 3.67E-02 321.4 1 5.59E-02 48933 r 5.59E-02 489,33 1.90E-M 1.90E-03
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin,2,3,7,8- (TH) 1746016 1.66E-10 0.0 253E-10 0.00 r 253E-10 0,00 8-60E-12 8.60E-12
Token(TH) 108883 1,7BE-02 166.6 2.70E-02 236,94 2.70E-02 23&94 9.20E-04 9.20E-04
Trichoroet"ne(TM 79016 5.79E-04 41 8.82E-04 7,73 8.82E-04 7,73 3.00E-05 3.00E-05
Trichlomfluoromethene(CFC 111)IT) 75694 7.92E-04 6.9 1.21E-03 10.56 1.21E-03 10,56 4.10E-05 4.10E-05
Trichlorophenol,2,4,6-(H) 88062 4.25E-07 0.0 6.47E-07 0.01 6.47E-07 0.01 2.20E-0B 2.20E-08
Viryl chloride(TH) 75014 3.48E-04 3.0 5.29E-04 4.64 5.29E-04 4.64 1.80E-05 1.80E-05
Olen(TH) 1330207 4.83E-04 4.2 7.35E-04 6.44 7.35E-04 6.44 2.50E-05 2.50E-05
Highest HAP(Hydrogen chloride(hydrochloric acid)(TH)) 17647010 1 3.67E-01 3214.2 5.59E-01 4893.34 1 5.59E-01 4893.34 1.90E-02 1.90E-02
'Total HAPs 1 11,12 6,567 1.14 9,998 1.14 9,998 0.0388 0.0388
TOWC AIR POLLUTANT E ISSIONS INFORMATION PERAV MNG PURPOSES
EXPECTED ACTUAL EMISSIONS AFTER CONTROLS/LIMITATIONS(FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES) EMISSION FACTOR
Ib/mmBtu
TOXIC AIR POLLUTANT CAS Num. IWhr lb/clay IhJyr uncontrolled 1controlled
Acetaldehyde(TH) 75070 1.60E-02 3.85E-01 140 8.30E-04 6.30E-04
Acrolein(TH) 107028 7.72E-02 1.85E+00 677 4.00E-03 4.00E-03
Arsenic&Compounds (TH) ASC 4.25E-04 1.02E-02 4 2.20E-05 2.20E-05
Benzene(TH) 71432 8.11E-02 1.95E+00 711 4.20E-03 4.20E-03
Benzo(a)pyrene m 50328 5.02E-05 1.21E-03 0 2.60E-06 2.60E-06
Beryllium metal(rn-reacted) (Also include in BEC)(f/H) 7440417 2.12E-05 5.10E-04 0 1.10E-06 1.10E-06
Cadmium Metal(elemental un-reacted) Add w/CDC)(TM) 7440439 7.92E-05 1.90E-03 1 4.10E-05 4.10E-06
Carbon tetrachloride(TH) 56235 8.69E-04 2.09E-02 8 4.50E-05 4.50E-05
Chlorin(TH) T782505 1.53E-02 3.66E-01 134 7.90E-04 7.90E-0t
Chorobenzene(h) 108907 6.37E-04 1.53E-02 6 3.30E-05 3.30E-05
Chloroform(TH) 67663 5.41E-04 1.30E-02 5 2.80E-05 2.80E-05
Di(2-ettylhexyI)phthalate(DEHP)(TH) 117817 9.09E-07 2.18E-05 0 4.70E-08 4.70E-08
Ethylene dichloride(1,2-dichloreethane)(TH) 107062 5.60E-04 1.34E-02 5 2.90E-05 2.90E-05
Soluble Chromate Cmpcis,as Chrome(VI)(TH) SOLCR6 6.76E-05 1.62E-03 1 3.50E-06 3.50E-06
Formaldehyde(TH) 50000 8.50E-02 2.04E+00 744 4.40E-03 4.40E-03
Hexachlorodibenzo-prtioxin 1,2,3,6,7,8(T) 57653857 6.14E-10 1.47E-08 0 3.18E-11 3.18E-11
Hydrogen chloride(hydrochloric acid)(TM 7647010 3.67E-01 8.81E+00 3,214 1.90E-02 1.90E-02
Manganese&compounds(TH) MNC 3.09E-02 7.42E-01 271 1.60E-03 1.60E-M
Mercury,vapor(Include in Mercury&Compds)(T/H) 7439976 6.76E-05 1.62E-03 1 3.50E-06 3.50E-06
Methyl chloroform(TH)(1,1,1 trichloroelhane) 71556 5.99E-04 1.44E-02 5 3.10E-05 3.10E-05
Methyl ethyl ketone(T) 78933 1.04E-04 2.50E-03 1 5.40E-06 5.40E-06
Methylene chloride(TH)(dichoromethane) 75092 5.60E-03 1.34E-01 49 2.90E-04 2.90E-04
Nickel metal(Component of Nickel&Compounds)(TIH) 7440020 6.37E-04 1.53E-02 6 3.30E-05 3.30E-05
Pentachlorophenol(TH) 87865 9.85E-07 2.36E-05 0 1 5.10E-08 5.10E-08
Perchloroettylene(tetraehloruethylem)(TH) 127184 7.34E-04 1.76E-02 6 3.80E-05 3.80E-05
Phenol(TH) 108952 9.85E-04 2.36E-02 9 5.10E-05 5.10E-05
Polychorinted biphenyls (TH) 1336363 1.57E-07 3.78E-06 0 8.15E-09 8.15E-09
Styrene 014) 100425 3.67E-02 8.81E-01 321 1.90E-03 1.90E-03
Tetwhiorodiberizopdioxin,2,3,7,8- (TH) 1746016 1.66E-10 3.99E-09 0 8.60E-12 8.60E-12
Toluene(TH) 108883 1.78E-02 4.26E-01 1 156 9.20E-04 9.20E-04
Trichloroethylene,(TH) 79016 5.79E-04 1.39E-02 5 3.00E-05 3.00E-05
Trichlorofluoromethan(CFC 111)(T) 75694 7.92E-04 1.90E-02 7 4.10E-05 4.10E-05
Vinyl chloride(TM 75014 3.48E-04 8.34E-03 3 1.80E-05 1.80E-05
)4ilene(TH) 11330207 1 4.83E-04 1.16E-02 4 2.50E-05 2.50E-05
8 1 P a g e

Form B-B1 for ESB-3
WOODWASTE COMBUSTION EMISSIONS CALCULATOR REVISION 1 2/1/2010-OUTPUT SCREEN
NCDENR
SOURCE/FACIUTY/USER INPUT SUMMARYLFROM INPUT SCREW
COMPANYW, E. Partners II, LLC FACILITY ID NO.:
PERMIT NUMBER:
EMISSION SOURCE DESCRIPTION: Biomass Boiler FACILITY CITY: Lewiston WoocMile
EMISSION SOURCE ID NO.: I ESB-3 FACILITY COUNTY: Berne
PARTICULATE CONTROL DEVICE: Mulb-cone POLLUTANT CONTROL EFF.
SPREADSHEET PREPARED BY: Gerald Cottrell FUEL HEAT VALUE: 4375 BTU/LB NOX 0
ACTUAL FUEL THROUGHPUT: 1 58 000.00 TON/YR HHV Used for GHGs(MNBTU/TON): 0,00 PM 80
POTENTIAL FUEL THROUGHPUT: 88 300.80 TON/YR BOILER TYPE: Striker PM10 77
REQUESTED MAX.FUEL THRPT: 58,000.00 TON/YR NO STACK TEST DATA USED PM2.5 33
METHOD USED TO COMPUTE ACTUAL GHG EMISSIONS: 0
CARBON CONTENT USED FOR GHGS AS A FRACTION): CARBON CONTENT NOT USED FOR CALCULATION TIER CHOSEN
CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS INFORMATION FOR THIS SOURCE
SOURCE OF EXPECTED ACTUAL POTENTIAL 13ASSIONS
EMISSION (AFrei0WTROLS/LWTS) (BEFORECONrROLSILMTS) (AFTER CONTROLS/LWS)
AIR POLLUTANT 9AITTED FACTOR Ib/hr tonslyr lb/hr I to"r IWhr tonslyr
PARTICULATE MATTER(PM) Mane Data 11.172 37142 1 55.8Wj 244.6668r 11.17 48.9334
PARTICULATE MATTER<U MICRONS(PM,,) Manu.Data 10.278 29.570 44.6880 195.7334 10.28 45.0187
PARTICULATE MATTER25 MICRONS(PM2,) Manu.Data 5.614 1&151 8.3790 w-mor 5.61 24.5890
SULFUR DIOXIDE(S02) I AP 42 0.740 2.129 0.7400 3.2412 0.74 3.2412
NITROGEN OXIDES(NOR) OBta 8.840 25.433 8.8400 38.7192 &.84 3&7192
CARBON MONOXIDE(CO) Data 11.170 3ZI36 11.1700 48.97,46 11.17 48.9246
VOLATLE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS(VCC)EEAP42 0.500 1.438 0.5000 2.1900 0.50 2.1900
LEAD 0.0014 0.004 0.0014 0.0062 0.00 0.0062
OTHER
HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS INFORMATION FOR THIS SOURCE
ACTUAL t3AISSIONS POTENTIAL EMSSIONS EMISSION FACTOR
CAS (AFrEROONTROLS/LWS) (BffORECOMROLS/LW.S (AFTEROONTROLS/LWS) lb(mmBtu
TOXIC/HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT NUMBER Ib/hr Ib/yr Whir Ib! r Whir Ib/ r uncontrolled/controlled
Acetaldehyde(TH) 75070 1.60E-02 140.4 2.44E-02 213.76 2.44E-02 213.76 8.30E-04 8.30E-04
Aoetophonone(H) 98862 6.18E-08 0.0 9.41E-0B 0.00 9.41E-08 0.00 3.20E-09 3.20E-09
Acrdein(TH) 107028 7.72E-02 676.7 1.18E-01 1030,18 1.18E-01 1030.18 4.00E-03 4.00E03
Antimony&Compounds (H) SBC 1.53E-04 1.3 2.32E04 2.03 2.32E-04 2.03 7.90E-06 7.90E-06
Arsenic&Compounds (TH) ASC 4.25E-04 3.7 6.47E-04 5,67 6.47E-04 5,67 2.20E-05 2.20E-05
Benzene(TH) 71432 8.11E-02 710.5 1.23E-01 1081.68 1.23E-01 1081.68 4.20E-03 4.20E-03
Benzo(a)pyrene (T) 50328 5.02E-05 0.4 7.64E-05 0.67 7.64E-05 0.67 2.60E-06 2.60E-06
Beryllium metal(un-reacted) (Also include in BEC)T/H) 7440417 2.12E-05 0.2 3.23E-05 0.28 3.23E-05 0,28 1.10E-06 1.10E-06
Cadmium Metal(elemental un-reacted)-(Add w/CDC)(T/H) 7440439 7.92E-05 0.7 1.21E-04 1.06 1.21E-04 1.06 4.10E-06 4.10E-06
Carbon tetrachloride(TH) 56235 8.69E-04 7.6 1.32E-03 11.59 1.32E-03 11.59 4.50E-05 4.50E-05
Chlorine(TH) 7782505 1.53E-02 133.6 2.32E-02 203.46 2.32E-02 203,46 7.90E-04 7.90E.04
Chlaobenzene(TH) 108907 6.37E-04 5.6 9.70E-04 8,50 9.70E-04 8,50 3.30E-05 3.30E-05
Chloroform(TH) 67663 5.41E-04 4.7 8.23E-04 7.21 8.23E-04 7.21 2.80E-05 2.80E-05
Ctromium-Other cornpds(H)(add wlchrom acid to get CRC) 3.38E-04 3.0 5.15E-04 4.51 5.15E-04 4.51 1.75E-05 1.75E-05
Chromic acid(VI)(Add as comp.of soICR6 and CRCXT/H) 7738945 6.76E-05 0.6 1.03E-04 0.90 1.03E-04 0.90 3.50E-06 3.50E-06
Cobalt compounds(H) COC 1.26E-04 1.1 1.91E-04 1,67 1.91E-04 1.67 6.50E-06 6.50E-06
Dindrophenol,2,4-(H) 51285 3.48E-06 0.0 5.29E-06 0.05 5.29E-06 0.05 1.80E-07 1.80E-07
Di(2-ethylhexyl)pMhalate(DEHP)(TH) 117817 9.08E-07 0.0 1.36E-06 0.01 1.38E-06 0.01 4.70E-08 4.70E-08
Ethyl benzene(M 100414 5.99E-04 5.2 9.11E-04 7.98 9.11E-04 7.98 3.10E-05 3.10E-05
Ethylene dichloride(1,2 dichloroethane)(TH) 107062 5.60E-04 4.9 8.53E-04 7.47 8.53E-04 7.47 2.90E-05 2.90E-05
Formaldehyde(TH) 50000 8.50E-02 744.3 1.29E-01 1133.19 1.29E-01 1133,19 4.40E-03 4.40E-03
HexacNorodibenzo-"ioxin 1,2,3,6,7,8 IT) 57653857 6.14E-10 0.0 9.35E-10 0.00 9.35E-10 0.00 3.18E-11 3.18E-11
Hydrogen cNonde(hydrocNcric acid)(TH) 7647010 3.67E-01 3214.2 1 5.59E01 4893.34 5.59E-01 4893.34 1.90E-02 1.90E-02
Lead and Lead compounds(H) PBC 9.27E-04 8.1 1.41E-03 12.36 1 1.41E-03 12.36 4.80E-05 4.80E-05
Manganese&compounds(TH) MNC 3.09E-02 270.7 4.70E-02 41Z07 4.70E-02 412,07 1.60E-03 1.60E-03
Mercury,eepor(Include in Mercury&Compds)(r" 7439976 6.76E-05 0.6 1.03E-04 0,90 1.03E-04 0.90 3.50E-06 3.50E-06
Methyl bromide(H)(txomomethane) 74839 2.90E-04 2.5 4.41E-04 3.86 4.41E-04 a86 1.50E-05 1.50E-05
Methyl chloride(H)(chloromethane) 74873 4.44E-04 3.9 6.76E-04 5.92 6.76E-04 5.92 2.30E-05 2.30E-05
Methyl chloroform(TH)(1,1,1 trichbroethane) 71556 5.99E-04 5.2 9.11E-04 7.98 9.11E-04 7.98 3.10E-05 3.10E-05
Methyl ethyl ketone M 78933 1.04E-04 0.9 1.59E-04 1.39 1.59E-04 1.39 5.40E-06 5.40E-06
9 Page

l
Form B-Bl for ESB-3 Continued
Methylene chloride("(dichloromethane) 75092 5.60E-03 49.1 8.53E-03 74,69 8.53E-03 74.69 290E-04 2.90E-04
Naphthalene (H) 91203 1.87E-03 16.4 2.85E-03 24.98 2.85E-03 24,98 9.70E.05 9.70E-05
Nickel metal(Component of Nickel&Compounds)(T/H) 7440020 6.37E-04 6.6 9.70E-04 8.50 9.70E-04 8.50 3.30E-05 3.30E-05
Ndrophenol,4-(H) 100027 2.12E-76 0.0 3.23E-06 0.03 3.23E-06 0.03 1.10E-07 1.10E-07
Pertachlorophenol(TH) 87865 9.85E07 0.0 1.50E-06 0.01 1.50E-06 0.01 5.10E-0B 5.10E-08
Perchloroethylene(tetrachloroeth ylene)(TN) 127184 7.34E-04 &4 1.12E-03 9.79 1.12E-03 R79 3.80E-05 3.80E-05
Phenol(TH) 108952 9.85E-04 &e 1.50E-03 13.13 1 50E-03 13.13 5.10E-05 5.10E-05
Phosphorus Metal,Yellow or White(H) T723140 5.21E-04 4.6 7.94E-04 6,95 r 7.94E-04 6.95 2.70E-05 2.70E-05
Polychlorinated biphenyls (TH) 1336363 1.57E-07 0.0 2.40E-07 0.00 r 2.40E-07 0.00 8.15E-09 8.15E-09
Polycyclic Organic Matter(H) POMTV 2.41E-03 21.1 3.6BE-03 32.19 r 3.68E-03 32.19 1.25E-04 1.25E-04
Propionald"de(H) 123386 1.18E-03 10.3 1.79E-03 15.71 1.79E-03 15.71 6.10E-05 6.10E-05
Propylene dichloride(H)(1,2 dicNoropropane) 78875 6.37E-04 6.6 9.70E-04 &50 9.70E-04 8.50 3.30E-05 3.30E-05
Selenium compounds(H) SEC 5.41E-05 0.6 8.23E-05 0,72 8.23E-05 0.72 2.80E-06 2.80E-06
Styrene(n4 100425 3.67E-02 321.4 1 5.59E-02 489.33 5.59E-02 489.33 1.90E-03 1.90E-03
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin,2,3,7,8- UH) 1746016 1.66E-10 0.0 1 253E-10 0.00 253E-10 0,00 8.60E-12 8.60E-12
Toluene C" 108883 1.78E-02 166.6 2.70E-02 236.94 2.70E-02 236.94 9.20E-04 9.20E-04
Trichloroethrylene(TH) 79016 5.79E-04 6.1 8.82E-04 7.73 8.82E-04 1 7.73 3.00E-05 3.00E-05
Trichlorofluoromethene(CFC 111)(r) 75694 7.92E-04 &9 1.21E-03 10.56 1.21E-03 10.56 4.10E-05 4.10E-05
Triahlorophenol,2,4,6-(H) 88062 4.25E-07 0.0 6.47E-07 0.01 6.47E-07 0.01 2.20E-08 2.20E-0B
Vinyl chloride(TH) 75014 3.48E-04 &0 5.29E-04 4.64 5.29E-04 4.64 1.80E-05 1.80E-05
AVlene(TH) 1330207 4.83E-04 4.2 7.35E-04 6.44 7.35E-04 6,44 2.50E-05 2.50E-05
'Highest HAP(Hydrogen chloride(hydrochloric acid)(TH)) 7647010 3.67E-01 3214.2 5.59E01 4893.34 5.59E-01 4893.34 1.90E-02 1.90E-02
Total HAPs 11,12 6,5671 1.14 9,998 1 1.14 9,998 3.88E-02 3.88E-02
TOXIC AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS INFORMATION PERMITTING PURPOSES
EXPECTED ACTUAL EMISSIONS AFTER CONTROLS/LIMITATIONS(FOR PERMITTING PURPOSE'S) EMISSION FACTOR
IWmmBtu
TOXIC AIR POLLUTANT CAS Num. IWtr lb/day lbtyr uncontrolled controlled
Acetaldehyde 014) 75070 1.60E-02 3.85E-01 140 8.30E-04 8.30E-04
Acrolein(TM 107028 7.72E-02 1.85E+00 677 4.00E-03 4.00E-03
Arsenic&Compounds (TH) ASC 4.25E-04 1.172E-02 4 2.20E-05 2.20E-W
Benzene(TH) 71432 8.11E-02 1.95E+00 711 4.20E-03 4.20E-03
Benzo(a)pyrene (T) 50328 5.02E-05 1.21E-03 0 2.60E-06 2,60E-06
Beryllium metal(ur-reacted) (Also include in BEC)(T/H) 7440417 2.12E-05 5.10E-04 0 1.10E-06 1.10E-06
Cadmium Metal(elemental unreacted)-(Add w/CDC)(TM) 7440439 7.92E-05 1.90E-03 1 4.10E-06 4.10E-06
Carbon tetrachloride(TH) 56235 8.65E-04 2.09E-02 8 4.50E-05 4.50E-05
Chlorine(TH) 7782505 1.53E-02 3.66E-01 134 7.90E-04 7.90E-04
Chlorober¢ene(TH) 108907 6.37E-04 1.53E-02 6 3.30E-15 3.30E-05
Chloroform(TH) 67663 5.41E-04 1.30E-02 5 2.80E-05 2.80E-05
Di(2-ethylhexypphthalate(DEHP)(TH) 117817 9.08E-07 2.18E-05 0 4.70E-08 4.70E-08
Ethylene dichloride(1,2dichloreethane)(TH) 107062 5.60E-04 1.34E-02 5 2.90E-05 2.90E-05
Soluble Chromate Cmpds,as Chrome(VI)(TH) SCLCR6 6.76E-05 1.62E-03 1 3.50E-06 3.50E-06
Formaldehyde(TH) 50000 8.50E-0Z 2.04E+00 744 4.40E-03 4.40E-03
Hexachlorodibenzo-pdioxin 1,2,3,6,7,8(r) 57653857 6.14E-10 1.47E-0B 0 3.18E-11 3.18E-11
Hydrogen chloride(hydrochloric acid)(TH) 7647010 3.67E-01 8.81E+00 3,214 1.90E-02 1.90E-02
Manganese&compounds(n-� MNC 3.09E-02 7.42E-01 271 1.60E-0:i 1.60E-03
Mercury,vapor(Include in Mercury&Compds)(T/H) 7439976 6.76E-05 1.62E-03 1 3.50E-06 3.50E-06
Methyl chloroform(TI-�(1,1,1 trichloroethane) 71556 5.99E-04 1.44E-02 5 3.10E-05 3.10E-05
Methyl ethyl ketone M 78933 1.04E-04 2.50E-03 1 5.40E-06 5.40E-06
Methylene chloride(TH)(dichloromethane) 75092 5.60E-03 1.34E-01 49 2.90E-04 290E-04
Nickel metal(Component of Nickel&Compounds)(T/H) 7440020 6.37E-04 1.53E-02 6 3.30E-05 3.30E-05
Pertachlorophenol(T" 87865 9.85E-07 2.36E-05 0 5.10E-08 5.10E-0B
PercNoroethylene(tetrachloroethylene)(TH) 127184 7.34E-04 1.76E-02 6 3.80E-05 3.80E-05
Phenol(TH) 108952 9.85E-04 2.36E-02 9 5.10E-05 5.10E-05
Polychlorinated tiphenyls (TH) 1336363 1.57E-07 3.78E-06 0 8.15E-09 615E-09
Styrene(TH) 100425 3.67E-0Z 8.81E-01 321 1.90E-03 1.90E-03
Tetrachlorockbenzo-p-dioxin,2,3,7,8-(TH) 1746016 1.66E-10 3.99E-09 0 8.60E-12 8.60E-12
Toluene(TH) 108883 1.78E-02 4.26E-01 156 9.20E-04 9.20E-04
Thchloroethylene(TH) 79016 5.79E-04 1.39E-02 5 3.00E-05 3.00E-05
Trichlorofluoromethane(CFC 111)M 75694 7.92E-04 1.90E-02 7 4.10E-05 4.10E-05
Virryl chloride(TH) 75014 3.48E-04 8.34E-03 3 1.80E-05 1.80E-05
A/lene(TH) 1330207 4.83E-04 1.16E-02 4 2.50E-05 2.50E 05
101Page

FORM B1
EMISSION SOURCE(WOOD, COAL, OIL, GAS, OTHER FUEL-FIRED BURNER)
REVISED 12/01/01 NCDENR/Division of Air Quality-Application For Air Permit to Construct/0perate BI
EMISSION SOURCE DESCRIPTION: Green Wood Fired Steam Boiler EMISSION SOURCE ID NO: ESB-1
CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): CDMC-1
OPERATING SCENARIO: 1 OF 1 EMISSION POINT(STACK)ID NO(S): EPS-1
DESCRIBE USE: X PROCESS HEAT SPACE HEAT X ELECTRICAL GENERATION
X CONTINUOUS USE STAND BY/EMERGENCY OTHER(DESCRIBE):
HEATING MECHANISM: X INDIRECT DIRECT
MAX FIRING RATE(MMBTUIHOUR): 29.4
WOOD-FIRED BURNER
WOOD TYPE: X BARK X WOOD/BARK X WET WOOD DRY WOOD OTHER(DESCRIBE):
PERCENT MOISTURE OF FUEL: 45
UNCONTROLLED CONTROLLED WITH FLYASH REINJECTION X CONTROLLED W/O REINJECTION
FUEL FEED METHOD: Stoker HEAT TRANSFER MEDIA: X STEAM AIR OTHER
METHOD OF TUBE CLEANING: Soot Blowing CLEANING SCHEDULE: Bi-Annual
COAL-FIRED BURNER
TYPE OF BOILER IF OTHER DESCRIBE:
PULVERIZED OVERFEED STOKER UNDERFEED STOKER SPREADER STOKER FLUIDIZED BED
❑WETBED UNCONTROLLED UNCONTROLLED UNCONTROLLED CIRCULATING
❑DRY BED CONTROLLED CONTROLLED FLYASH REINJECTION RECIRCULATING
NO FLYASH REINJECTION
METHOD OF LOADING: CYCLONE HANDFIRED TRAVELING GRATE OTHER(DESCRIBE):
METHOD OF TUBE CLEANING: CLEANING SCHEDULE:
OIUGAS-FIRED BURNER
TYPE OF BOILER: ❑ UTILITY ❑ INDUSTRIAL ❑ COMMERCIAL ❑ RESIDENTIAL
TYPE OF FIRING: ❑NORMAL ❑TANGENTIAL ❑ LOW NOX BURNERS ❑NO LOW NOX BURNER
METHOD OF TUBE CLEANING: CLEANING SCHEDULE:
OTHER FUEL-FIRED BURNER
TYPE OF FUEL: PERCENT MOISTURE:
TYPE OF BOILER: ❑ UTILITY ❑ INDUSTRIAL ❑ COMMERCIAL ❑ RESIDENTIAL
TYPE OF FIRING: TYPE OF CONTROL(IF ANY): FUEL FEED METHOD:
METHOD OF TUBE CLEANING: CLEANING SCHEDULE:
FUEL USAGE(INCLUDE STARTURBACKUP FUELS)
MAXIMUM DESIGN REQUESTED CAPACITY
FUEL TYPE UNITS CAPACITY(UNIT/HR) LIMITATION(UNFr/HR)
Unadulterated Green wood Ibs 6" 6"
FUEL CHARACTERISTICS(COWLETE ALL THAT ARE APPLICABLE)
SPECIFIC SULFUR CONTENT ASH CONTENT
FUEL TYPE BTU CONTENT (%BY WEIGHT) (%BY WEIGHT)
Unadulterated Green Wood 4375 0.06 1.1
SAMPLING PORTS,COMPLIANT WITH EPA METHOD 1 WILL BE INSTALLED ON THE STACKS: XYES NO
11 jPage

FORM B1
EMISSION SOURCE (WOOD, COAL, OIL, GAS, OTHER FUEL-FIRED BURNER)
REVISED 12/01/01 NCDENR/Division of Air Quality-Application for Air Permit to Construct/Operate B1
EMISSION SOURCE DESCRIPTION: Green Wood Fired Steam Boiler EMISSION SOURCE ID NO: ESB-2
CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): CDMC-2
OPERATING SCENARIO: 1 OF 1 EMISSION POINT(STACK)ID NO(S): EPS-2
DESCRIBE USE: X PROCESS HEAT SPACE HEAT X ELECTRICAL GENERATION
X CONTINUOUS USE STAND BYIEMERGENCY OTHER(DESCRIBE):
HEATING MECHANISM: X INDIRECT DIRECT
MAX FIRING RATE(MMBTU/HOUR): 29.4
WOOD-FIRED BURNER
WOOD TYPE: X BARK X WOOD/BARK X WET WOOD DRY WOOD OTHER(DESCRIBE):
PERCENT MOISTURE OF FUEL: 45
UNCONTROLLED CONTROLLED WITH FLYASH REINJECTION X CONTROLLED W/O REINJECTION
FUEL FEED METHOD: Stoker I HEATTRANSFER MEDIA: X STEAM AIR OTHER
METHOD OF TUBE CLEANING: Soot BIOWI CLEANING SCHEDULE: BI-Annual
COAL-FIRED BURNER
TYPE OF BOILER IF OTHER DESCRIBE:
PULVERIZED OVERFEED STOKER UNDERFEED STOKER SPREADER STOKER FLUIDIZED BED
❑WET BED UNCONTROLLED UNCONTROLLED UNCONTROLLED CIRCULATING
❑DRY BED CONTROLLED CONTROLLED FLYASH REINJECTION RECIRCULATING
NO FLYASH REINJECTION
METHOD OF LOADING: CYCLONE HANDFIRED TRAVELING GRATE OTHER(DESCRIBE):
METHOD OF TUBE CLEANING: CLEANING SCHEDULE:
OIUGAS-FIRED BURNER
TYPE OF BOILER: ❑ UTILITY ❑ INDUSTRIAL ❑ COMMERCIAL ❑ RESIDENTIAL
TYPE OF FIRING: ❑NORMAL ❑TANGENTIAL ❑ LOW NOX BURNERS ❑NO LOW NOX BURNER
METHOD OF TUBE CLEANING: CLEANING SCHEDULE:
OTHER FUEL-FIRED BURNER
TYPE OF FUEL: PERCENT MOISTURE:
TYPE OF BOILER: ❑ UTILITY ❑ INDUSTRIAL ❑ COMMERCIAL ❑ RESIDENTIAL
TYPE OF FIRING: TYPE OF CONTROL(IF ANY): FUEL FEED METHOD:
METHOD OF TUBE CLEANING: CLEANING SCHEDULE:
FUEL USAGE(INCLUDE STARTUP/BACKUP FUELS)
MAAMUM DESIGN REQUESTED CAPACITY
FUEL TYPE UNITS CAPACITY(UNIT/HR) LIMITATION(UNIT/HR)
Unadulterated Green wood Ibs 63M 63W
FUEL CHARACTERISTICS(COMPLETE ALL THAT ARE APPLICABLE)
SPECIFIC SULFUR CONTENT ASH CONTENT
FUEL TYPE BTU CONTENT (%BY WEIGHT) (%BY WEIGHT)
Unadulterated Green Wood 4375 0.06 1.1
SAMPLING PORTS,COMPLIANT WITH EPA METHOD 1 WILL BE INSTALLED ON THE STACKS: XYES NO
121Page

FORM B1
EMISSION SOURCE (WOOD, COAL, OIL, GAS, OTHER FUEL-FIRED BURNER)
REVISED 12/01/01 NCDENR/Division of Air Quality-Application for Air Permit to Construct/Operate BI
EMISSION SOURCE DESCRIPTION: Green Wood Fired Steam Boiler EMISSION SOURCE ID NO: ESB3
CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): CDMC3
OPERATING SCENARIO: 1 OF 1 EMISSION POINT(STACK)ID NO(S): EPS3
DESCRIBE USE: X PROCESS HEAT SPACE HEAT X ELECTRICAL GENERATION
X CONTINUOUS USE STAND BY/EMERGENCY OTHER(DESCRIBE):
HEATING MECHANISM: X INDIRECT DIRECT
MAX FIRING RATE(MMBTU/HOUR): 29.4
WOOD-FRED BURNER
WOOD TYPE: X BARK X WOOD/BARK X WET WOOD DRY WOOD OTHER(DESCRIBE):
PERCENT MOISTURE OF FUEL:_ 45
UNCONTROLLED CONTROLLED WITH FLYASH REINJECTION X CONTROLLED W/O REINJECTION
FUEL FEED METHOD: Stoker H EAT TRANSFER MEDIA: X STEAM AIR OTHER
METHOD OF TUBE CLEANING: Soot B ng CLEANING SCHEDULE: Bi-AIIIIUBi
COAL-FIRED BURNER
TYPE OF BOILER IF OTHER DESCRIBE:
PULVERIZED OVERFEEDSTOKER UNDERFEED STOKER SPREADER STOKER FLUIDIZED BED
❑WET BED UNCONTROLLED UNCONTROLLED UNCONTROLLED CIRCULATING
❑DRY BED CONTROLLED CONTROLLED FLYASH REINJECTION RECIRCULATING
NO FLYASH REINJECTION
METHOD OF LOADING: CYCLONE HANDFIRED TRAVELING GRATE OTHER(DESCRIBE):
METHOD OF TUBE CLEANING: CLEANING SCHEDULE:
OIUGAS-FIRED BURNER
TYPE OF BOILER: ❑ UTILITY ❑ INDUSTRIAL ❑ COMMERCIAL ❑ RESIDENTIAL
TYPE OF FIRING: ❑NORMAL ❑ TANGENTIAL ❑ LOW NOX BURNERS ❑NO LOW NOX BURNER
METHOD OF TUBE CLEANING: CLEANING SCHEDULE:
OTHER FUEL-FRED BURNER
TYPE OF FUEL: PERCENT MOISTURE:
TYPE OF BOILER: ❑ UTILITY ❑ INDUSTRIAL ❑ COMMERCIAL ❑ RESIDENTIAL
TYPE OF FIRING: TYPE OF CONTROL(IF ANY): FUEL FEED METHOD:
METHOD OF TUBE CLEANING: CLEANING SCHEDULE:
FUEL USAGE(INCLUDE STARTUP/BACKUP FUELS)
MAXIMUM DESIGN REQUESTED CAPACITY
FUEL TYPE UNITS CAPACITY(UNIT/HR) LIMITATION(UNIT/HR)
Unaduterated Green wood Ibs 6300 6300
FUEL CHARACTERISTICS(COMPLETE ALL THAT ARE APPLICABLE)
SPECIFIC SULFUR CONTENT ASH CONTENT
FUEL TYPE BTU CONTENT (%BY WEIGHT) (%BY WEIGHT)
Unadulterated Green Wood 4375 0.06 1.1
SAMPLING PORTS,COMPLIANT WITH EPA METHOD 1 WILL BE INSTALLED ON THE STACKS: XYES NO
131Page

Section 1.04 Forms C-4 for each Control Device
Control Device CDMC-1
FORM C4
CONTROL DEVICE(CYCLONE, MULTICYCLONE, OR OTHER MECHANICAL)
REVISED 12/01/01 NCDErtR/Division of Air Quality-Application for Air Permit to Construct/Operate C4
CONTROL DEVICE ID NO: CONIC-1 EMISSIONS FROM WHICH EMISSION SOURCE ID NO(S): ESB-1
CONTROLS
EMISSION POINT(STACK)ID NO(S):EPS-1 POSITION IN SERIES OF CONTROLS NO. 1 OF 1 UNITS
MANUFACTURER: Wellons MODEL NO:
DATE MANUFACTURED: PROPOSED OPERATION DATE: 3/1/2012
OPERATING SCENARIO: PROPOSED START CONSTRUCTION DATE: 11/1/2010
_1_OF_1_ P.E.SEAL REQUIRED(PER 2Q.0112)? YES X NO
DESCRIBE CONTROL SYSTEM: Multi-cyclone collector
POLLUTANT(S)COLLECTED,. TSP PW10 P%2.5
BEFORE CONTROL EMISSION RATE(LB/HR): 55.86 44.69 8.38
CAPTURE EFFICIENCY: 100% 100% 100% %
CONTROL DEVICE EFFICIENCY: 80% 77% 33% %
CORRESPONDING OVERALL EFFICIENCY: 80% 77% 33% %
EFFICIENCY DETERMINATION CODE: Mfg. Mfg. Mfg.
TOTAL EMISSION RATE(LB/HR): 11.172 10.28 5.61
PRESSURE DROP QN.W10): MIN 26 MAX 3.5 WARNING ALARM? YES X NO
INLET TEMPERATURE(°F): MIN 275 MAX 326 OUTLET TEMPERATURE ff): MIN275 MAX 325
INLET AIR FLOW RATE(ACFM): 14,775 BULK PARTICLE DENSITY(LB/FTO): 36
POLLUTANT LOADING RATE(GR/FT): .1
SEMM CHAMBER CYCLONE MULTICYCLOfE
LENGTH(INCHES): INLETVELOCITY(FT/SEC): d CIRCULAR d RECTANGLE NO.TUBES: 18
WIDTH(INCHES): DIMENSIONS(INCHES)See inshuctions IF WET SPRAY UTILIZED DIAMETER OF TUBES: Y'
FEIGHT(INCHES): H: Dd: LIQUID USED: HOPPER ASPIRATION SYSTEM?
VELOCITY(FT/SEC.): W: Lb: FLOW RATE(GPM): YES X NO
NO.TRAYS: De: Lc: MAKE UP RATE(GPM): LOWERS?
NO.BAFFLES: D: S: I YES X NO
TYPE OF CYCLONE: CONVENTIONAL X HIGH EFFICIENCY OTHER
DESCRIBE MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES: PARTICLE SIZE 013TPJBL ON
Annual inspection and routine monitoring of pressure drop SIZE WEIG % CUMULATIVE
(MICRONS) OF TOTAL %
DESCRIBE INCOMING AIR STREAM: 0-1
Exhaust gases at 300-3W degrees F.from wood fired combustion after leaving the boiler and 1-10
after passing thru the combustion air preheater. 10-25
25-50
50-100
-100
TOTAL=100
DESCRIBE ANY MONITORING DEVICES,GAUGES,TEST PORTS,ETC:
Multiple cone collector will be provided with pressure lest ports on the inlet and outlet.
ON A SEPARATE PAGE,ATTACH A DIAGRAM OF TFE RELATIONSHIP OF THE CONTROL DEVICE TO ITS EMISSION SOURCE(S):
15 P a g e
�

Control Device CDMC-2
FORM C4
CONTROL DEVICE(CYCLONE, MULTICYCLONE, OR OTHER MECHANICAL)
REVISED 12/01/01 NCDENRIDivision of Air Quality-Application for Air Permit to ConstructlOperate C4
CONTROL DEVICE ID NO: CDMC-2 CONTROLS EMISSIONS FROM WHICH EMISSION SOURCE ID ND(S): ES13-2
EMISSION POINT(STACK)ID NO(S):EPS-2 POSITION IN SERIES OF CONTROLS NO. 1 OF 1 UNITS
MANUFACTURER: Wellons MODEL NO:
DATE MANUFACTURED: PROPOSED OPERATION DATE: 3/1/2012
OPERATING SCENARIO: PROPOSED START CONSTRUCTION DATE: 11/1/2010
_1 OF_1_ P.E.SEAL REQUIRED(PER 2Q.0112)? YES X NO
DESCRIBE CONTROL SYSTEM: Mukkyclone collector
POLLUTANT(S)COLLECTED: TSP Pw10 PM-2.5
BEFORE CONTROL EMISSION RATE(LB/HR): 55.86 44.69 8.38
CAPTURE EFFICIENCY: 100% 100% 100% %
CONTROL DEVICE EFFICIENCY: 80% 77% 33% %
CORRESPONDING OVERALL EFFICIENCY: 80% 77% 33% %
EFFICIENCY DETERMINATION CODE: Mfg. Mfg- Mfg. _
TOTAL EMISSION RATE(LB/HR): 11.172 10.28 5.61
PRESSURE DROP QN.H20): MIN 2.5 MAX 3.5 WARNING ALARM? YES X NO
INLET TEMPERATURE CF): MIN 275 MAX 325 OUTLET TEMPERATURE CF): MIN275 MAX 325
INLET AIR FLOW RATE(ACFM): 14,T75 BULK PARTICLE DENSITY(LB/FT): 35
POLLUTANT LOADING RATE(GR/FT�: .1
SETTLING CHAMBER CYCLONE MULTICYCLONE
LENGTH ONCHES): INLET VELOCITY(FT/SEC): d CIRCULAR d RECTANGLE NO.TUBES: 18
WIDTH ONCHES): DIMENSIONS(INCHES)See insfructbns IF WET SPRAY UTILIZED DIAMETER OF TUBES: V'
HEIGHT ONCHES): H: Dd: LIQUID USED: HOPPER ASPIRATION SYSTEM?
VELOCITY(FT/SEC.): W. Lb: FLOW RATE(GPM): YES X NO
NO.TRAYS: De: Lc: MAKE UP RATE(GPM): LOWERS?
NO.BAFFLES: D: S: YES X NO
TYPE OF CYCLONE: CONVENTIONAL X HIGH EFFICIENCY OTHER
DESCRIBE MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES: PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
Annual inspection and routine monitoring of pressure drop SIZE WEIGHT% CUMULATIVE
(MICRONS) OF TOTAL %
DESCRIBE INCOMING AIR STREAM: 0.1
Exhaust gases at 300-M degrees F.from wood fired combustion after leaving the boiler and 1-10
after passing thru the combustion air preheater. 10.25
25-50
50-100
>100
TOTAL=100
DESCRIBE ANY MONITORING DEVICES,GAUGES,TEST PORTS,ETC:
Multiple cone collector will be prouded with pressure test ports on the inlet and outlet.
ON A SEPARATE PAGE,ATTACH A DIAGRAM OF THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE CONTROL DEVICE TO ITS EMISSION SOURCE(S):
16 Page

Control Device CDMC-3
FORM C4
CONTROL DEVICE(CYCLONE, MULTICYCLONE, OR OTHER MECHANICAL)
REVISED 12/01/01 NCDENWDivision of Air Quality-Application for Air Permitto ConstructOperate C4
CONTROL DEVICE ID NO: CDMC-3 CONTROLS EMISSIONS FROM WHICH EMISSION SOURCE ID NO(S): ESB-3
EMISSION POINT(STACK)ID NO(S):EPS3 POSITION IN SERIES OF CONTROLS NO. 1 OF 1 UNITS
MANUFACTURER: Wellons MODEL NO:
DATE MANUFACTURED: PROPOSED OPERATION DATE: 3/1/2012
OPERATING SCENARIO: PROPOSED START CONSTRUCTION DATE: 11/1/2010
1 OF 1 P.E.SEAL REQUIRED(PER 20.0112)? YES X NO
DESCRIBE CONTROL SYSTEM: Multi-cyclone collector
POLLUTAW(S)COLLECTED: TSP PM-10 PM-2.5
BEFORE CONTROL EMISSION RATE(LB/HR): 55.86 44.69 8.38
CAPTURE EFFICIENCY: 100% 100% 100% %
CONTROL DEVICE EFFICIENCY: 80% 77% 33% %
CORRESPONDING OVERALL EFFICIENCY: 80% 77% 33% %
EFFICIENCY DETERMINATION CODE: Mfg. Mfg. Mfg.
TOTAL EMISSION RATE(LB/HR): 11.172 10.28 5.61
PRESSURE DROP ON.H20): MIN 2.5 MAX 3.5 WARNING ALARM? YES X NO
INLET TEMPERATURE M: MIN 275 MAX 325 OUTLET TEMPERATURE(°F): MIN276 MAX 326
INLETAIR FLOW RATE(ACFM): 14,776 BULK PARTICLE DENSITY(LB/FT): 35
POLLUTANT LOADING RATE(GR/FT): .1
SE7TLM CHAMBER CYCLONE MULTICYCLONE
LENGTH QNCHES): INLETVELOCITY(FT/SEC): d CIRCULAR d RECTANGLE NO.TUBES: 18
WIDTH QNCHES): DIMENSIONS(INCHES)See instructions IF WET SPRAY UTIUZED DIAMETER OF TUBES: 9"
HEIGHT QNCHES): H: Dd: LIQUID USED: HOPPER ASPIRATION SYSTEM?
VELOCITY(FT/SEC.): W: Lb: FLOW RATE(GPM): YES X NO
NO.TRAYS: De: Lc: MAKE UP RATE(GPM): LOWERS?
NO.BAFFLES: D: S: I YES X NO
TYPE OF CYCLONE: CONVENTIONAL X HIGH EFFICIENCY OTHER
DESCRIBE MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES: PARTICLE SIRE DISTRIBUTION
Annual inspection and routine monitoring of pressure drop SIZE WEIGHT% CUMULATIVE
(MICRONS) OF TOTAL %
DESCRIBE INCOMING AIR STREAM: 0-1
Exhaust gases at 300350 degrees F.from wood fired combustion after leaving the boiler and 1-10
after passing thru the combustion air preheater. 10-25
25-W
50-100
>100
TOTAL=100
DESCRIBE ANY MONITORING DEVICES,GAUGES,TEST PORTS,ETC:
Multiple cone collector will be protided with pressure test ports on the inlet and outlet.
ON A SEPARATE PAGE,ATTACH A DIAGRAM OF THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE CONTROL DEVICE TO ITS EMISSION SOURCE(S):
17 Page

Section 1.03 Form B-6
FORM B6
EMISSION SOURCE (STORAGE SILO/BINS)
REVISED 12/01/01 NCDENRIDIvlsion of Air Quality-Application for Air Permit to Construct/Operate B6
EMISSION SOURCE DESCRIPTION: Below Grade Fuel Bunker EMISSION SOURCE ID NO: ESSB-1
CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): none
OPERATING SCENARIO: 1 OF 1 EMISSION POINT(STACK)ID NO(S): none
DESCRIBE IN DETAIL THE PROCESS(ATTACH FLOW DIAGRAM):
85.9 w x 60'I x 13'storage height concrete fuel bunker(approx 35,800 cu ft)
MATERIAL STORED: Green Wood Boiler fuel DENSITY OF MATERIAL(LB/FT3):24
CAPACITY CUBIC FEET: 35,8W TONS: 430
DANENSIONS(FEET) HEIGHT: 13 DIAMETER: I (OR) LENGTH: 60 WIDTH: 85.5 HEIGHT: 13
ANNUAL PRODUCT Tl>ROUGF(PUT(TONS) ACTUAL: 72,000 MAAMUM DESIGN CAPACITY: 430 Tons
PNEUMATICALLY FILLED MECHANICALLY FILLED FILLED FROM
BLOWER SCREW CONVEYOR RAILCAR
COMPRESSOR BELT CONVEYOR MOTOR HP: TRUCK
OTHER: BUCKET ELEVATOR I STORAGE PILE
X OTHER: Self unloading trailers OTHER:
NO. FILL TUBES:
MAAMUM ACFM:
MATERIAL IS FILLED TO:
BY WHAT METHOD IS MATERIAL UNLOADED FROM SILO? Hydralically operated scrapes pull biomass material from bunker to a
lateral screw con%eyor.
MAXIMUM DESIGN FILLING RATE OF MATERIAL(TONS/HR): 100
MANMUM DESIGN UNLOADING RATE OF MATERIAL(TONS/HR): 12
COMMENTS:
See drawings as attached.
14JPa e
g

Section 1.05 Form D-1 Facility Wide Emissions
FORM D1
FACILITY-WIDE EMISSIONS SUMMARY
REVISED 12/01101 NCDENR)Division of Air Quality-Application for Air Permit to ConstrucIlOperate D1
CRITERIAAIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS INFORMATION-FACILITY-MADE
EXPECTED ACTUAL EMISSIONS POTENTIAL EMISSIONS POTENTIAL EMISSIONS
(AFTER CONTROLS/ (BEFORE CONTROLS/ (AFTER CONTROLS/
LIMITATIONS) LIMITATIONS) LIMITATIONS)
AIR POLLUTANT EMITTED tons/yr tons/yr tore/yr
PARTICULATE MATTER(PM) 96.43 734.00 146.80
PARTICULATE MATTER<10 MICRONS(PMrp) y 88.71 587.20 135.06
PARTICULATE MATTER<2.5 MICRONS(PM2.5) 48.45 110.10 73.77
SULFUR DIOXIDE(S02) 6.39 9.72 9.72
MTROGEN OXIDES(NOx) 76.30 116.16 116.16
CARBON MONOXIDE(CO) 96.41 146.77 146.77
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS(VOC) 4.32 6.57 6.57
LEAD 4f to s 0.01 0.02 0.02
OTHER 0.00 0.00 0.00
HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS INFORMATION-FACILITY-NDE
EXPECTED ACTUAL EMISSIONS POTENTIAL EMISSIONS POTENTIAL EMISSIONS
(AFTER CONTROLS! (BEFORE CONTROLS/ (AFTER CONTROLS/
LIMITATIONS) LIMITATIONS) LIMITATIONS)
HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT EMITTED CAS NO. tons/yr tors/yr tons/yr
Acetaldehyde(TH) 75070 2.11E-01 0.32 0.3206
Acetophenone(H) 98862 8.12E-07 0.00 0.0000
Acrolein(TH) 107028 1.02E+00 1.55 1.5453
Antimony&Compounds (H) SBC 2.00E-03 0.00 0.0031
Arsenic&Compounds (TH) ASC 5.58E-03 0.01 0.0085
Benzene(TH) 71432 1.07E+00 1.62 1.6225
Benzo(a)pyrene (T) 50328 6.60E-04 0.00 0.0010
Beryllium metal(un-reacted) (Also include in BEC)(f/ 7440417 2.79E-04 0.00 0.0004
Cadmium Metal(elemental un-reacted)-(Add w/CDC) 7440439 1.04E-03 0.00 0.0016
Carbon tetrachloride(TH) 56235 1.14E-02 0.02 0.0174
Chlorine(TH) 7782505 2.00E-01 0.31 0.3052
Chlorobenzene 108907 8.37E-03 0.01 0.0127
Chloroform(TH) 67663 7.11E-03 0.01 0.0108
Chromium-Other compds(H)(add w/chrom acid to get 1 0 4.44E-03 0.01 0.0068
Chromic acid(VI)(Add as comp.of soICR6 and CRC)( 7738945 8.88E-04 0.00 0.0014
Cobalt compounds(H) CDC 1.65E-03 0.00 0.0025
Dinkrophenol,2,4-(H) 51285 4.57E-05 0.00 0.0001
Di(2ethy1hexyl)phthalate(DEHP)(TH) 117817 1.19E-05 0.00 0.0000
Ethyl benzene(H) 100414 7.87E-03 0.01 0.0120
Ethylene dichloride(1,2-dichloroethane)(14 107062 7.36E-03 0.01 0.0112
Formaldehyde(TH) 50000 1.12E+00 1.70 1.6998
HexacNorodiberuro-p-dioxin 1,2,3,6,7,8(T) 57653857 8.07E-09 0.00 0.0000
Hydrogen chloride(hydrochloric acid)(TH) 7647010 4.82E+00 7.34 7.3400
Lead and Lead compounds(H) PBC 1.22E-02 0.02 0.0185
Manganese&compounds(TH) MNC 4.06E-01 0.62 0.6181
Mercury,vapor(Include in Mercury&Compds)(T/H) 7439976 8.88E-04 0.00 0.0014
Methyl bromide(H)(bromomethane) 74839 3.81E-03 0.01 0.0058
Methyl chloride(H)(chlommethane) 74873 5.84E-03 0.01 0.0089
Methyl chloroform('TH)(1,1,1 tricMoroethane) 71556 7.87E-03 0.01 0.0120
Methyl ethyl ketone(T) 78933 1.37E 03 0.00 0.0021
18 Page

D-5 Facility Emissions Continued
Methylene chloride(TH)(dichloromethane) 75092 7.36E-02 0.11 0.1120
Naphthalene (H) 91203 2.46E-02 0.04 0.0375
Nickel metal(Component of Nickel&Compounds)(TA 7440020 8.37E-03 0.01 0.0127
Nitrophenol,4-(H) 100027 2.79E-05 0.00 0.0000
PeMachloropheriol(TH) 87865 1.29E-05 0.00 0.0000
Perchloroethylene Qetrachkxoethylene)(TH) 127184 9.64E-03 0.01 0.0147
Phenol(TH) 108952 1.29E-02 0.02 0.0197
Phosphorus Metal,Yellow or White(H) 7723140 6.85E-03 0.01 0,0104
Polychlorinated biphenyls (TH) 1336363 2.07E-06 0.00 0.0000
Pdycyclic Organic Matter(H) POMTV 3.17E-02 0.05 0.0483
Propionaklehyde(14) 123386 1.55E-02 0.02 0.0236
Propylene dichloride(H)(1,2 dichloropropane) 78875 8.37E-03 0.01 0.0127
Selenium compounds(H) SEC 7.11E-04 0.00 0.0011
Styrene(TH) 100425 4.82E-01 0.73 0.7340
Tetrachlorodibenzo-pdioxin,2,3,7,8-(TH) 1746016 2.18E-09 0.00 0.0000
Toluene(TH) 108883 2.33E-01 0.36 0.3554
Trichlowthylene(TH) 79016 7.61E-03 0.01 0.0116
Trichlorofluo omethane(CFC 111)IT) 75694 1.04E-02 0.02 0.0158
Thchlorophenol,2,4,6-(H) 88062 5.58E-06 0.00 0.0000
Vinyl chloride 01-0 75014 4.57E-03 0,01 00070
Xylene(TH) 1330207 6.34E-03 001 00097
0 0 3.21E+00 4,89 4.8933
TOXIC AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS INFORMATION-FACILITY-IMDE
INDICATE REQUESTED ACTUAL EMISSIONS AFTER CONTROLS/LIMITATIONS. EMISSIONS ABOVE THE TOXIC PERMfT EMISSION RATE(TPER)IN 15A
NCAC 2Q.0711 MAY REQUIRE AIR DISPERSION MODELING. USE NETTING FORM D2 IF NECESSARY.
Modeling Required?
TOXIC AIR POLLUTANT B41TTED CAS NO. Ib(hr lb/day Iblyear Yes No
Acetaldehyde(TH) 75070 4.81E-02 1.15E+00 421.2 No
Acrdem(TH) 107028 2.32E-01 5.56E+00 2030.0 Yes
Arsenic&Compounds (T}I) ASC 1 27E-03 3.06E-02 11.2 Yes
Benzene(TH) 71432 2.43E-01 5.84E+00 2131.5 Yes
Benzo(a)pyrene IT) 50328 1.51E-04 I 3.62E-03 1.3 no
Beryllium metal(un-reacted) (Also include in BEG)(TI 7440417 6.37E-05 1.53E-03 0.6 Yes
Cadmium Metal(elemental un-reacted)-(Add w/CDC) 7440439 2.38E-04 5.70E-03 2.1 Yes
Carbon tetrachloride(TH) 56235 2.61E-03 6.26E-02 22.8 No
Chlonne(TH) 7782505 4.58E-02 1.10E+00 400.9 Yes
C hlorobenzene(M) 108997 1.91E-03 4.59E-02 16.7 No
Chloroform(TH) 67663 1.62E-03 3.89E-02 14.2 No
Di(2ethylherypphthakVe(DEHP)(TH) 117817 2.72E-06 6.53E-05 0.0 No
Ethylene dichloride(1,2-dichloroethane)MA) 107062 1.68E-03 4.03E-02 14.7 No
Soluble Chromate Cmpds,as Chrome(VD(TH) SOLCR6 2.03E-04 4.87E-03 1.8
Formaldehyde(TH) 50000 2.55E-01 6.12E+00 2233.0 Yes
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dionin1,2,3,6,7,8IT) 57653857 1.84E-09 4.42E-08 0.00002 No
Hydrogen chloride(hydrochloric acid)IT" 7647010 1.10E+00 2.64E+01 9642.5 Yes
Manganese&compounds(TH) MNC 9.27E-02 2.22E+00 812.0 Yes
Mercury,vapor(Include in Mercury&Cbmpds)(T" 7439976 2.01E-04 4.87E-03 1.8 No
Methyl chbroform(TH)(1,1.1 tdchloroethane) 71556 1.80E-03 4.31E-02 15.7 No
Methyl ethyl ketone(f) 78933 3.13E-04 7.51E-03 2.7 No
Methylene chloride(TH)(dichloromethane) 75092 1 68E-02 4 03E-01 147.2 No
Nickel metal(Component of Nickel&Compounds)(TA 7440020 1.91E-03 4.59E-02 .16.7 No
Pentachlorophenol(TH) 87865 2.95E-06 7.09E-05 0.0 No �I
Pemhloroethylene(tetrachloroethylene)(TH) 127184 2.20E-03 5.28E-02 19.3 No
Phenol(TH) 108952 2.95E-03 7.09E-02 25.9 No
Polychlorinated biphenyls (TH) 1336363 4.72E-07 1.13E-05 0.0 No
Styrene(TH) 100425 1.10E-01 2.64E+00 964.3 No
Tetrachkxodibenzo{sdiimn,2,3,7,8-(TH) 1746016 4.98E-10 1.20E-08 0.000004 No
Toluene(TH) 109883 5.33E-02 1.28E+00 466.9 No
Trlchloroethylene(TH) 79016 1.74E-03 4.17E-02 15.2 No
Trichlorofluoromethane(C FC 111)(T) 75694 2.38E-03 5.70E-02 20.8 No
Vinyl chloride(TH) 75014 1.04E-03 2.50E-02 9.1 No
Xylene(TH) 1330207 1.45E-03 3.48E-02 12.7 No
19 Page
i

FORM D
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS TO SUPPORT PERMIT APPLICATION
REVISED:12t01/01 NCDENR/Division of Air Quality-Application for Air Permit to Construct/Operate p5
PROVIDE DETAILED TECHNICAL CALCULATIONS TO SUPPORT ALL EMISSION,CONTROL,AND REGULATORY
DEMONSTRATIONS MADE IN THIS APPLICATION. INCLUDE A COMPREHENSIVE PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM AS
NECESSARY TO SUPPORT AND CLARIFY CALCULATIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS. ADDRESS THE
FOLLOWING SPECIFIC ISSUES ON SEPARATE PAGES:
A SPECIFIC EMISSIONS SOURCE(EMISSION INFORMATION)(FORM B)-SHOW CALCULATIONS USED,INCLUDING EMISSION FACTORS,MATERIAL
BALANCES,AND/OR OTHER METHODS FROM WHICH THE POLLUTANT EMISSION RATES IN THIS APPLICATION WERE DERIVED. INCLUDE
CALCULATION OF POTENTIAL BEFORE AND,WHERE APPLICABLE,AFTER CONTROLS. CLEARLY STATE ANY ASSUMPTIONS MADE AND PROVIDE
ANY REFERENCES AS NEEDED TO SUPPORT MATERIAL BALANCE CALCULATIONS.
B SPECIFIC EMISSION SOURCE(REGULATORY INFORMATIONXFORM E2-TITLE V ONLY)-PROVIDE AN ANALYSIS OF ANY REGULATIONS APPLICABLE
TO INDIVIDUAL SOURCES AND THE FACILITY AS A WHOLE. INCLUDE A DISCUSSION OUTING METHODS(e.g.FOR TESTING AND/OR MONITORING
REQUIREMENTS)FOR COMPLYING WITH APPLICABLE REGULATIONS,PARTICULARLY THOSE REGULATIONS LIMITING EMISSIONS BASED ON
PROCESS RATES OR OTHER OPERATIONAL PARAMETERS. PROVIDE JUSTIFICATION FOR AVOIDANCE OF ANY FEDERAL REGULATIONS
(PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION(PSD),NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS(NSPS),NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR
HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS(NESHAPS),TITLE V),INCLUDING EXEMPTIONS FROM THE FEDERAL REGULATIONS WHICH WOULD OTHERWISE BE
APPLICABLE TO THIS FACILITY. SUBMIT ANY REQUIRED TO DOCUMENT COMPLIANCE WITH ANY REGULATIONS. INCLUDE EMISSION RATES
CALCULATED IN ITEM"A'ABOVE,DATES OF MANUFACTURE,CONTROL EQUIPMENT,ETC.TO SUPPORT THESE CALCULATIONS.
C CONTROL DEVICE ANALYSIS(FORM C)-PROVIDE A TECHNICAL EVALUATION WITH SUPPORTING REFERENCES FOR ANY CONTROL EFFICIENCIES
LISTED ON SECTION C FORMS,OR USED TO REDUCE EMISSION RATES IN CALCULATIONS UNDER ITEM'A'ABOVE. INCLUDE PERTINENT OPERATING
PARAMETERS(e.g.OPERATING CONDITIONS,MANUFACTURING RECOMMENDATIONS,AND PARAMETERS AS APPLIED FOR IN THIS APPLICATION)
CRITICAL TO ENSURING PROPER PERFORMANCE OF THE CONTROL DEVICES). INCLUDE AND LIMITATIONS OR MALFUNCTION POTENTIAL FOR THE
PARTICULAR CONTROL DEVICES AS EMPLOYED AT THIS FACILITY. DETAIL PROCEDURES FOR ASSURING PROPER OPERATION OF THE CONTROL
DEVICE INCLUDING MONITORING SYSTEMS AND MAINTENANCE TO BE PERFORMED.
D PROCESS AND OPERATIONAL COMPLIANCE ANALYSIS-(FORM E3-TITLE V ONLY)-SHOWING HOW COMPLIANCE WILL BE ACHIEVED WHEN USING
PROCESS,OPERATIONAL,OR OTHER DATA TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE.REFER TO COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS IN THE REGULATORY
ANALYSIS IN ITEM"B'WHERE APPROPRIATE. LIST ANY CONDITIONS OR PARAMETERS THAT CAN BE MONITORED AND REPORTED TO
DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE WITH THE APPLICABLE REGULATIONS.
E PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SEAL- PURSUANTTO 15A NCAC 20.0112'APPLICATION REQUIRING A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SEAL,'
A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER REGISTERED IN NORTH CAROLINA SHALL BE REQUIRED TO SEAL TECHNICAL PORTIONS OF THIS APPLICATION FOR
NEW SOURCES AND MODIFICATIONS OF EXISTING SOURCES. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS FOR FURTHER APPLICABILITY).
I, ,attest that this application for
has been reviewed by me and is accurate,complete and consistent Kith the information supplied
in the engineering plans,calculations,and all other supporting documentation to the best of my knowledge. I further attest that to the best of my
knowledge the proposed design has been prepared in accordance Kith the applicable regulations. Although certain portions of this submittal
package may have been developed by other professionals,inclusion of these materials under my seal signifies that l have reviewed this material
and have judged it to be consistent Kith the proposed design. Note: In accordance with NC General Statutes 143-215.6A and 143-215.6B,any
person who knowingly makes any false statement,representation,or certification in any application shall be guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor Mich
may include a fine not to exceed$10,000 as Kell as civil penalties up to$25,000 per violation.
(PLEASE USE BLUE INK TO COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING) PLACE NORTH CAROLINA SEAL HERE
NAME:
DATE:
COMPANY:
ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE:
SIGNATURE:
PAGES CERTIFIED:
(IDENTIFY ABOVE EACH PERMIT FORM AND ATTACHMENT
THAT IS BEING CERTIFIED BY THIS SEAL)
20 Page

Section 1.06 Form D5 Supporting Calculations
Form D5,section A
Assumptions:
Number of Boilers 3 units
Boiler Input(all boilers installed as part of the installation) 29.4 mmbtu/hr
Potential annual hours of operations 8760 Hours
Expected annual hours of operations 7344 Hours
Allowable emission limit for particulate matter per 15A NCAC 02D.0504:
E= 1.16988 x(1/(Btu input*A.2230)
E= 0.431b/MMBtu
The AP—42 factor for bark(the worst case)with mechanical collector is.54#/mmbtu
For this permit application,the following outlet emissions factor will be used. .0.38 lb/MMBtu
PM before Controls PM= 55.86 Ib/hr
PM After Controls PM= 11.172lb/hr
Particle size distribution predicted in the exhaust gas from the wood-fired combustion system with no controls:
<10 to 2.5 micron—65%PM
<2.5 micron—15%PM
PMlo total before controls: PMlo= 44.69lb/hr
PMlo total after controls: PMio= 10.28 lb/hr
PM2,5 total before controls: PM23= 8.38 Ib/hr
PMzS total after controls: PM25= 5.61 lb/hr
PM 11.172lb/hr
Emission factors:#/mmbtu SOZ 0.74 lb/hr
Nox 8.84 lb/hr
CO 11.17 Ib/hr
VOCs 0.5 Ib/hr
21 JPage

Section 1.07 Multiclone Efficiency
100
j
90 i
U
80
Q1
d
U
U
C
w
t1 70
LU
MELONS
.� -
v
i
v
a 8" Multicone Collector
Collection Efficiency
50 vs
Particle Size
40 Temperature 300OF
Dust Concentration 0.5 Gr./ACF
Specific Gravity 2.2
30
Pressure D Ff 3 in 0
20
10
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 3
Particle Size - Microns
22 Page

Section 1.08 Particulate Size Percentage Chart
PARTICULATE Sfr!NU
-177
•J � 11�t 111
V). ti
W
r�
0 LJ IVI U LAT I VE a LESS T HAN ISTATE.D !'7_E
23 Page

Section 1.09 Preliminary Boiler Performance Estimate
Perdue PERMIT RUN
Prellminary Boiler Performance
One 20,760 Pounds per hour continuous capaclry steam generator for operation at
329 paig and 429°F saturared steam with feedwater ar 225 °F.
Type Fuel.• STAND. WOOD (as toed)
C = 29.37 % S = 0.06 % Ash= 1.70 %.
02 = 21,34 % N2 = 0.06 % HHV= 4,675 Btu's/Lb
H2 = 3.08 % H2O = 45.00
Main Steam Production 20,700 Pounds/br
Auxiliary Steam Flow 0 Pounds/hr
BiowdownFlow @ 5.0 %B.D. 1,089 Pounds/hr
Fecdwater Flow 21,789 Pounds/hr
Fuel Flow 6,288 Pounds/hr
Combustion Air Flow @ 65 %E.A. 37,055 Pounds/hr
Flue Gas Flow 43,274 Pounds/hr
Steam Temperature at Outlet 429 OF
Drum Saturation Temperature 429 OF
Feedwater Inlet Temperature 225 OF
Pressure at Steam Outlet 325 prig
Drum Pressure 325 prig
Reference Air Temperature 70 OF
Air Heater Air Exit Temperature 210 °F
Max.Flame Temperature 2,074 OF
Stack Temperature 300 OF
Gross Heat Input 29,395 K Btu's/hr
Total Heat Output 20,913 K Btu's/hr
Furnace Volume 1,250 ft'
Volumetric Hear Release in Furnace 23,516 Btu's/fts-hr
Boiler EfKciencv
Dry Flue Gas Loss 7.18 percent
Moisture[liquid]in Fuel 11.14 percent
Water Vapor in Combustion Air 0.17 percent
H2O from Combustion of Hydrogen 6.86 percent
Unburned Carbon Loss 1.00 percent
Radiation Loss 1.00 percent
Unaccountable Loss 0.50 percent
Manufacturer's Margin 1.00 percent
Total Losses 28.85 percent
Efficiency:incl.maniac.margin(Guarantee) 71.15 percent
121712009 wellons Inc.
24 Page

Section 1.10 Diagram of Flue Gas Path
t
!'uuuce
1
r�
fl
CFI
Legend: p�
Green Line: Induced Air
Pink Line: Combustion Gas
tTFLLO�':
25 Page

Article II. Zoning Supporting Data
The project location, 3539 Governors Road, Lewiston Woodville,NC is currently outside the city
limits and resides within the jurisdiction of the county of Bertie. This area does not currently have
zoning regulations in-place. Therefore,the following applies:
15A NCAC 02Q .0113 NOTIFICATION IN AREAS WITHOUT ZONING
(a) State and local governments are exempt from this Rule.
(b)Before a person submits a permit application for a new or expanded facility in an area without
zoning, he shall provide public notification as setout in this Rule.
(c)A person covered under this Rule shall publish a legal notice as specified in Paragraph(d)of this
Rule and shall post a sign as specified in Paragraph(f)of this Rule.
(d)A person covered under this Rule shall publish a legal notice in a newspaper of general
circulation in the area where the source is or will be located at least two weeks before submitting
the permit application for the source. The notice shall identify:
(1)the name of the affected facility;
(2)the name and address of the permit applicant; and
(3)the activity or activities involved in the permit action;
(e)The permit applicant shall submit with the permit application an affidavit and proof of
publication that the legal notice required under Paragraph(d)of this Rule was published.
(f)A person covered under this Rule shall post a sign on the property where the new or expanded
source is or will be located.
The sign shall meet the following specifications:
(1)It shall be at least six square feet in area;
(2)It shall be set off the road right-of-way, but no more than 10 feet from the road right-of-
way.
(3)The bottom of the sign shall be at least six feet above the ground;
(4)It shall contain the following information:
(A)the name of the affected facility;
(B)the name and address of the permit applicant; and
(C)the activity or activities involved in the permit action;
(5)Lettering shall be a size that the sign can be read by a person with 20/20 vision standing
in the center of the road; and
(6)The side with the lettering shall face the road, and sign shall be parallel to the road.
The sign shall be posted at least 10 days before the permit application is submitted and shall remain
posted for at least 30 days after the application is submitted.
261Page

PUBL1SNlat'S AFFIDAVIT
North Carolina
Bertie County
Michelle Leicester affirms that she is
Production Manager of the Herr a Ledger
Advance, a newspaper published weekiv at
Windsor, Bertit County, ;North Carolina.
and that the advertisement, a true copy of
which is hereto attached, entitled:
Application for Air Permit
.E. Partners II, L LC Wy E ParVwrs n,t1C,W
�836 Easxt►e��►.
3,,M 14e.140 P41"I.
W 27265,APO"W
Was published In said the Beebe Ledger- totneMCP"Q'°`"
Advance on the following date(s): �6°' �,oAd
8bowagg CDgenera-
July 21 bw umotv
juy 21
And that the said newspaper in which such
notice. (raper, document or legal
advertisement was published, was at the
time of each and every publication, a
newspaper meeting all of the requirements
and qualifications of Chapter 1. Section 597
of the General Statutes of North Carolina
and was a qualified newspaper within the
meaning of Chapter 1, Section 597 of the
General Statutes of orth Carolina.
Affirmed and subwrihed before me this
L IhtV- k11
Notwy Publ iL
My Commission Expires c +- - I 2.c i �
28 Page

'sy K
,�,r�� Mrr.>♦�
am aNrb a 'AAkS ISO,=PZW!WIP
�"a1N "IhOrw the Deals Aref
ClacsllleA Llne AAs • • - • • • � �
1 COarcrllr llWlrlp......--_.S+i,lO .
CO.Unrwl lttlA)ro1H
I
1 1 _
TA.►ri 1FRi[fIT •►nr r.•• .wfi sn.N, .rr„r+..>'.. anr(iR.>rrs larrya.aw. r)rr►Il..re. �-��.
rPt��11NAE( Irrwr rrF lN`tY �/Y 1.�.�1�1• q l..If•�I ..�r'M1 rY
++I t+ rr Yr. sr,)rsw Aw w'.irr.iM A.YN.ssF rs )51.a,..:. w',Mrc
w.:)�:Mi. fs Mlh /l•Yr•w- Ni �^ tY51r.1►r�i- Ilbs ya il.:M•
'��M'« or�.M�ir�i. f+fT7Rw �.,awr w. writtr r�l w..1.- w Mr.Yisrc r.
b Irra.A f10N.11RWf1vomfu -�TarTf aPty ml
":!�.rt� tar.rr rrwr w/r p.s• Irr Msw/,n
1 a ow•wla rw ul i rarlNr a Hl11NE
'�duria;-e •• 1 r Ilrr.•r.Irl .ir.,rwlrr.w Yr r..aw. TTIIR RUN 1 i/1
.rrrrf•irr rr.rrr rwllsr tn.rr T�.T AMRTMENTO
ar:nia�- Iw IIMlyr t11rO�rr1 wrm
rw+rrw rrr elwlr rr.s>. ttee�rr1prr��.1�r .we.rrr's ARE 4('CEr71NG
rl.rrY r.tw /rrlq•i11.1 rr IrNRNN.rr -�IlLw—ii wrw aNr APPUl:AT1:447 F'-.R
>1riFi �yy� w wreM4 1Y1tlr `iN� Wprfr Nlr
' dY•�tls WN rY alr Mifr Yt91'Y"Y 1
„r•)'��"�' 'all a BEDROOM UNITS
�r,rwrrr rllrrry ErTiLis7Tii. o..I►•a.. 1i00i1--
Y rr,/w r.rr.Fraw Ttrl�rww-•r�/nf�.w �tlr.r `,•.aJ4-.rr�wrsllrtar' s&I*lrT rw,ory
Irflla nrr N tu/r•r�� REM BASED ON INCCM E.
/ w
rKMwL RENTAL ASSISTANCE
—twiMll AYAIMDJNEED.I¢rirs� wew rr+ Iw Ir SECTION SNIELC-IMED.
�rrr1rr vrlr,sYs TIF�ii'A. �f'.i�:.a ti.: fAar�..
w rr� A1R,rtrr aw.+rlrrr arls.r(rta •:••••
wM/w M.>• ra«rrwr ,rrr/w �«�+•..• N:* ti.1.IH
rrr r•w.r'1e•.al..rlrrl 17 A,rrr
—4moraKm r .oA.fer.w.�NIrrrrrlM rNIftaA AwrNrrlyr I .
)r/I1Qc,
Yu.(n ln.tiwar.S 1p..t
4Mx�i >nap rrY♦ •11r/rr b wp , fMr16NR
.�..� Iyr�1Y rin":'s'1•Ir�i. wMisa.r. . .:..�JIG.hA.. rt Y� 1
PP v flf NfprAr f}r. Iorr aw.Ira o}I �
Mia»may K M V O a�sb M�NItrmob. Ip.b�fiM �.�� ...�i..•�ram. �e.gnl Irgsu,Vib•
w, r,M Ira Iw rOrm IA rift •r1�r .. .♦ �rw.+.I..
I�1•i
r t ` .r�i✓ulfrq -VARMOr- r
--%ii�j.N Iltrrbll'N (•A 1'1'-ti('(}t'!'v'il 1'1 H�.I('
Itu ntril
UO'w.•Msn Afr...I..,}r•h.•rAr.".I.I M all ..M11Y
e•�.�i. a..P..rW lr a>rrM }IrrWwis A.AtYNrN
is»a... w 4r1.SY�S.,MrMtr LoM S7♦MrIrY.
•.P..r•r Arw.r.P Y=•
a•+-.-IA-bI WY a l.r.dA..•yw)...A tY.ir t..rr•...e.1
�.,.�. h.LL YI•.a...1.4.yrO,w
�r.11.r.�i Nrra�)�pq.rN� WaW rsr`u��n.�A,•�rr...
rl ws.wlc Iwr.K T.w.f�'.b.Wir rt...�alw.).
.ram.r r (:Y.iwl MN a Llir•/f
•.wr. N r�•�...r rA.1 M rr.�A Afna c.b HAw N..b.rw..y.
'R1r1 Al�r.rr....1-` TNJtaL E}.}•clllfril.}3
wI'• r........ I11I A...C•rY u.r�t•sv}nv
arrr Irrbr W'..1t Y tM.y...q YY Nt iN►f11N4.y.r�NU}.r.r/.y1
Iso—
ft—our. rld'I:na\r: fnri0low
4•A �ilcr lYAJTar.n NI)tI l\1111t 111
:•.`�+4Y Super CrOs,word ArrIKA A(AI.N /1\N\I 1/141
rwrwrrr __ - 'L_:.. -- . , r t• \) r •, .1 1 i i ..
3 '.
•rr asrrr • '" • • • � '
r�i/ .ow+r .T"sr�'. $� ti .• f� C: .n c x ii. t 1 a-f.. i t
r�try. x�'� w �i..p�'- '�'us. ti .��- 1 \ N T ,.• 1 M n ♦ � 1 \
,�.� Y �' "�•� �.�i�' .•8� r l l t x,.A . t, I t T 1� a l�w+' "�.�'.. :'�' ItC.,=•.' .� 5�� ^r y��,_• a. r 1 A It w t • A 1 N t 1 rt �
w.r.rC•Y.Nr .,,,.
W mL r
■}rlrrur —
Il,fEfra
OR
Ham. rpml
016
■ ■ ,�
M.r uM
.A'}' 1TN ■ � ■
ff _
rl�u♦r wA. IIII'
K Tls vYf•.cc, , .
•IM,.11•
r.v.r(II•
b F ar•rn• .e.u),r...1....re
so W.•m r•H N
29 11age

Pictures of Sign: Posted Property prior to August 5, 2010
—4
W.E. Partners, LLC-
W.E. Partners LLC
1836 Eastchester Dr., Suite 108
High Point, NC 27265
Application to the NCDAQ for a minor
source air permit for the construction a .'
of a biomass coggneration facility.,,41
yrk
� W
Y.tiYL11L
271

Article Ill. Supplemental BACT Analysis to Qualify as a
New Renewable Energy Facility
301Page

LLONS
1836 Eastchester Dr.
Suite 108
Energy Solutions High Point,NC 27265
O: 360.750.3583
F: 360.750.3483
October 4,2010
Mr. Robert Fisher
Regional Air Quality Manager
North Carolina Department of Air Quality
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, NC 27889
RE: BACT Analysis for Proposed W.E. Partners 11, LLC Biomass Cogeneration at Lewiston,NC.
Dear Mr. Fisher,
Thank you again for your continued assistance in the process of securing a Construction and Operating
permit for the proposed Biomass Cogeneration Facility to be constructed at 3539 Governors Road, Lewiston
Woodville,North Carolina.
As we discussed, the project, due to the small size and scope, will be classified as an Area Source and is not
subject to Potential for Significant Deterioration (PSD) site or the hazardous air pollutants (HAP) program
under Title 1 of the Clean Air Act.
However, in subsequent conversations, we shared with you that it is our intent to participate in the North
Carolina Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard and register our facility with the North Carolina Utility
Commission. By registering with the North Carolina Utility Commission, the Renewable Energy Credits
(RECs)generated by the proposed facility will be qualified for sale to a North Carolina based utility. Based
on our discussion, we must complete a Best Available Control Technology analysis per the statute governing
the North Carolina Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard.
With this requirement, please find enclosed our completed BACT analysis for the proposed facility.
If I can be of further assistance,please do not hesitate to call.
Regards,
Wellons Energy Solutions, LLC
Garald B. Cottrell
General Manager
31 JPage

0 I
LLONS
Energy Solutions Group
1. Project Description
W.E. Partners II, LLC, a North Carolina based limited liability company and a wholly owned subsidiary
of Wellons Energy Solutions, LLC, has submitted an air permit application to the North Carolina
Division of Air Quality (NCDAQ) for the green field installation of three (3) 29.4 MMBtu/hr biomass
fired boilers to be located at 3539 Governors Road, Lewiston Woodville, North Carolina. Lewiston is
located in Bertie, County. The project is a biomass cogeneration facility and as such, will provide
saturated steam to the adjacent facility, which is owned by Perdue Inc., and provide electricity to
Dominion Power. The facility will be a self qualified small generation facility and will be certified with
the North Carolina Utility Commission as a new Renewable Energy Facility.
As indicated above, it is the desire of W.E. Partners II, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Wellons
Energy Solutions, LLC, to participate, as a qualified source of Renewable Energy Credits, in the North
Carolina Renewable Energy Portfolio program. This program, established in 2007 by the North Carolina
legislature, was created under Senate Bill #3, which requires utilities in North Carolina with a minimum
number of customers, to provide for an escalating percentage of power generation to be from renewable
resources. The legislation contains a requirement that certain new biomass combustion processes, which
otherwise would not be subject to Best Available Control Technology(BACT)of the Federal Prevention
of Significant Deterioration(PSD)program, would be subject to a North Carolina(state)BACT analysis
as a"new renewable energy facility" delivering power to an electric power supplier. This requirement is
also known as the Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Portfolio Standard(REPS).
2. Regulatory Summary for the Proposed Facility
2.L Three (3) unadulterated wood-fired boilers (29.4 million Btu per hour maximum heat input,
each)—the following is a list of all air quality regulations applicable to the boiler:
2.2. 2D.0504(e)"Particulate from Wood Burning Indirect Heat Exchangers"
This requires that the total maximum heat inputs of all wood burning indirect heat exchanges at the
facility to be used in determining the allowable emission limit for each unit. Therefore regulation
applies to this wood burning indirect heat exchanger. The particulate matter emissions are, for each
proposed biomass boiler, is limited to 0.38 pounds per hour. This determination is based on the
equation E= 1.1698 -0z2so
eq Q where E is the allowable emission limit for particulate matter in pounds
per million Btu and Q is the maximum heat input in million Btu per hour, or 88.2 MMBtu (3 x 29.4
MMBtu/hr each).
2.3. "New Source Performance Standard"—NSPS Subpart Dc
This regulation, NSPS Subpart Dc will apply to the new proposed facility but there are no limits or
monitoring requirements as each of the proposed units fall below the threshold of 30MMBtu/hr.
Standard notifications of construction and start-up, in conjunction with expected permit requirement
of annual fuel usage is expected.
2.4. "Prevention of Significant Deterioration" This regulation is not applicable to the proposed
facility. Under the PSD requirements, all new or modified major stationary sources of air
pollutants regulated under the Clean Air Act (CAA) must undergo a preconstruction review
consistent with Section 165 of the Act prior to "begin[ning] actual construction." A "major
stationary source" is defined as any one of 28 named source categories which has the potential to
321Page

emit 100 tons per year(TPY)or more, or any other stationary source which has the potential to emit
250 TPY or more, of any pollutant regulated under the CAA. W.E. Partners'proposed facility is not
one of the listed source categories with a 100 ton per year threshold; therefore, the major source
threshold for the proposed facility is 250 tpy of any regulated pollutant and is therefore not subject
to PSD review. See 40 CFR 51.166(b)(23)
2.5. "Nonattainment New Source Review(NNSR)
The proposed plant will be located in the city of Lewiston, Bertie County, North Carolina. This area
is classified as attainment with respect to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards(NAAQS) for
particulate, sulfur dioxide, ozone, nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide and lead. Because the area is
classified as attainment for all pollutants, no pollutants are subject to nonattainment review. This
area is considered a Class II area with allowable PSD increments for PM-10, SOz, and NOx
emissions.
3. Criteria Pollutants
As we have discussed, based on the individual boiler size of 29.4 MMBtu/hr and the projected emissions
profile with a voluntary fuel input limitation of 58,000 tons per year (65% utilization rate), it is
anticipated that the facility will be classified as a synthetic minor by the NCDAQ. As such, per our
original permit application,the following criteria pollutants were summarized in Form B:
Source of Criteria Pollutant Individual
Emission Boiler
Source of Potential After Potential After
Emission Factor Controls lb/MMBtu Controls
CO Manu. Data 0.380 48.92
NOx Manu. Data 0.300 38.72
VOC AP-42 0.017 2.19
S02 AP-42 0.025 3.22
PM Mann. Data 0.350 48.92
PM,o Manu. Data 0.380 45.02
As noted above, no single criteria pollutant (CO, NOx, PM, S02 and VOC) for each boiler and as a
whole on a facility wide basis, emissions would not subject the facility to a PSD Review.
4. Best Available Control Technology Determination
Any major stationary source or major modification subject to PSD must conduct an analysis to ensure the
use of"Best Available Control Technology"(BACT). As discussed earlier,this facility, due to the small
emissions, does not qualify as a PSD, Title V or Major Facility for HAPs. However, a North Carolina
mandated BACT analysis must be performed to allow the facility to participate in the North Carolina
Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard and to qualify our Renewable Energy Credits with the North
Carolina Utilities Commission.
BACT is defined in the Clean Air Act as an emissions limit based on the maximum degree of emissions
i
reduction for each pollutant... which the permitting authority determines, on a case by case basis, taking
into account energy, environmental and economic impacts and other costs, is achievable for such facility
through the application of production processes and available methods, systems and techniques... Four
key aspects of the definition that are noteworthy;
331Page

• BACT takes into account various costs associated with implementing pollution controls:
economic, environmental(air, water and solid waste), energy and other impacts.
• BACT includes and, in fact stresses, "production processes"along with add-on controls
• BACT is intended to be a case-by-case evaluation, implying individual case evaluations and
decisions,not rigid,pre-set guidelines.
The top-down BACT approach starts with the most stringent(or top)technology that has been applied to the
same unit at other similar emission source types and provides a basis for rejecting the technology in favor of
the next most stringent technology or proposing it as BACT.
Step 1
The first step is to define the spectrum of process and/or add on-control alternatives potentially applicable to
the subject emissions units. The following categories of technologies are addressed in identifying candidate
control alternatives:
• Demonstrated add-on control technologies applied to the same emissions unit at other similar source
types;
• Add-on controls not demonstrated for the source category in question but transferred from other
source categories with similar emission stream characteristics;
• Process controls such as combustion or alternate production processes;
• Add-on control devices serving multiple emission units in parallel;
• Equipment or work practices, especially for fugitive or area emission sources in this process.
Step 2
The second step in the top-down approach is to evaluate the technical feasibility of the alternative identified
in the first step and to reject those that can be demonstrated as infeasible based on an engineering evaluation
or on chemical or physical principles. The following criteria were considered in determining technical
feasibility; previous commercial-scale demonstration, precedents based on permits, requirements for similar
sources and technology transfer.
Step 3
The third step is an assessment and documents of the emission limit that is achievable with each of the
technically feasible alternative considering the specific operating constraints of the emission units
undergoing review. After determining what control efficiency is achievable with each alternative, the
alternatives will be ranked into an emissions control ranking from the most to least stringent.
Step 4
The fourth step is to evaluate the costleconomic, environmental and energy impacts of the top or most
stringent alternative. To reject the top alternative, it must be demonstrated that this control alternative is
infeasible based on the impacts analysis results. If a control technology is determined to be technically
infeasible or infeasible based on high cost effectiveness or to cause adverse energy or environmental impacts,
the control is rejected as BACT and the impact analysis is performed on the next most stringent control
alternative. In analyzing economic cost effectiveness, the annualized control cost (in dollars per ton of
emissions removed)was compared with the commonly accepted values for cost effective emissions controls.
Step 5
The final step in the analysis is the consideration of toxic pollutant impacts on the control alternative choice.
Toxics concerns are usually important only if an adverse toxic emissions impact results from the selected
alternative. As in step 4, if an adverse toxic emissions impact is determined, the alternative is rejected in
favor of the next most stringent alternative.
341Page

EPA RACT/BACT/LAER Database Review
As required, a review of the EPA RACT/BACT/LAER database was completed for "packaged"
(boiler/furnace units which are factory assembled and transported for installation and are typically less
than 29.4MMBtu heat input) biomass boilers. As indicated below, our review of the RBLC of the
process type, 12.120, Industrial Size Boilers/Furnaces less than 100 MMBtu's and 13.120, Commercial
and Institutional Biomass boilers less than 100 MMBtu's, provided 5 examples of units of 30 MMBtu or
less.
FA6557 FAOUrT PERMIT THROWHP EMISSION U
MaLFTT_NAME OUNTT STATE DATE PROCESS_NAME PRNAARy_g1EL UT UNIT POLLUTANT MIT UnR
LOUISIANA-PACIFIC HAYWARD SAWYER WI 6✓1 nom THERMAL OIL,KONUS;S 11, WOOD 19A MMBTU/H Calbm M—de 52.5 Lb1tr
1,CUISIANA-PACIFIC HAYWARD SAWYER WI 6/17/2004 THERMAL OIL,KONUS,S21 WOOD 23.8 MMBTLM Cerbm Monoxide 52.5 Lb/Hr
WEST FRASER INC. UNION AR Ill7/2002 BOEUML WII.IANS WOOD WASTE 29.63 NUVOM H Cbrbm M—& 0.3 Ib/MMBtu
WELLBORN CABINETS.INC. CLAY AL 4/16/2003 (3)WOOD WASTE BOHER.S WOOD WASTE 29.5 MMMUH Nitrogen Omd®(NOx) 0.5 Ib/MM131u
WEST FRASER(SOUTH),INC.-HU UNION AR 11lN2002 BOILER,WFISONS WOOD WASTE 29.63 MMBTLUH Nitragen Oxides(NOx) 0.3 1b/MMBW
LOUISIANA-PACIFIC HAYWARD SAWYER WI 6/17/2004 THERMALOH KONLS;S11, WOOD 19.4 MMBTIYH Mtragm Oxid®(NOx) 8.9 LbHR
UXASIANA-PACIFIC HAYWARD SAWYER WI 6/17/2004 TH RMAI.OIL XQNLA S21 WOOD 23.8 MMBTTYH Mupm madn 16.2 Wit
LOUSIANA-PACIFIC 14AYWA SAWYER WI 6117/2W4 THERMALOR KON(S;SII, WOOD 19.4 MdBTUH Particulate Maga(PM) 6.5 Lb,Hr
LOUSIANA-PACIFIC HAYWPSAWYER Wt 6(1712004 THERMAL OIL KONM S21 WOOD 23.8 MNBTLYH Particulate MWer 15 Ib/Hr
LAUSIANA-PACdFIC HAYWPSAWYER WI 6/17/2W4 THERMAL OIL,KONLS;Sll, WOOD 19.4 bA4BT(YH PM,fi tenMe<10 µ 6.5 Lb/It
L.OLMANA-PACMC HAYWFSAWYFR Wl N17/20% THERMAL OIL,KONLS,S21 WOOD 23.8 NfABTUH PM CrHerable<10 µ 15 LbtHr
WEST FRASER SO INC.LMON AR 11/7/2002 BOILER,WELLONS WOOD WASTE 29.63 MMl31T.YEI PM Storable<10 0.24 Ib/Mmb
tu
C.OUSIANA-PACIFIC HAYW?SAWYFR WI G17/2004 THERMALOIL,KONIS;Sll, WOOD 19.4 NURTYH /olatile Organic Compound 0.5 lb/),ffvM
WUSIANA-PACIFIC HAYWFSAWYFR WI N17/2004 THERMAL OU,KONIS,S21 WOOD 23.8 NfvMTLYH loWe Organic Compound 0.62 lb
WEST FRASER(SOUTM INC.UNION AR 11l/1= BOILER,WELIONS WOOD WASTE 29.63 NtABTUH IoWg a Or 'cContpoumb 0.1 Ib
35 Page

5. BACT Analysis
5.1. NOx
The proposed biomass generation facility will fire green wood or bark,resulting in a proposed emissions
limit, per boiler, of 8.84 lbs/hr or 0.3 lb/MMBtu, assuming a maximum heat input of 29.4 MMBtu. This
results in an expected emissions rate of 38.72 tons per year.
The formation of NOx is determined by the interaction of chemical and physical processes occurring
with the flame zone of the furnace of the proposed boiler. There are two principal forms of NOx
designated as "thermal' NOx and "fuel" NOx. Thermal NOx formation is the result of oxidation of
atmospheric nitrogen contained in the inlet gas in the high-temperature, post flame region of the
combustion zone. The major factors influencing thermal NOx formation are temperature, concentrations
of combustion gases (primarily nitrogen and oxygen) in the inlet air and residence time within the
combustion zone. Fuel NOx is formed by the oxidation of fuel-bound nitrogen. NOx formation can be
controlled by adjusting the combustion process and/or installing post combustion controls.
5.1.1.Control Technologies
Potential applicable NOx control technologies which were considered:
• Regenerative Selective Catalytic Reduction(RSCR)
• Selective Catalytic Reduction(SCR)and
• Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction(SNCR).
• Staged Combustion
Regenerative Selective Catalytic Reduction: The RSCR system which was evaluated reheats
the exhaust flue gas downstream of the PM Control device to approximately 600°F, prior to
passing the exhaust through the SCR modules. The system requires the flue gas to be very clean,
have a high temperature and low sulfur content.
Selective Catalytic Reduction: Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) is a post combustion NO,,
add-on control device that is placed in the flue gas stream following the boiler. SCR involves the
injection of ammonia (NH3) over a catalyst in the presence of oxygen. On the catalyst surface,
the ammonia decomposes into NH2 free radicals, reacts with NOx molecules, and reduces to
nitrogen and water.
Selective Non Catalytic Reduction (SNCR): SNCR describes a process in which NO, is
reduced to molecular nitrogen (N2) and water (H20) by injecting an ammonia or urea
(CO(NH2)2) spray into the post-combustion area of the unit. Typically, injection nozzles are
located in the upper area of the boiler. Once injected, the urea or ammonia decomposes into NH3
or N112 free radicals, reacts with NO,molecules, and reduces to nitrogen and water.
Staged Combustion: Staged combustion is a combustion unit design/operational technique that
allows for the reduction of thermal and rapid NOx formation. This is achieved by modifying the
primary combustion zone stoichiometry and air/fuel ratio. The combustion air is provided in
staged manner to control the bum rate. This occurs due to the slower burning of the fuel pile,
resulting in pyrolysis products allowed to oxidize in lower temperature zones of the combustion
unit furnace, thus reducing the high instantaneous temperatures at the fuel bed responsible for
NOx formation. Overfire air (OFA) is a form of staged combustion where the primary
combustion uses a fuel-rich mixture to complete combustion.
361 P a a e

5.1.2.Eliminate Technically Infeasible Options
The Regenerative Selective Catalytic Reduction typically requires the flue gas to be reheated
with either natural gas or No.2 fuel oil duct burners prior to entering the catalyst. Catalyst life
if typically two years and electrical costs for the system tend to be high given the need for an
additional ID fan. Reheating the air stream would be costly and would have additional
detrimental environmental impacts, including the generation of additional NOx emissions, the
pollutant for which the RSCR would be installed to reduce. Based on this, RSCR is considered
technically infeasible for NO,control with the proposed biomass boiler system.
Although Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) is a potential control technology in this
analysis, the use of such a system is not technically feasible for the biomass fired boiler
exhaust based on the following;
• The high particulate loading associated with the proper temperature range in the energy
system reduces the number of active catalyst sites available for the reaction to occur
and reduces the NO.removal efficiency(i.e. blinds the catalyst).
• The alkalinity of the wood ash can contaminate the catalyst and significantly reduce
the NO,,removal efficiency.
• Catalyst replacement and disposal.
Again, as discussed early, the SCR could be used downstream of the particulate control device
but the stream would require reheating to achieve the proper temperature. It is counter-intuitive
to require reheating of a combustion stream (requiring the use of additional energy and fuel
consumption) which results in additional combustion related emissions to reduce combustion
related emissions from the biomass boiler. Therefore the use of SCR on the proposed biomass
boiler is not technically feasible and will not be considered further in this analysis.
Selective Non Catalytic Reduction is a proven NOx reduction technology in large, field erected
boilers with sufficient area in the upper, post combustion area of the steam vessel for the
placement of the injection nozzles. In discussions with the manufacturer of the proposed boiler,
the manufacturer has confirmed that this technology has not been utilized in the small,
"packaged" boiler design. In the "package" boiler design, the water-tube section of the boiler
sits directly above the furnace of a distance of less than 8 feet. Any introduction of ammonia
or urea in the space would take place directly into the combustion zone, thereby eliminating its
effectiveness. Therefore, due to the biomass boiler/furnace design, SNCR is not technically
feasible and will not be considered further.
5.1.3.Rank Remaining Control Technologies for Effectiveness
Staged Combustion with the proposed biomass package boiler/furnace in combination with
Good Combustion Practices.
5.1.4.Evaluate Most Effective Control Option(Impacts Analysis)
The proposed Staged Combustion, in combination with Good Combustion Practices is
considered sufficient for the purposes of BACT and results in a proposed NOx emissions rate
of 0.3 lb/11lMBtu.
5.1.5.Select BACT
The selected method of Staged Combustion and Good Combustion Practices for BACT
resulting in a proposed emissions rate of 0.30 lb/MMBtu was compared to the data for similar
installations. Review of the data shows limits ranging from 0.301b/MMBtu to 0.68 lb/MMBtu.
The proposed limit is representative of similar systems operating with spreader stoker furnaces
operating without controls and is based on the manufacturers guaranteed level of performance.
371Page

5.2. Particulate Matter(TSP/PM1o)
Particulate Matter (TSP/PM10) is emitted as both a filterable and condensable particulate matter.
Filterable PM dominates the particulate emissions and is the focus of this evaluation process.
Condensable emissions from wood combustion are believed to be very low. The AP42 factor for
condensable PM is 0.0171b/MMBtu compared to a value of 0.301b/MMBtu for filterable PM from
wood combustion(the 0.30 measurement is downstream of a mechanical dust collector for primary
PM control).
Table 5.2
IA4T[ rALw1V_STA REMrt_Mr IE3MI_61YANQ AOCQSS Te TiEg30M EFl6�ll .1YYr..noO..Y•Aam.YYEE ouwrl an nncus MINE Mnrt_.YFt nwoulwur_unrt I0LLIR1El1 E3rt• uM r43.E.e
W1318fAHA-PACIFIC NAVWARD BAIYYER WI 03-AV-3 d11130W IIiPN1AL OIL F¢+A3H13. Il.li WOOD 19..M ,V Pm w.Or Meer(P.MI 1.3 Lhft
WI118L\HA-PACIRC FLIYWARD S VN' m 03-AV-330 6117aM T13EiWA1.OM 1ffA S, 13,z WOOD :3.8 MAffiTI!,H Pn1eW..e Mayer PM 13 Lh3
5.2.1.Control Technologies
The primary control technologies available include the;
• Baghouse
• Electrostatic Precipitator(ESP)
• Multi-clone Mechanical Collector
Baghouse: A fabric filtration device, or baghouse, consists of a number of filtering elements
(bags) along with a pneumatic bag cleaning system contained in a main shell structure
incorporating dust hoppers. Fabric filters use fabric bags as filters to collect particulate matter.
The particulate-laden gas enters a fabric filter compartment and passes through a layer of
particulate and filter bags. The collected particulate forms a cake on the outer layer of the bag,
which enhances the bag's filtration efficiency. However, excessive caking will increase the
pressure drop across the filter and reduces its efficiency.
The particulate removal efficiency of the filter is dependent upon a variety of particle and
operational characteristics. Particle characteristics include size distribution and cohesion as
well as electrical resistivity. Operational parameters that effect efficiency include air-to- cloth
ratios, pressure losses, cleaning sequence and interval as well as pneumatic intensity of the
cleaning cycle. In addition, collection efficiency can be affected by fabric properties such as
structure of the fabric, composition of the fibers and material of construction.
Electrostatic Precipitator: Electrostatic precipitators (ESP's) remove particles from a gas
stream through the use of electrical force. Discharge electrodes apply a negative charge to
particles passing through a strong electrical field. These charged particles then migrate to a
collecting electrode having an opposite, or positive, charge. Collected particles are removed
from the collecting electrodes by periodic mechanical rapping.
Multiple Cone Particulate Collector: A whirling motion is imparted to the gas entering a
cyclonic collector. This action generates centrifugal force that concentrates particles of
entrained dust at the interior walls of the collecting tubes. The particles then fall and are
discharged from the bottom of the tube. Clean gas exits through the outlet at the collecting
tubes vertical centre line. Multiple-cyclone separators are also known as multi-clones, consist
381Page

of a number of small-diameter cyclones, operating in parallel and having a common gas inlet
and outlet. Multi-clones operate on the same principle as cyclones--creating a main downward
vortex and an ascending inner vortex.
Multi-clones are more efficient than single cyclones because they are longer and smaller in
diameter. The longer length provides longer residence time while the smaller diameter creates
greater centrifugal force. These two factors result in better separation of dust particulates.
5.2.2.Eliminate Technically Infeasible Options
All three technologies are viable technologies. However, based on experience of Wellons, the
manufacturer of the proposed package boiler unit, we have chosen to eliminate the baghouse
for particulate control for the proposed biomass boiler. In discussions with Wellons
management, the firm has cited three instances where a customer attempted to utilize a
baghouse for particulate control. In each instance, the customer experienced excessively high
downtime and costs associated with the bags catching fire or the excessive replacement
requirements due to holes being burned in the bags. Therefore, a baghouse option for the
biomass installation was not considered further.
5.2.3.Rank Remaining Control Technologies for Effectiveness
Current regulation for a wood burning heat exchanger particulate emissions is provided by the
formula as follows. The particulate matter emissions are limited to 0.47 Lb/Hr based on the
equation E= 1.1698 Q-0.2230 where E is the allowable emission limit for particulate matter in
pounds per million Btu and Q is the maximum heat input in million Btu per hour, or 58.8
MMBtu/hr.
There are two technically feasible PM control technologies for the proposed biomass-fired
boiler; Electrostatic Precipitator and Multiple Cone Particulate Collector. An electrostatic
Precipitator was evaluated with a guaranteed emissions level of 0.03 LB/MMBtu, or 0.882
Lb/Hr,when used in conjunction with a Multi-cone Particulate Collector.
A single Multiple Cone Particulate Collector, as proposed, would provide for a particulate
control of 0.38 LB/MMBtu, or 11.17 Lb/Hr.
5.2.4.Evaluate Most Effective Control Option (Impacts Analysis)
Economic Impacts:
Electrostatic precipitators are a proven means to substantially reduce the particulate emissions
of a biomass boiler. However, the application of ESPs has not been a viable option for small,
package biomass boilers, based on incremental capital cost associated with the project. Due to
the relatively small steam production of each unit, 20,700 pounds, the incremental cost of
incorporating this technology results in an excessively high cost per ton of Particulate Matter
which is cost prohibitive.
As depicted in Table B, a two-field ESP, one for each proposed biomass package boiler unit,
has an estimated installed cost$1,266,244 and an indirect costs of$432,191, for an incremental
Total Capital Investment of $1,698,435. An analysis is then completed for the direct and
indirect annual costs,which also incorporates overhead and return on capital.
391Page

As proposed, the units are equipped with a primary means of Particulate Removal, which is
achieved with a Multi-clone Precipitator. The proposed emissions control device will result in
a BACT emissions of 0.38 Lb/MMBtu or 11.17 Lb/Hr.
By installing an ESP on each proposed biomass boiler unit, the anticipated emissions rate is
reduced to 0.03 lb/MMBtu. We then evaluate the anticipated incremental costs to achieve the
lower emission rate, as shown below, which indicates that the incremental cost per ton of PM
reduction is estimated to be $6,510 per ton. These costs are considered cost prohibitive and,
therefore, an electrostatic precipitator is eliminated from further consideration.
Emissions with Multi-Clone Only Emissions with Multi-Clone with ESP,per Unit
0.38 Ib/MMBtu * 29.4 MMBtu/h = 11.172 Ib/hr 0.03 Ib/MMBtu * 29.4 MMBtu/hr= 0.882 Ib/hr
11.172 Ib/hr * 8760 hr/yr = 97,867 Ib/yr 0.882 Ib/hr * 8760 hr/yr = 7,726 Ib/yr
97,867 Ib/yr / 2000 lb/ton = 48.93 tons/yr 7,726 Ib/yr / 2000 lb/ton = 3.86 tons/yr
Incremental PM emissions Improvement 45.07 tons/yr
Per Table 1.2,Incremental Total Annual costs to Achieve Emission Reduction $293,407 per year.
Incremental cost per ton of Particulate Emissions $6,510 per ton
5.2.5.Select BACT
A controlled particulate emissions level of 0.38 lbs/MMBtu, or 11.18 lbs/hr is proposed as
BACT using a Multi-Cone Particulate Collector.
40 t sl

5.3. Sulfur Dioxide(S02)
Sulfur dioxide is formed due to the oxidation of the fuel bound sulfur. Wood ash provides
substantial emissions control as S02 reacts with the alkaline wood ash. A ' 'uual-s
abatement is feasible to further reduce emissions. No data was fo 21 P CElat�irye d,
to S02 for small,package boiler systems.
5.3.1.Control Technologies MT _ 5 2010
Wet Scrubber (Venturi Scrubber): A venturi scrubber is one a wet
remove SO2. Flue gas enters the scrubber vertically after p sing o 0 the
scrubber, an alkaline solution such as sodium hydroxide absorb SO e
S02 reacts with the sodium hydroxide and is removed in a solution as a liquid waste.
Additional scrubbing solution is added to the recirculating scrubber solution to compensate for
the quantity that reacts with S02 and reacted scrubbing liquor is discharges to a wastewater
treatment as"blowdown".
Dry Sorbent Injection: In a dry sorbent injection system, a reagent such as Trona (sodium
sesquircarbonate)can be injected in the hot flue gas, where it reacts with SO2, removing it from
the gas stream. The reacted sorbent is removed as particulate by the downstream particulate
matter control system. The sorbent particles must be ground extremely fine in order to
maximize the surface area of the particles for reaction and an additional "run" of ductwork
must be added to the system to allow for adequate residence time for reaction between the
sorbent and S02.
5.3.2.Eliminate Technically Infeasible Options
Both technologies are feasible.
5.3.3.Rank Remaining Control Technologies for Effectiveness
There are two technically feasible S02 control technologies for the biomass-fired boilers,
Venturi Scrubber and Dry Sorbent Injection. The scrubber is the most stringent level of control,
achieving a level of 0.005 lb/MMBtu. Sorbent injection can achieve a level of 0.00625
lb/MMBtu. Per our review of the RBLC database,no data was found on small, package boiler
systems similar to our proposed installation.
411Page

5.3.4.Evaluate Most Effective Control Option(Impacts Analysis)
5.3.4.1. Venturi Scrubber
Economic Impacts:
A detailed cost evaluation of a venture scrubber is included in Table C. As shown below, the
incremental cost effectiveness of approximately $126,000 per ton is considered cost prohibitive
and the venturi scrubber is therefore eliminated from further consideration in the BACT
evaluation.
Uncontrolled Emissions Emissions with Venturi Scrubber
0.0252 Ib/MMBtu * 29A MMBtu/h= 0.7409 Ib/hr 0.005 Ib/MMBtu * 29.4 MMBtu/hr= 0.147 Ib/hr
0.74088 Ib/hr * 8760 hr/yr = 6,490 Ib/yr 0.147 Ib/hr * 8760 hr/yr = 1,288 Ib/yr
6,490 Ib/yr / 2000 lb/ton = 3.25 tons/yr 1,288 Ib/yr / 2000 lb/ton = 0.64 tons/yr
Incremental SO2 emissions Improvement 2.60 tons/yr
Per Table C,incremental Total Annual costs to Achieve Emission Reduction $328,082 per year.
Incremental cost perton of SOz Emissions $126,127 perton
5.3.4.2. Dry Sorbent
Economic Impacts:
A detailed cost evaluation of a dry sorbent option is included in Table D. As shown below, the
incremental cost effectiveness of approximately $38,000 is considered cost prohibitive and the
venture scrubber is therefore eliminated from further consideration in the BACT evaluation.
Uncontrolled Emissions Emissions with Venturi Scrubber
0.0252 Ib/MMBtu * 29.4 MMBtu/h= 0.7409 Ib/hr 0.00625 Ib/MMBtu * 29.4 MMBtu/hr= 0.18375 Ib/hr
0.74088 Ib/hr * 8760 hr/yr = 6,490 Ib/yr 0.18375 Ib/hr * 8760 hr/yr = 1,610 Ib/yr
6,490 Ib/yr / 2000 lb/ton = 3.25 tons/yr 1,610 Ib/yr / 2000 lb/ton - 0.80 tons/yr
Incremental SO2 emissions Improvement 2.44 tons/yr
Per Table D,Incremental Total Annual costs to Achieve Emission Reduction $93,502 per year.
Incremental cost per ton of SO2 Emissions $38,317 perton
5.3.5. Select BACT
An uncontrolled S02 level of 0.74 lbs/hr or 0.025 lb/MMBtu is proposed as BACT for the
Perdue Lewiston project.
4211> 1 C

5.4. Carbon Monoxide(CO)and Volatile Organic Compounds(VOC)
Carbon monoxide and VOC emissions result due to imperfect combustion of carbonaceous material
in the fuel. CO is a by-product of the combustion process in which carbon is not fully oxidized to
CO2. Likewise, VOC is emitted when the carbonaceous matter in the fuel is not converted to CO2
or CO. Control of both species involves forcing the oxidation of carbon to CO2.
5.4.1.Control Technologies
There are a variety of oxidation techniques that are used in various process industries.
However, only the following control technologies were considered in the evaluation:
• Regenerative Catalytic Oxidation(RCO)
• Good combustion practices.
Regenerative Catalytic Oxidation: Regenerative catalytic oxidation (RCO) technology is
widely used in the reduction of VOC emissions, and currently, to reduce CO emissions. It is
the only oxidation technology evaluated because it requires only moderate reheating to a
minimum temperature of 450 degrees F. Furthermore, RCO's can achieve a high thermal
efficiency of 95%because it utilizes a ceramic bed to recapture the heat of the stream exiting
the combustion zone. Particulate control must be placed upstream of the RCO. Even with
highly efficient TSP/PM 10 control, there is the risk of the catalyst blinding/poisoning and the
catalyst life guarantees are relatively short.
Good Combustion Practices: Since CO and VOC emissions result from imperfect
combustion of carbonaceous fuel, emissions are effectively minimized through proper boiler
design and good combustion practices (GCP), including operation at sufficiently high
combustion temperatures, adequate residence time, adequate excess air and adequate
turbulence, which results in through mixing and availability of 02 to allow for nearly complete
conversion of CO and VOC to CO2 and water.
5.4.2.Eliminate Technically Infeasible Options
As indicated previously, there are a variety of combustion techniques that can be used to
control CO and VOC's. However, many of the following technologies are not practical for
post-combustion control given the exhaust stream characteristics of biomass fired boilers.
• Flares,
• Recouperative Thermal Oxidation,
• Regenerative Thermal Oxidation,
• Non-Regenerative Catalytic Oxidation.
The first three options have been deemed to be impractical due to high operating costs. As each
technology involves reheating the exhaust stream to high combustion temperatures and/or are
thermally inefficient,this results in an excessively high operating cost.
In evaluating the use of Regenerative Catalytic Oxidization, it is our concern that due to the
high particulate level which will pass over the catalyst, the expected life of the unit will be
exceptionally short and problematic, resulting in excessive downtime and cost. Therefore, the
Non-regenerative Catalytic Oxidation technology is eliminated as a viable BACT
consideration.
431Page

5.4.3.Rank Remaining Control Technologies for Effectiveness
Based on our review, there appears to be two practical, technically feasible CO/VOC control
technologies available for biomass fired boilers; RCO and GCP. The most stringent control
option for CO is 0.10 MMBtu, achieved with RCO. Per our review of the RBLC data for small
boilers of similar size,we found three examples, with CO limits ranging from 2.2 lb/MMBtu to
0.3 lb/MMBtu. All small biomass boilers cited in the RBLC utilize Good Combustion
Practices as the control technology.
The most stringent control option is assumed to be 0.0085 lb/MMBtu, which is also achieved
with and ESP/RCO combination. GCP, as proposed,provides a VOC level of 0.017 lb/MMBtu.
All small biomass boilers in the RBLC utilize Good Combustion Practices as the control
technology.
5.4.4.Evaluate Most Effective Control Option (Impacts Analysis)
Economic Impact RCO
As indicated earlier, the installation of the RCO WILL require the installation of an upstream
particulate control device, in addition to the proposed multi-clone, to remove particulate
loading prior to the air stream crossing the ceramic bed. As an ESP has been reviewed and
determined to be financially incompatible, the analysis of adding the RCO was completed
using assuming an additional cost of an ESP and RCO installation.
CO Control
A detailed cost evaluation of an ESP and RCO option is included in Tables A & E for CO
control. As shown below, the incremental cost effectiveness of approximately $13,000 is
considered cost prohibitive and the ESP/RCO option for CO control is therefore eliminated
from further consideration in the BACT evaluation
Base Line Emissions with GCP Emissions with ESP/RCO,per Unit
0.38 lb/MMBtu ' 29.4 MMBtu/h= 11.172 Ib/hr 0.1 lb/MMBtu . 29.4 MMStu/hr= 2.94 Ib/hr
11.172 Ib/hr • 8760 hr/yr = 97,867 Ib/yr 2.94 Ib/hr . 8760 hr/yr = 25,754 Ib/yr
97,867 Ib/yr / 2000lb/ton = 48.93 tons/yr 25,754 Ib/yr / 2000 lb/ton = 12.88 tons/yr
Incremental CO emissions Improvement 36.06 tons/yr
Per Table 8,Incremental Total Annual costs to Achieve Emission Reduction $293,407 per year.
Per Table E,Incremental Total Annual costs to Achieve Emission Reduction $163,000 per year.
Incremental cost per ton of Particulate Emissions $12,658 per ton
441Page

VOC Control
A detailed cost evaluation of an ESP and RCO option is included in Table E for CO control. As
shown below, the incremental cost effectiveness of approximately $416,000 is considered cost
prohibitive and the ESP/RCO option for VOC control is therefore eliminated from further
consideration in the BACT evaluation
Base Line Emissions with GCP Emissions with ESP/RCO,per Unit
0.017 lb/MMBtu . 29.4 MMStu/h= 0.4998 lb/hr 0.0085 lb/MMBtu s 29.4 MMBtu/hr= 0.2499 lb/hr
0.4998 lb/hr ' 8760 hr/yr = 4,378 Ib/yr 0.2499 lb/hr ' 8760 hr/yr = 2,189 Ib/yr
4,378 Ib/yr / 2000 lb/ton = 2.19 tons/yr 2,189 Ib/yr / 2000 lb/ton = 1.09 tons/yr
Incremental VOC emissions Improvement 1.09 tons/yr
Per Table B,Incremental Total Annual costs to Achieve Emission Reduction $293,407 per year.
Per Table E,Incremental Total Annual costs to Achieve Emission Reduction $163,000 per year.
Incremental cost per ton of Particulate Emissions $416,977 per ton
Economic Impact: GCP
No adverse economic, energy or environmental impacts are associated with Good Combustion
Practices as proposed.
5.4.5. Select BA CT
C
The proposed project will use proper boiler design and Good Combustion Practices to
minimize CO and VOC emissions. GCP results in a proposed emissions rate of 11.17 lb/hr or
.38 lb/MMBtu of CO and 0.5 lb/hr or 0.017 lb/MMBtu for VOC.
451Page

5.5. Mercury
Mercury(Hg)is a trace element in biomass. When biomass is burned, mercury exits the boiler
at extremely low concentrations, on the order of parts per billion. The proposed biomass fuels
have inherently low mercury concentrations. Based the upon available information, the only
mercury control used on large, field erected biomass-fueled boilers are the use of low mercury
containing biomass fuels combined with the use of PM control systems, such as an ESP or
baghouse.
Per the EPA AP-42, Mercury from biomass is projected to be 0.0000035 lb/MMBtu, which
implies a uncontrolled pound per day, facility wide emissions rate of 0.007409 lbs, using three,
29.4 MMBtu package boilers(29.4 MMBtu/Hr* 3 units*24 hours* 0.0000035 lb/MMBtu)
5.5.1.Control Technologies
• Secondary PM control device such an a bag house
• Secondary PM control device such as an Electrostatic Precipitator(ESP)
• Activated Carbon Injection System
• Utilize low mercury containing biomass fuels
5.5.2.Eliminate Technically Infeasible Options
As described above, two of the technologies, bag house and ESP, have been rejected as viable
control technologies in the control of particulates due to technical (bag house and potential for
fires)and ESP,which was rejected based on a financial justification.
Based on the available data, we concluded that the MACT floor for mercury emissions from
this biomass fueled boiler is the use of biomass fuels and, where financially and technically
feasible, a secondary PM Control device. In the beyond the floor mercury MACT analysis, we
identified the use of activated carbon injection as a feasible mercury control. While we are not
aware of the use of activated carbon injection on any biomass-fueled boiler, based on the
current coal-fired utility boiler and municipal waste combustor experience, activated carbon
injection is a technically feasible mercury control alternative for this biomass-fueled boiler.
However, because the concentration of mercury in biomass is expected to be much lower than
in coal or municipal solid waste, the use of activated carbon injection will have limited ability
to control mercury. Based on this review and the fact that activated carbon injection has not
been demonstrated on similar biomass-fueled boilers, we have concluded that the level of
mercury emissions with activated carbon injection will be the same as the level of control when
firing low mercury containing biomass.
Further, the use of activated carbon injection may also adversely impact the potential reuse of
the boiler flyash which could have substantial environmental impacts and additional economic
costs.
5.5.3.Rank Remaining Control Technologies for Effectiveness
With the previous elimination of a secondary control device and carbon injection system, the
use of low mercury containing biomass fuels is proposed as BACT.
461Page

5.5.4.Evaluate Most Effective Control Option (Impacts Analysis)
No adverse economic, energy or environmental impacts are associated with combustion of low
mercury containing biomass fuels as proposed.
5.5.5. Select BACT
Based on this analysis, we have concluded that the case-by-case MACT for the control of
mercury emissions from this biomass-fueled boiler is the use of low mercury containing
biomass fuels. Based on this analysis, we propose a case by-case MACT emission limit for
mercury emissions from this boiler of 3.50E-06 pounds per million Btu of heat input.
471 (' �� ,� .

Table A
FACILITY_[ FACILITY PERMIT THROUGHP EMISSION_LI
FACILITY NAME OUNTY STATE DATE PROCESS NAME PRIMARY FUEL UT UNIT POLLUTANT MIT UnR
LOUISIANA-PACIFIC HAYWARD SAWYER WI 6/17/2004 THERMAL,OIL,KONUS;S 11, WOOD 19A N MBTU/H Carbon Monoxide 52.5 Lb/Hr
LOUISIANA-PACIFIC HAYWARD SAWYER WI 6/17/2004 THERMAL OIL,KONUS,S21 WOOD 23.8 N MBTU/H Carbon Momrdde 52.5 Lb/Hr
WEST FRASER(SOUTH),INC. UNION AR 11/7/2002 BOILER,WELLONS WOOD WASTE 29.63 MMBTU/H Carbon Monmdde 0.3 Ib/MMBtu
WELLBORN CABINETS,INC. CLAY AL 4/16/2003 (3)WOOD WASTE BOILERS WOOD WASTE 29.5 MMBTU/H Nitrogen O)ddes(NOx) 0.5 Ib/Nmtu
WEST FRASER(SOUTH),INC.-HUUNION AR 11/7/2002 BOILER,WELLONS WOOD WASTE 29.63 MMBTU/H Nitrogen O)ddes(NOx) 0.3 Ib/MMBtu
LOUISIANA-PACIFIC HAYWARD SAWYER WI 6/17/2004 THERMAL OIL,KONUS;S11, WOOD 19.4 MMBTU/H Nitrogen O)ddes(NOx) 8.9 Lb/HR
I.OUISIANA-PACIFIC HAYWARD SAWYER WI 6/17/2004 THERMAL OIL KONUS S21 WOOD 23.8 MMBTU/H Nitrogen O>ddes NOx 16.2 Lb/Hr
LOUISIANA-PACIFIC HAYWP SAWYER WI 6/17/2004 THERMAL OIL,KONUS;S11, WOOD 19.4 MMBTU/H Particulate Matter(PM) 6.5 Lb/Hr
LOUISIANA-PACIFIC HAYWP SAWYER WI 6/17/2004 TH01MAL OIL KONUS S21 WOOD 23.8 MMBTU/H Particulate Matter 15 Lb4k
LOUISIANA-PACIFIC HAYWPSAWYER WI 6/17/2004 THERMAL OIL,KONUS;S11, WOOD 19.4 MMBTU/H PM,filterable<10 µ 6.5 Lb4k
LOUISIANA-PACIFIC HAYWP SAWYER WI 6/17/2004 THERMAL OIL,KONUS,S21 WOOD 23.8 MMBTU/H PM,filterable<10 µ 15 Lb/Hr
WEST FRASER SO INC. UNION AR 1 U7/2002 BOILER,WELLONS WOOD WASTE 29.63 MMBTU/H PK filterable<10 p 0.24 lb/Mmbtu
LOUISIANA-PACIFIC HAYWPSAWYER WI 6/17/2004 THERMAL OIL,KONUS;S11, WOOD 19.4 MMBTU/H /olatile Organic Compound! 0.5 lb
LOUISIANA-PACIFIC HAYWP SAWYER WI 6/17/2004 THERMAL OIL,KONUS,S21 WOOD 23.8 MMBTU/H /olatile Organic Compound! 0.62 lb
WEST FRASER SO INC. UNION AR 1 V7/2002 BOILER,WELLONS WOOD WASTE 29.63 MMBTU/H /olatile Organic Compound., 0.1 lb
48 Page

Table B ESP Cost Analysis
Each Unit,Will Each Unit,Will
Capital Cost need Two Units Notes Reference Operating Cost need Two Units Notes Reference
Purchased Equipment Costs Direct Annual Costs
ESP and freight $671,000 A 2 Capacity Factor(CF)for Direct Annual Costs 100% 2
Instrumentation $67,100 101%of A 1(a) Operating Labor
Sales Tax $20,130 3%of A 1(a) Operator $13,688 1.5 hr/dy"365 d/y'CIF $25/hr 1(b),2
Total Purchased Cost(TPC) $758,230 TPC Supervisor $2,053 15%of Operator 1(b)
Coordinator $4,106 301/6 of Operator 1(b)
Direct Installation Cost %of TPC Total $19,847
Foundations&Support $30,329 4% 1(a) Maintenance
Handling and erection $379,115 50% 1(a) Labor $371 .825'ESP Plate Area(ft2) 1(d),2
Electrical $60,658 8% 1(a) Material $7,582 1%'PEC 1(d)
Piping $7,582 1% 1(a) Total $7,954
Insulation for duct $15,165 2% 1(a) Electrical Costs
Painting $15,165 2% 1(a) Requirement 23 kw/hr 2
Direct Installation $508,014 0.075$/kW-hr 2
$15,111
Total Direct Costs,TDC $1,266,244 Total Direct Annual Costs $42,911 TDAC
Indirect Costs %of TPC Indirect Annual Costs
Engineering $151,646 20% 1(a) Overhead $16,680 60%'(operating labor&Maint.) 1(e)
Construction&Field Expense $151,646 20'r6 1(a) Admin Charges $33,969 2%of TO 1(e)
Contractor Fees $75,823 10°k 1(a) Property Tax $16,984 1%of TO 1(e)
Start-up $7,582 1% 1(a) Insurance $16,984 1%of TO 1(e)
Performance Test $7,582 1% 1(a) Total Capital Recovery Cost $165,878
Model Study $15,165 2% 1(a) Annual Interest Rate 10%
Contingencies $22,747 3% Economic Life of ESP 15
Total Indirect Costs,IC $432,191 Capital Recovery Factor 0.131
Total Capital Investment $1,698,435 Total Indirect Annual Costs $250,496 TIAC
Total Annual Costs $293,407 TIAC+TDAC
1.US EPA OAQFS,EPA Air Pollution Cost Manual(6th edition),July 2002,Section 6,Ch3)
a.Table 3.16:Capital Cost Factors for an ESP
b.Table 3.21 for Annual Cost
c.Generally not required for and ESP
d.Equation 3.45 for Maintenance Materials
e.Suggested factor for property taxes,insurance and administration charges is 4%of TCI
Overhead is calculated at 60%of the sum of operating,supervisory,coordination and maintenance labor as well as materials
2.Data and quotes from Wellons Inc.
491 ,' a _ u

Table C
Venturi Scrubber Cost Analysis
One unit for both Each Unit,Will
Capital Cost boilers Notes Reference Operating Cost need Two Units Notes Reference
Purchased Equipment Costs Direct Annual Costs
Venturi Scubber $163,085 A 2 Capacity Factor(CF)for Direct Annual Costs 100%
Fan/pump $93,623 2 Operating Labor
Total $256,708 A Operator $36,500 4 hr/dy*365 d/y*CF*$25/hr 1(b)
Instrumentation $25,671 10%ofA 1(a) Supervisor $5,475 15%of Operator 1(b)
Sales Tax $4,893 3%of A 1(a) Coordinator $10,950 30%of Operator 1(b)
Freight $12,835 5%of A 1(a) Total $52,925
Total Purchased Cost(TPQ $300,107 TPC Maintenance
Labor $18,250 2 hr/dy*365 d/y*CF*$25/hr 1(b),2
Direct Installation Cost %of TPC Material $9,003 3%*PEC 1(b)
Foundations&Support $12,004 6% 1(a) Total $27,253
Handling and erection $150,053 40% 1(a) Electrical Costs
Electrical $24,009 1% 1(a) HP pump&HP Fan,130 combined HP est. $74,241 est.113 kw/hr @ 0.075 per kW 2
Piping $3,001 5% 1(a) Water Usage
Insulation for duct $6,002 3% 1(a) Water usage $17,345 Est.20 gmp @$1.65/1000 gal 2
Painting $6,002 1% 1(a) Caustic Usage
Direct Installation $201,072 Caustic usage $18,308 7.6 Ib/hr @ 50%strength,$550 ton 2
Total Direct Annual Costs $190,072 TDAC
Total Direct Costs,TDC $501,178 Indirect Annual Costs
Indirect Costs %of TPC Overhead $48,107 60%*(operating labor&Maint.) 1(b)
Engineering $30,011 10% 1(a) Admin Charges $12,124 2%of TCI 1(b)
Construction&Field Expense $30,011 10% 1(a) Property Tax $6,062 1%of TO 1(b)
Contractor Fees $30,011 10% 1(a) Insurance $6,062 1%of TCI 1(b)
Start-up $3,001 1% 1(a) Total Capital Recovery Cost $65,654
Performance Test $3,001 1% 1(a) Annual Interest Rate 10%
Model Study $0 0% 1(a) Economic Life of Scrubber 15
Contingencies $9,003 3% Capital Recovery Factor 0.131
Total Indirect Costs,IC $105,037 Total Indirect Annual Costs $138,010 TIAC
Total Capital Investment $606,216 Total Annual Costs $328,082 TIAC+TDAC
1.US EPA OAQFS,EPA Air Pollution Cost Manual(6th edition),July 2002,Section 6,Ch3)
a.Table 2.8:Capital Cost Factors for an Venturi Scrubber
b.Table 2.9 for Annual Cost
2.Scaled down cost estimate of 15%of proposal for similar system for an 858MMBtu system
50 1'

Table D
Dry Sorbent Cost Analysis
One unit for both Each Unit,Will
Capital Cost boilers Notes Reference Operating Cost need Two Units Notes Reference
Purchased Equipment Costs Direct Annual Costs
Trone System $67,952 A 2 Capacity Factor(CF)for Direct Annual Costs 100%
Total $67,952 A Operating Labor
Instrumentation $6,795 10%of A Operator $18,250 2 hr/dy'365 d/y'CF $25/hr 1(b)
Sales Tax $2,039 3%ofA 1(a) Supervisor $2,738 15%of Operator 1(b)
Freight $3,398 5%of A Coordinator $0 0'/6 of Operator 1(b)
Total Purchased Cost(TPC) $80,183 TPC Total $20,988
Maintenance
Direct Installation Cost %of TPC Labor $9,125 1 hr/dy'365 d/y'CF'$25/hr 1(d)
Foundations&Support $3,207 6% 1(a) Material $9,125 Material estimated to equal labor 1(d)
Handling and erection $40,092 401% 1(a) Total $18,250
Electrical $6,415 1% 1(a) Electrical Costs
Piping $802 5% 1(a) HP pump&HP Fan,130 combined HP est. $1,971 est.3 kw/hr @ 0.075 per kW 2
Insulation for duct $1,604 3% 1(a) Sorbent Costs
Painting $1,604 1% 1(a) Caustic usage $4,730 6 Ib/hr @$0.09 per lb
Direct Installation $53,723 Total Direct Annual Costs $45,939 TDAC
Indirect Annual Costs
Total Direct Costs,TDC $133,906 Overhead $23,543 60%'(operating labor&Maint.) 1(e)
Indirect Costs %of TPC Admin Charges $3,239 2%of TO 1(e)
Engineering $8,018 10% 1(a) Property Tax $1,620 1%of TO 1(e)
Construction&Field Expense $8,018 1096 1(a) Insurance $1,620 1%of TO 1(e)
Contractor Fees $8,018 109% 1(a) Total Capital Recovery Cost $17,542
Start-up $802 1% 1(a) Annual Interest Rate 10%
Performance Test $802 1% 1(a) Economic Life of Scrubber 15
Model Study $0 0% 1(a) Capital Recovery Factor 0.131
Contingencies $2,406 3% Total Indirect Annual Costs $47,563 TIAC
Total Indirect Costs,IC $28,064 Total Annual Costs $93,502 TIAC+TDAC
Total Capital Investment $161,971
1.US EPA OAQFS,EPA Air Pollution Cost Manual(6th edition),July 2002,Section 6,Ch3)
a.Table 3.16:Capital Cost Factors for an ESP
b.Table 3.21 for Annual Cost
2.Scaled down cost estimate of 15%of proposal for similar system for an 858MMBtu system
51 P �i

Table E
Regenerative Catalytic Oxidation(RCO)
Each Unit,Will Each Unit,Will
Capital Cost need Two Units Notes Reference Operating Cost need Two Units Notes Reference
Purchased Equipment Costs Direct Annual Costs
RCO and freight $286,909 A 1 Capacity Factor(CF)for Direct Annual Costs 100% 2
Instrumentation $28,691 10%of A 1(a) Operating Labor
Sales Tax $8,607 3%of A 1(a) Operator $2,281 0.25 hr/dy*365 d/y*CF*$25/h 1(b),2
Total Purchased Cost(TPC) $324,207 TPC Supervisor $342 15%of Operator 1(b)
Coordinator $694 30%of Operator 1(b)
Direct Installation Cost %of TPC Total $3,308
Foundations&Support $12,968 4% 1(a) Maintenance
Handling and erection $162,103 50% 1(a) Labor $371 .825*Plate Area(ft2) 1(d),2
Electrical $25,937 8% 1(a) Material $3,242 1%*PEC 1(d)
Piping $3,242 1% 1(a) Total $3,613
Insulation for duct $6,484 2% 1(a) Electrical Costs
Painting $6,484 2% 1(a) Requirement 44.5 kw/hr 2
Direct Installation $217,218 0.075$/kW-hr 2
$29,237
Total Direct Costs,TDC $541,425 Fuel
Indirect Costs %of TPC Natural Gas 0.15 Mbtu/hr
Engineering $64,841 20% 1(a) Cost $8.56$/1000ftA3
Construction&Field Expense $64,941 20% 1(a) 1,020 Btu/ftA3
Contractor Fees $32,42110% 1(a) $1,259
Start-up $3,242 1% 1(a) Catalyst Costs
Performance Test $3,242 1% 1(a) Catalyst Cost $40,448
Model Study $6,484 2% 1(a) Catalyst Life 2 years
Contingencies $9,726 3% Catalyst Annual Cost $20,224
Total Indirect Costs,IC $184,798
Total Capital Investment $726,2231 Total Direct Annual Costs $57,640 TDAC
Indirect Annual Costs
1.US EPA OAQFS,EPA Air Pol l uti on Cost Man uaI(6th edition),July 2002,Section 6,03) Overhead $4,15360e/6*(operating labor&Maint.) 1(e)
a.Table 3.16:Capital Cost Factors for an RCO for a 858MBtu bolter.For discussion purposes, Admin Charges $14,524 2%of TO 1(e)
we have assumed 5%of this costa s a surrogate for the proposed 29.4 MMBtu system Property Tax $7,262 1%of TO 1(e)
b.Table3.21 for Annual Cost Insurance $7,262 1%of TO 1(e)
c.Generally not required for and ESP Total Capital Recovery Cost $70,927
d.Equation 3.45 for Maintenance MaterlaIs Annual Interest Rate 10%
e.Suggested factor for property taxes,Insurance and ad ministration charges is 4%of TO Economic Life of ROC 15
Overhead is cal cuIated at 60%of the sum of operating,sup-1 sory,coordi natl on and Capital Recovery Factor 0.131
maintenance labor as well as materlaIs Total Indirect Annual Costs $104,128 TIAC
Total Annual Costs $161,768 TIAC+TDAC
52111

Article IV. Summary Report, Toxic Modeling Results
Wellons Energy Solutions (Wellons) is proposing to install and operate three biomass-fired boilers
to be located at the existing Perdue Farms Lewiston Plant in Lewiston, North Carolina (Lewiston
site). The North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR)Division
of Air Quality (DAQ) removed the exemption from preparing a toxics modeling demonstration for
combustion sources on July 10, 2010. Therefore, to obtain an air quality permit for the proposed
biomass-fired boilers, a toxics demonstration must be performed for all toxic air contaminants
which exceed their Toxic Pollutant Emission Rates (TPERS). For those exceeding their respective
TPERS, the facility was required to conduct modeling of toxic air pollutant (TAP) emissions from
the proposed boilers to demonstrate compliance with acceptable ambient levels (AALs) at the
Lewiston site.
To complete the necessary modeling, Wellons engaged Trinity Consulting to provide assistance in
completing the necessary modeling activities. A complete report, including summary results, is
attached in Article VII.
Although detailed in Article VII, the modeling demonstrated that the ambient concentrations
resulting from the emissions of TAPS from the proposed boilers do not exceed the AALs contained
in Chapter 15A of the North Carolina Administrative Code(NCAC) Section 2D .1100.
531Page

Article V. Solid Waste Determination
54 j

1
EAkLLONSI
1836 Eastchester Dr.
Suite 108
Energy Solutions High Point,NC 27265
O: 360.750.3 583
F: 360.750.3483
October 4, 2010
Mr. Robert Fisher
Regional Air Quality Manager
North Carolina Department of Air Quality
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington,NC 27889
The proposed biomass cogeneration facility will be constructed adjacent to the Perdue Agribusiness site in
Lewiston, North Carolina. W.E. Partners II, LLC, a subsidiary of Wellons Energy Solutions, LLC, will be
the operator of the facility.
We have attempted to address the 10 questions that you have provided in determination of a solid waste fuel
determination. Per our understanding, the questions will be used to assist in the determination as to whether
the un-adulterated biomass material that will be used as our primary boiler fuel should be classified as a
"solid waste"material.
We hope that you concur that our biomass feedstock is not a "solid waste". The biomass material is a
product that has not been discarded and has positive economic value over and above the processing and
transportation costs. In addition, the material is not stored and is generally transported to our facility within
24 hours of the chipping process. In addition, we believe that our proposed biomass cogeneration facility is
supportive of both Federal and State incentives designed to spur the economic development of renewable
energy projects in the United States.
Should you have additional questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate in contacting
me at the number above.
Sincerely,
Gar ottrell L�7 ��
President and General Manager
Wellons Energy Solutions
551PaVge

Supplemental data for W.E. Partners II, LLC permit application for the construction and
operation of a biomass boiler cogeneration facility.
1) Identification and description of the unit.
This specified biomass furnace and boiler is being sourced from Wellons Inc., a
biomass boiler manufacturer based in Vancouver, WA. The Wellons steam generation
system will consist of three (3) 600 hp watertube-firetube package style boilers. The
wood-fired system will produce 62,100 PPH of saturated steam at 325 psig. Wellons
will provide systems engineering and design, manufacturing of the combustion
equipment, boiler, fuel handling, and the associated balance of plant equipment
described in this proposal. The proven Wellons cell furnace system will be utilized.
This combustion system allows for high-efficiency wood burning as demonstrated by
low fan horsepower requirements and low exhaust stack temperatures.
gge r
Fuel Feed Cof T
Ov!,W Dar k
e Nr+rn-� ((TTIYTp1
40
TW
1 np
101111
w i-eaSp o 0 0
mu anon
of
O O 0
Re�(racfo ars of1°
FD
ry
Alf o Q o
SpaceTupere Holes
o d� o Air#1e
Access Door Reactive Fuel B*d / pro}t
re..Caoled
ary Grates Side Damper
�Unde yr'
Openrngs /
«eu
r
-CaRe� rral
Wellons Rotary Grate Furnace
Wellon's Inc. proven water-cooled rotary grate system is designed to allow for proper
combustion control while providing a reliable, proven concept for ash removal. Since
1989, Wellons has successfully installed more than 150 rotary grate furnaces in a
multitude of industrial and fuel configurations.
56 � " .

I
Biomass System Components:
A typical biomass boiler installation will consist of 3 components; the furnace/pressure vessel, the
material receiving and storage system as well as the metal framed boiler house.
--- Biomass Firebox & Pressure Vessel
Automatic de-ashing
biomass firebox and high
pressure steam
kLT 7 generation vessel.
i=z
Fuel Receiving, Classifying & Storage
a
Fuel bunker, as shown, is
preferred storage method
but is subject to size and
storage limits.
�"' '•-- Boiler Building
Boiler Building is a pre-
engineered structure with
-- -_ water, electricity, steam
and condensate returns.
57 i <

Typical Arrangement for a Wellons 600 HP Boiler arrangement
v os sr.r y rrr.m.r
flrv.�.rr+ ror-wn�4.r
wonw..nvri.. +¢r R
r-r w
Y
o --
4
R
o '
}
i
o �
o
o ! w
v. ow
TF i01M►bows\T-6 fte t
a%-VI-)
581Page

2) Narrative description of the process by which the fuel is developed, beginning with the
virgin material.
The proposed system will be capable of burning any biomass material with moisture
contents of between 10 and 50%. Sources of biomass material that will be consumed will be
primary sourced from in-woods chipping operations as well as existing, site-based mill
operations.
During the logging process, a tree is cut and a skidder will transport several un-trimmed
trees to the central deck for processing. The first process is that the tree is de-limbed and cut
to size. This step separates the biomass feedstock into two revenue streams; biomass boiler
fuel and the lumber or pulp mill grade material.
The lumber grade material is then graded and cut to size to meet existing mill specifications.
In certain instances, the logger will also chip "paper mill' quality chips as opposed to
sending un-processed logs. In this case, the log is de-limbed, de-barked and then chipped
for later transport to the mill site.
The trimmings, including limbs, tree tops are then transported to the boiler fuel processing
area for chipping and loading.
This process uses a cone-head
chipper which chips the material
-
and loads the processed chips
directly into chip vans which are
on-site. Once the chip vans are
full, they are transported to the
biomass cogeneration facility for
unloading. Typically, the chips are
transported either the same day of
processing or the next day, = •r '"
depending on day of the week andV }
the volume of material being
generated.
While contracts for vendors to the $
Lewiston facility have not been
selected at this time,a point of contact for additional information may be:
Doug Duncan
Director
NC Professional Loggers Association
[phone]
59 Page

3) Narrative description of the industrial processes that occur on the site where the
material will be burned.
W.E. Partners has signed a steam purchase agreement with Perdue Agribusiness LLC, a
division of Perdue Farms, to provide saturated steam to Perdue at the Lewiston, NC site. The
Perdue Lewiston site is a rendering and protein processing plant. Saturated steam is used in
the rendering of chicken parts from Perdue's processing plant that is located approximately
1 mile from the rendering facility.
In addition, a Power Purchase Agreement will be initiated with Dominion Power for the sale
of electricity generated by the facility and Renewable Energy Credits will be sold to Duke
Energy.
4) Physical and chemical description of finished fuels, including the extent to which the
fuels are physically and chemically similar to virgin material.
As described in paragraph 2, the biomass boiler fuel is identical in chemical composition as
timber being harvested and
transported to mills throughout
North Carolina. The material
being used for boiler fuel is
different only in that the bark and a
leaves, which must be separated for
"mill quality pulp" can be retained
in the biomass boiler fuel
specification. The physical `
dimensions of the chips is typically R
the same or very similar to in- ;
woods chipping for "mill quality"
chips. Again, the primary r `'
difference is that paper-mill quality
4T'
chips have the leaves and bark
removed prior to processing.
5) Identification and description of any existing markets for the fuels, including
discussion of the historical existence of the market,size and prices.
Biomass sources provide about 3 percent of all energy consumed in the United States. In 2002,
biomass supplied about 47 percent of all renewable energy consumed in the United States.
Electric generation from biomass (excluding municipal solid waste) represents about 11
percent of all generation from renewable sources in the United States. In fact, biomass supplied
more energy to the nation in 2002 than any other form of renewable energy, including
hydroelectric power. Biomass supplied almost six times the energy of geothermal, solar and
wind energy sources combined. Globally, biomass meets about 14 percent of the world's
energy needs.
The utilization of biomass for the production of steam is a technology that has been in
existence for more than 100 years. Companies that are utilizing biomass fired boilers are
601Page

largely in the forest products related businesses such as paper and pulp mills, saw mills with
kiln operations and other wood related products.
Biomass fired boilers are prevalent throughout the Southeast and in particular, North
Carolina. Based on 2006 data for the NC Dept. of Labor, North Carolina has more than 280
biomass fired boilers permitted to operate in the state. With that being said, several
companies outside the forest products sector have embraced biomass fired boilers in the last
several years. Companies such as Freight-liner, Dorthea Dix Hospital, Deep River Dyeing,
NC Correctional Institution and Corn Products are all examples of companies utilizing
biomass fired boilers that do not produce their own biomass fuel feedstock.
Pricing is primarily a function of biomass cost plus processing and transportation costs.
Process and transportation is very dependent on the cost of diesel fuel. Pricing, per our
preliminary requests for proposal ranged from $18 to $25 per green ton, delivered to
Lewiston site.
6) Identification of treatment process
The biomass fuel undergoes no treatment process other than the mechanical conversion from
limbs and treetops to a uniform chip material.
7) Description of general market use of fuel material.
To our knowledge, tree tops and limbs that are utilized for the production of biomass fuel is
used exclusively in the form of biomass fuel.
8) Description of benefits from the combustion of the fuels other than energy production.
Benefits of utilizing biomass as compared to fossil fuels are many.
a. Reduction on the dependence of imported natural gas and heating oil
b. Reduction in green house gases as biomass is considered green house gas neutral
c. Production of Renewable Energy Credits to assist North Carolina based utilities in
meeting the North Carolina Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard.
d. Supplemental increase in employment with additional employees needed for
harvesting, chipping and transporting biomass material.
9) Third party.
Please see item 2. In this business case, there are no third party participants. The logging
operator manufacturers' two products; lumber/pulp mill quality biomass or boiler fuel
biomass. No "broker" or other party is between the producer of the biomass boiler fuel and
W.E. Partners 1, LLC.
10)Any information relevant to whether the fuel is a solid waste.
To be classified as a solid waste, the material must have been discarded. Under the meaning
of"discard", the biomass material that will be utilized for combustion in the biomass boiler
is not a material that has been"discarded". The logger procuring the saw timber is the same
vendor providing the biomass material for combustion. The material has a positive economic
value as indicated by the pricing that we will be paying for the material, the processing of
the fuel and the transportation of the fuel to our facility. As indicated earlier, the material
611 Page

will be processed concurrently with the other logging products at the logging site, with
typical chipping and transportation occurring on the same day of production.
62 � !' <E

Article VI. Maps & Drawings
Section 6.01 Map of Proposed Facility Location
Proposed Location:
3539 Governors Rd.
Lewiston Woodville,NC
Norirna Rosemary. a Rapids `• ` its ...C+rntuck
15aLittleton NOR764MPTON CoMVi 'Mwkeesboio A.
a �.CAMDEN CtPli:, :K
Warrenton e8 Wddon ,°t j,�� Wron atesv+Me4
rsOn ' �. E th
x•" x E tlAnons+nMe 6 y bzabe :, t59
/'�Wbodtand HT . ,�¢ _ Poplar
°y ~ sAhosk 3+aa r.mr;rt Gr �' 7 _ Shiloh
$tars h
0
son Bankie Rich_, are +BeMdere O)
H I F A x .. .
ei Parkv* '9 Sil"n
sFr Enfield :5e
Scotland Whites Beach, y ;3,
Neck
Lou,sburg Y ake.rs q �Lew+sto 37
Palm
EDGECOMBF rra 8 E R T i E aEdenton
Dortche: r' a. A�'.reA SOwd
Sprang Nashhlle �Windsor Merry Hilt
Hope, N Y S rocky Mount i $innnerwile64
Tarboro, = N O R T H
RoperColumbia
' Prrncevitle � 13 ,- " r Scuppernong
er 11arpsburg C A R O L 1 N A Piytno'At
Lebuton Old Wrihamstofi
+ Elm City Pinetops� Sparta 8 Jameshlte
ethei Robersonv+lfe
�
-naps f A* TYRRELL D A. P E
o111fikon M A R T I N
�;26s:
„. Lucama ,-----,.._ ' - Padolus 264
631Page

Section 6.02 Satellite Image of Perdue Facility
Processing
Plant
Propose
Biomass `
Cogen ✓
Location 4 ;�
r
Rendering
PlantX'
V. s l
64 Page

Section 6.03 Layout of Perdue Farms Processing Plant, Rending and Supporting Operations
Proposed location for
Biomass CoLyen Boiler
get-
a'f!
• l � w ' I 1 IT
A: jw-
t". 4LTA/A=Sy LANE TITLE S„RVEY 1
4R1E', EfM -/nl ao lel i EL-, i EI
.�-t llr r■ ,Ilr 11-1 ,iil rrl•-. -Ilx ,Ir •rli
'� -••♦ •[Irl -• �n.�-r 47•• L•I111- w�. wi
•IMr 1 xl,I I•11
[.5• n:..a. .J I r 1�-Ir •l%.[ .Ir Ix1"•Lia�-i,.-
•-�r•ri uT, m Trr ru" „•, ilE l.mn
.��;•�+. 1,-w.rlr r.-r ••.n xu,T. an. nui_ !,. •io.i .
LE E 1 IF "I OL -11-E 1-TIU' ,'\ •y•'L"' •.` 1. i .11 r•1,1� 1 w 1♦r•
r,7 .w.1I•r•yr. -
-re•- i� �T=�.� LIecILe
r.
r C [ R IL ITS vx YR :* U�•j
i i w l __ _ - ,•`Y':""' /lM[11•[aM! 7W SEA w w!
• IA. r T-L•E-
t� aw[• 1 � T 7 R E f47L+• 1'-... , _
•.!r .n x '� G�
•... ... .- • !•,... lr�+r:•- a r+••..u.•-Tr«-1• •• •.,x..a,wur,w.rr. ......• r• ,r.•
65 1 a1 e

Section 6.04 Close-up of Proposed Location
I
1 [!YW
. ff
�41
I
.c it ,1 � ¢r.l _ �• y
_ ��� .`k`"�I Scat- �`S��'�Vaiu cn ,f 49� '4,1� �!'i.i •'
,..y�.a''.. .� �•• _._._.._._ c ,t[ I �[ .r—`�� '•^� r�r�. r a ,u,,.�i .. ....
66 PaL, e

Section 6.05 Facility Plan View Drawings
Fa
Y
0
R
O
o E
R
a
r
osR«w.lls
4 R
0
MLO S a:.
1W...agl.90—6 T-6 vw.t
�F"R..""w.i uc�•ww.w 9_
67jPage

Section 6.06 Machinery Elevation Drawings
IAJ
A ucx� I N--1 W'#
-
me mMv �
e
.m•av
nn sru
sT MT �q yr
a
v.,...aw.w.r...�w.M
a.eNw w.s�
681I' a e

Section 6.07 Facility Exterior Elevations
�� way aFarioN
1 N
rwa�case oewa
¢4wcieref
69 Page

Article VII. Full Report-Air Toxic Pollutant Modeling Analysis
701Page

TOXIC AIR POLLUTANT MODELING ANALYSIS
WELLONS ENERGY SOLUTIONS GROUP ■ LEWISTON,NORTH CAROLINA
LEWISTON,NORTH CAROLINA
Prepared By:
WELLONS ENERGY SOLUTIONS GROUP TRINITY CONSULTANTS
1836 Eastchester Drive 325 Arlington Avenue,Suite 500
Suite 108 Charlotte,North Carolina 28203
High Point,NC 27265 [phone]
[phone] Fax[phone]
Garald Cottrell■ General Manager Tom Muscenti■ Managing Consultant
Ian Donaldson■ Senior Consultant
September 2010
Project No. 103402.0195
Tina
Consurilits-

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................1-1
2. MODELING METHODOLOGY............................................................................................2-1
2.1 DISPERSION MODEL SELECTION
2.2 LAND-USE ANALYSIS
2.3 TERRAIN...............................................................................................................2-1
2.4 METEOROLOGICAL DATA .....................................................................................2-1
2.5 SITE LAYOUT........................................................................................................2-2
2.6 BUILDING DOWNWASH.........................................................................................2-2
2.7 RECEPTOR GRIDS..................................................................................................2-3
3. EMISSION SOURCE PARAMETERS.....................................................................................3-1
3.1 EMISSION RATES AND MODELED POLLUTANTS ....................................................3-1
3.2 STACK PARAMETERS ............................................................................................3-1
4. MODELING RESULTS...........................................................................................4-1
APPENDIX A—PLOT PLAN
APPENDIX B—MODELING FILES
APPENDIX C—MODELING PROTOCOL CHECKLIST
APPENDIX D—AREA TOPOGRAPHICAL MAP
Wellons Energy Solutions Group 1 Trinity Consultants
Lewiston Site 103402.0195

LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 2-1. HEIGHTS OF BUILDINGS IN DOWNWASH ANALYSIS........................................................2-3
TABLE 3-1. FACILITY-WIDE EMISSION RATES...................................................................................3-1
TABLE 3-2.POINT SOURCE MODEL STACK PARAMETERS..................................................................3-1
i
TABLE 4-1. ACROLEIN MODELING RESULTS......................................................................................4-1
TABLE 4-2. ARSENIC MODELING RESULTS........................................................................................4-1
TABLE 4-3. BENZENE MODELING RESULTS........................................................................................4-2
TABLE 4-4. BERYLLIUM MODELING RESULTS...................................................................................4-2
TABLE 4-5. CADMIUM MODELING RESULTS......................................................................................4-2
TABLE 4-6. CHLORINE MODELING RESULTS......................................................................................4-3
TABLE 4-7. FORMALDEHYDE MODELING RESULTS............................................................................4-3
TABLE 4-8. HYDROGEN CHLORIDE MODELING RESULTS..................................................................4-3
TABLE 4-9. MANGANESE MODELING RESULTS..................................................................................4-4
TABLE 4-10. RESULTS COMPARISON..................................................................................................4-4
TABLE B-1. INPUT METEOROLOGICAL FILES
TABLE B-2. INPUT NED DATA
TABLE B-3. BPIP DATA
TABLE B-4. AERMAP DATA
TABLE B-5. EXAMPLE MODELING INPUT AND OUTPUT FILES: ACROLEM
Wellons Energy Solutions Group 11 Trinity Consultants
Lewiston Site 103402.0195

1. INTRODUCTION
Wellons Energy Solutions(Wellons)is proposing to install and operate three biomass-fired boilers to
be located at the existing Perdue Farms Lewiston Plant in Lewiston,North Carolina(Lewiston site).
The North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources(NCDENR)Division of Air
Quality(DAQ)removed the exemption from preparing a toxics modeling demonstration for
combustion sources on July 10,2010. Therefore,to obtain an air quality permit for the proposed
biomass-fired boilers,a toxics demonstration must be performed for all toxic air contaminants which
exceed their Toxic Pollutant Emission Rates(TPERS). For those exceeding their respective TPERS,
the facility was required to conduct modeling of toxic air pollutant(TAP)emissions from the
proposed boilers to demonstrate compliance with acceptable ambient levels(AALs)at the Lewiston
site. Wellons is submitting this modeling analysis to demonstrate that the ambient concentrations
resulting from the emissions of TAPs from the proposed boilers do not exceed the AALs contained in
Chapter 15A of the North Carolina Administrative Code(NCAC)Section 2D .1100.
This report presents the methodology and results of the air quality dispersion modeling conducted for
the Wellons Lewiston site.
The modeling report is organized as follows:
• Section 2—Modeling Methodology
• Section 3—Emission Source Parameters
• Section 4—Modeling Results
• Appendix A—Plot Plan
• Appendix B—Modeling Files
• Appendix C—Modeling Protocol Checklist
• Appendix D—Area Topographical Map
Wellons Energy Solutions Group 1-1 Trinity Consultants
Lewiston Site 103402.0195

2. MODELING METHODOLOGY
The modeling methodology outlined in this section follows the Guidelines for Evaluating the Air
Quality Impacts of Toxic Air Pollutants in North Carolina, December 2009(Guidelines). A modeling
protocol checklist is included in Appendix C.
2.1 DISPERSION MODEL SELECTION
The air dispersion modeling analysis was conducted using the version 09292 of the American
Meteorological Society Environmental Protection Agency Regulatory Model(AERMOD)to estimate
maximum ground-level concentrations. AERMOD with PRIME is the recommended model for
refined analyses. AERMOD is a steady-state plume model that incorporates air dispersion based on
planetary boundary layer turbulence structure and scaling concepts, including treatment of both
surface and elevated sources,and both simple and complex terrain.
2.2 LAND-USE ANALYSIS
One of the upgrades to the AERMOD modeling system is the incorporation of land use into the
meteorological parameters for use in the AERMET calculations. Varying land use will produce
different environmental responses to heating,cooling,albedo,and other characteristics of the
Planetary Boundary Layer(PBL),which have an effect on the vertical stability and subsequent
behavior pollutant dispersion. In accordance with the Guidelines,the meteorological dataset has been
processed by DAQ to incorporate these characteristics.
2.3 TERRAIN
Receptor,building,and source terrain elevations were interpolated from National Elevation Dataset
(NED)data obtained from the U.S. Geological Survey(USGS)National Map Seamless Server
(NMSS). NED data are distributed in geographic coordinates in units of decimal degrees,and in
conformance with the North American Datum of 1983(NAD 83). The array elevations are at 1/3 arc
second(I 0-meter)intervals and were interpolated using the U.S. EPA-sanctioned AERMAP program
to determine elevations at the property line,as well as along Griffins Quarter Road(public access
road)and the defined grid withl00-meter receptor intervals. The NED and AERMAP files are
included in Appendix B.
2.4 METEOROLOGICAL DATA
Per North Carolina modeling guidelines,the dispersion modeling was performed using 1988 through
1992 preprocessed meteorological data based on surface observations and upper air measurements
taken from Norfolk,Virginia and Wallops Island,Virginia respectively.I The meteorological data set
was obtained from the NCDENR modeling and meteorology website.2
1 Based on conversation between Trinity Consultants and NCDENR on September 20,2010.
2 http://daq.state.nc.us/permits/wets/metdata.shtmi
Wellons Energy Solutions Group 2-1 Trinity Consultants
Lewiston Site 103402.0195

2.5 SITE LAYOUT
In all modeling analysis input and output data files,the location of emission sources, structures,and
receptors were represented in the Universal Transverse Mercator(UTM)coordinate system. The
Lewiston site is located in UTM Zone 18. The center of the Wellons facility emission sources is
located near UTM coordinates 300 km east and 4,002 km north.3
A diagram of the Lewiston facility including stack locations,building locations, and property
boundaries is contained in Appendix A.
2.6 BUILDING DOWNWASH
A good engineering practice(GEP)stack height evaluation was conducted for each point source to
determine if building downwash parameters were required in the modeling analysis. The Building
Profile Input Program with PRIME(BPIP-PRIME,version 04274)was used to conduct the GEP
analysis and calculate the necessary building downwash parameters required by AERMOD.
Dimensions for structures input to the analysis are summarized in Table 2-1. The analysis included
nearby buildings on the Purdue facility in addition to the buildings associated with the Wellons
facility. Appendix B contains the BPIP-PRIME input and output files.
3 These coordinates and all others in this report are based on the North American Datum of 1983(NAD83).
Wellons Energy Solutions Group 2-2 Trinity Consultants
Lewiston Site 103402.0195

d
TABLE 2-1. HEIGHTS OF BUILDINGS IN DOWNWASH ANALYSIS
Building X- Y- Elevation Height
ED Description Coordinate Coordinate (m) m ft
BLD1 Proposed NG Boiler Bldg 300037.5 4001815.3 25.86 9.14 30
BLD2 Boilerl Structure 300076.5 4001770 25.72 6.40 21
BLD3 Boiler2 Structure 300080.6 4001762.5 25.47 6.40 21
BLD4 Boiler3 Structure 300084.3 4001755.3 25.31 6.40 21
BLD5 Future Biomass Boiler Bldg 300063.1 4001763.5 25.56 12.57 41.25
BLD6 Control and Operation Offices 300058.5 4001760.6 25.53 6.16 20.2
BLD7 One Story Brick Building 299988.8 4001806.8 27.09 4.57 15
BLD8 Plant Protein Welfare Center 299997.5 4001791.1 25.58 4.57 15
BLD9 Metal Frame Bldg 299900.1 4001810.7 27.32 4.57 15
BLD10 Truck Wash Building 299957.3 4001760.2 24.53 7.62 25
BLD11 Canopy 299948.5 4001745.3 24.36 6.71 22
NW One Story Metal Frame
BLD12 Building 299803.7 4001835.2 27.21 4.57 15
BLD13 SE one story metal frame 300335.2 4001791.6 25.47 8.05 26.4
BLD14 Existing Rendering Plant 299910.4 4001823.5 27.17 10.58 34.7
BLD15 One Story Conc. Block 299916.2 4001997.6 24.79 3.35 11
BLD16 Fuel Bunker 300088.6 4001721.7 25.12 7.54 24.75
BLD17 Transition to Fuel Bunker 300075.5 4001740.8 25.08 6.32 20.75
2.7 RECEPTOR GRIDS
Ground-level concentrations were calculated within one Cartesian receptor grid, at receptors placed
along the property line, and receptors placed along the stretch of Griffins Quarter Road which runs
through the south-west corner of the Purdue Facility. The Cartesian grid covers a region that extends
5 km from the center of the Lewiston facility in all directions and contains 100-meter spaced
receptors. Because the minimum source to property distance is greater than 100 meters, discrete
receptors were placed at 100 meter intervals along the facility property line.
Purdue operates the parcel of land west of Governors Road(SR 308). Wellons plans to operate the
proposed boilers on leased land on the western portion of Purdue's property. In accordance with
DAQ policy4,boundary receptors are placed along Purdue's property line,which runs along
Governors Road and Cherry Farm Road to the east, and Griffins Quarter Road that borders the site to
the south,nuns through the Purdue's facility, and continues south to border the south-west side. In
addition, there are several gravel roads that are present for Purdue's use only and are not considered
public right-of-ways5. Therefore, the boundary receptors were placed in such a way that they contain
these areas within the Lewiston facility's property line, while a set of four receptor points were
defined along the stretch of Griffins Quarter Road which runs through the south-west corner. The
property boundary configuration is included in Appendix A.
4 Memorandum from Laura Butler,Chief,dated January 21, 1999.
5 Guidelines for Evaluating the Air Quality Impacts of Toxic Pollutants in North Carolina,NCDENR,Department
of Air Quality(DAQ):Permitting Section,Air Quality Analysis Branch,December 2009.
Wellons Energy Solutions Group 2-3 Trinity Consultants
Lewiston Site 103402.0195

3. EMISSION SOURCE PARAMETERS
This section details the source parameters used in this analysis.
3.1 EMISSION RATES AND MODELED POLLUTANTS
The emission rates for the modeling scenario are calculated in two ways,depending on the type of
acceptable ambient levels(AALs). For short term AALs(i.e. TPER expressed in lb/hr or lb/day),the
emission rates are based on the maximum potential fuel throughput for each averaging period,
calculated using the maximum heat input rating of the boiler. For the long term AALs(i.e. TPER
expressed in lb/yr),the emission rates take into account the requested annual fuel throughput
limitations. The boiler emission rates for all TAPS that exceed the TPERs in 15A NCAC 2Q .0711
are shown in Table 3-1. Wellons modeled all TAPS listed in Table 3-1.
TABLE 3-1. FACILITY-WIDE EMISSION RATES
Emission
Pollutant Rate TPER Units
Acrolein 0.4 0.020 lb/hr
Arsenic 11.2 0.016 lb/yr
Benzene 2132 8.1 lb/yr
Beryllium 0.6 0.28 lb/yr
Cadmium 2.1 0.37 lb/yr
Chlorine 1.7 0.79 lb/day
Formaldehyde 0.4 0.04 lb/hr
Hydrogen Chloride 1.7 0.18 lb/hr
Manganese 3.4 0.630 lb/day
3.2 STACK PARAMETERS
The AERMOD dispersion model allows for emission units to be represented as point,area,or volume
sources. The proposed biomass-fired boilers at the Lewiston site unobstructed vertical release point
sources. For point sources with unobstructed vertical releases, it is appropriate to use actual stack
parameters(i.e.,height,diameter, exhaust gas temperature,and gas exit velocity/flowrate)in the
modeling analysis. Therefore,the boiler stacks were modeled with actual stack parameters. The
temperature,flow rate,height and diameter for each identical stack are included in Table 3-2.
TABLE 3-2.POINT SOURCE MODEL STACK PARAMETERS
Unit ID Stack Height Stack Temp Stack Flow Stack Diameter
00 (F) (ACFM) (ft)
Boiler 75 325 14,775 2.50
Wellons Energy Solutions Group 3-1 Trinity Consultants
Lewiston Site 103402.0195

4. MODELING RESULTS
Summaries of maximum modeled concentrations for the modeled emission rate are included in Tables
4-1 through 4-9. The maximum impacts for the 1-hr averaging period standards occurred in 1992 at
UTM coordinate 300,307.8 km east and 4,001,659.6 km north. The maximum impacts for the 24-hr
averaging period standard occurred in 1989 at UTM coordinate 299,967.7 km east and 4,001,470.8
km north. The maximum impacts for the Annual averaging period standards occurred in 1990 at
UTM coordinate 300,204.3 km east and 4,002,124.1 km north.
TABLE 4-1. ACROLEIN MODELING RESULTS
Location of Maximum
Averaging Concentration UTM-E UTM-N
Year Period /m3 m m
1988 1-hour 1.40 300,307.8 4,001,659.6
1989 1.29 300,052.7 4,001,522.3
1990 1Al 300,307.8 4,001,659.6
1991 1.39 300,307.8 4,001,659.6
1992 1.42 300,307.8 4,001,659.6
TABLE 4-2. ARSENIC MODELING RESULTS
Location of Maximum
Averaging Concentration UTM-E UTM-N
Year Period m m m
1988 Annual 2.00E-04 300,204.3 4,002,124.1
1989 2.10E-04 300,052.7 4,001,522.3
1990 2.10E-04 300,204.3 4,002,124.1
1991 2.00E-04 300,052.7 4,001,522.3
1992 1.80E-04 300,051.7 4,001,503.4
Wellons Energy Solutions Group 4-1 Trinity Consultants
Lewiston Site 103402.0195

TABLE 4-3. BENZENE MODELING RESULTS
Location of Maximum
Averaging Concentration UTM-E UTM-N
Year Period m m m
1988 Annual 3.89E-02 300,204.3 4,002,124.1
1989 4.00E-02 300,052.7 4,001,522.3
1990 4.08E-02 300,204.3 4,002,124.1
1991 3.79E-02 300,052.7 4,001,522.3
1992 3.39E-02 300,051.7 4,001503.4
TABLE 4-4. BERYLLIUM MODELING RESULTS
Location of Maximum
Averaging Concentration UTM-E UTM-N
Year Period m m m
1988 Annual 1.00E-05 300,204.3 4,002,124.1
1989 1.00E-05 300,052.7 4,001,522.3
1990 1.00E-05 300,204.3 4,002,124.1
1991 1.00E-05 300,052.7 4,001,522.3
1992 1.00E-05 300,051.7 4,001,503.4
TABLE 4-5. CADMIUM MODELING RESULTS
Location of Maximum
Averaging Concentration UTM-E UTM-N
Year Period m m m
1988 Annual 4.00E-05 300,204.3 4,002,124.1
1989 4.00E-05 300,052.7 4,001,522.3
1990 4.00E-05 300,204.3 4,002,124.1
1991 4.00E-05 300,052.7 4,001,522.3
1992 3.00E-05 300,051.7 4,001,503.4
Wellons Energy Solutions Group 4-2 Trinity Consultants
Lewiston Site 103402.0195

TABLE 4-9. MANGANESE MODELING RESULTS
Location of Maximum
Averaging Concentration UTM-E UTM-N
Year Period m3 m m
1988 24-hr 2.09E-01 300,106.1 4,002,105.4
1989 2.48E-01 299,967.7 4,001,470.8
1990 1.88E-01 300,307.8 4,001,659.6
1991 2.23E-01 300,307.8 4,001,659.6
1992 2.45E-01 300,052.7 4,001,522.3
As shown in Table 4-10,the highest predicted impact for each pollutant is less than the corresponding AAL.
TABLE 4-10. RESULTS COMPARISON
Averaging Concentration AAL
Pollutant Period m3 m3 %of AAL
Acrolein 1-hr 1.42 80 1.8%
Arsenic Annual 2.10E-04 2.30E-04 91.3%
Benzene Annual 0.041 0.12 34.0%
Beryllium Annual 1.00E-05 4.10E-03 0.2%
Cadmium Annual 4.00E-05 5.50E-03 0.7%
Chlorine 1-hr 0.28 900 0.03%
Chlorine 24-hr 0.12 37.5 0.3%
Formaldehyde 1-hr 1.55 150 1.0%
Hydrogen Chloride 1-hr 6.72 700 1.0%
Manganese 24-hr 0.25 31 0.8%
Wellons Energy Solutions Group 4-4 Trinity Consultants
Lewiston Site 103402.0195

APPENDIX A-PLOT PLAN
Wellons Energy Solutions Group Trinity Consultants
Lewiston Site A-1 103402.0195

/Y iu w
ate p \ / Rom. RI
/ I
:,•s••r'Y ^{'^ R4Mw1�., ataRtnr
`7.
� .a .�•n t,s�, ,s � �F}4 �• YRc
i `
w..
VICINITY MAP ♦ • 'i:
.�rRRwrw.wwtw. WlRt rw.ur C.�..
;pR�Rar�r w �1p' ' ww.a r.Rr rr .pr.aRa s uwetrru `•v �_' \ 2 d S
'Aa[ �pr M wtww.crrawaRwt wRwerRwrYIY `_` wFy.Rpi -9 `�...-.. ._.._- •; j
Rwr..w QAii.°Ri�.`.�1♦�w�.a+' �7= 6
� ,'•I-. r\�\w aOW
bT p—pRLL W
A
ROrr 1 � 4Vt
Z
La
nwn•wRwrw rrw wa/s.. .e rw.ra..w —' < O
RQ DATA .aR�RraRR www�e ` Cr
w�is 'rRs. wR av Raw■ ` •nR ar.aw.cr Z
LisaawR �a+�!�iw.i.��p
ear aww.a.Rr I uwRs wrw mRata � �•r.• U O
J0 ww'Ri Zs�i 11fr. .^+ � awww,ew.M "' N N
ti°vi witrjs wR■�1p I�1�wR •.a+wroa rcRa wwrus .i•�
I�w wY a1111��rrw R.al�w0a 1f1 M n♦
fwL■��RYrlRla-1Ra-6��w r wNr r.■ _wR wuwr garMew Rl .w 1�aY� arw Rlww �♦ ..
—__.._ wr�twu OWNER MM 11 I :..A `'q.. 9#
WI
Ri.. .�aranawRRYw�1��.Rw e r a. I INDEX OF DRAWINGS �Ra
'YI rRw RIrOw Rr Rwrw lRlww,4 wlli as sRr aw ~ aw Rw Rt AtaR1 rR.iwR wRR WaR '�
''� a�MwwRafwwlw lY.wRwr�Iw iw wiwlRN �at-. ,�� tl.r Rp w.w aawal ars SV-s sa wRu6vwD Unum vW1
ft- .y• \ I•�10'
own OPlldl 12 � �D tlR[R07[a kt OciN.e�
Y-a r•w�. pC-mm Y OPMLS
:a�w Rliew�iai+irTi'iis`Tr� m •awrw¢_aai �w."'�.C`.`.iTiw�'Jo°R�i�w.0 � �'�•9 \ e' Is-t
- RawR Rlw wRa w�aw aRwwwa w�we�.nwa.a pll( O TRwrwL-ow. i
S \
■ram-'iw�w'wMwwr rwopswp M�4�lw11a 4�. 'OR�a'� s rRww l4wlwl � 5N-1
�i.�mRw sRwsww�s wat O rar.u..wwa.

APPENDIX B-MODELING FILES
The CD included with this modeling report contains all of the input and output data files used to
generate the results in this report. The following tables list each of the files provided on the CD.
TABLE B-1. INPUT METEOROLOGICAL FILES
Filename Description
NOR 1988.SFC Input surface meteorological data for 1988
NOR 1988.PFL Input profile meteorological data for 1988
NOR 1989.SFC Input surface meteorological data for 1989
NOR 1989.PFL Input profile meteorological data for 1989
NOR 1990.SFC Input surface meteorological data for 1990
NOR 1990.PFL Input profile meteorological data for 1990
NOR 1991.SFC Input surface meteorological data for 1991
NOR 1991.PFL Input profile meteorological data for 1991
NOR 1992.SFC Input surface meteorological data for 1992
NOR 1992.PFL Input profile meteorological data for 1992
TABLE B-2. INPUT NED DATA
Filename Description
92189692.tif Input NED file
67961406.tif Input NED file
53444946.tif Input NED file
49252954.tif Input NED file
27907626.tif Input NED file
04599649.tif Input NED file
TABLE B-3. BPIP DATA
Filename Description
Bpip Input file Downwash file
Bpip Output file Downwash file
Bpip Summary file Downwash file
Wellons Energy Solutions Group Trinity Consultants
Lewiston Site B-1 103402.0195

TABLE B-4. AERMAP DATA
Filename Description
Aermap domain detail file AERMAP file
Aermap input file AERMAP file
Aermap map detail file AERMAP file
Aermap map parameters file AERMAP file
Aermap receptor file AERMAP file
Aermap source file AERMAP file
Model input and output files were named in accordance with the following scheme:
S itenamePollutantYY.ext
Where:
Sitename=Lewiston
Pollutant=Pollutant modeled
YY=Year modeled(i.e. 88 for 1988)
ext=Type of file(i.e. "ami"for the input file,"aml"for the output file)
TABLE B-5. EXAMPLE MODELING INPUT AND OUTPUT FILES:ACROLEIN
Filename Description
LewistonAcroleinWami Input File
LewistonAcrolein89.ami Input File
LewistonAcrolein90.ami Input File
LewistonAcrolein9l.ami Input File
LewistonAcrolein92.ami Input File
LewistonAcrolein88.am1 Output File
LewistonAcrolein89.aml Output File
LewistonAcrolein90.aml Output File
LewistonAcrolein91.aml Output File
LewistonAcrolein92.aml Output File
Wellons Energy Solutions Group Trinity Consultants
Lewiston Site B-2 103402.0195

APPENDIX C-MODELING PROTOCOL CHECKLIST
Wellons Energy Solutions Group Trinity Consultants
Lewiston Site C-1 103402.0195

North Carolina.Modeling Protocol Checklist
The North Carolina Modeling Protocol Checklist may be used in lieu of developing the traditional written modeling plan for North Carolina
toxics and criteria pollutant modeling. The protocol checklist is designed to provide the same level
of informationas requested in a modeling
protocol as discussed in Chapter 2 of the Guideline for Evaluating the Air Quality Impacts of lox/c ol l utants in North Carolina. The
modeling protocol checklist is submitted with the modeling analysis.
Although most of the information requested in the modeling protocol checklist is self explanatory, additional comments are provided,
where applicable,and are discussed in greater detail in the toxics modeling guidelines referenced above. References to sections,tables,
figures,appendices,etc.,in the protocol checklist are found in the toxics modeling guidelines.
INSTRUCTIONS: The modeling report supporting the compliance demonstration should include most of the information listed below. As
appropriate,answer the following questions or indicate by check mark the information provided or action taken is reflected in your report.
FACILITY INFORMATION
Name: W.E. Partners I1,LLC Consultant(if applicable):
Facility ID: NA Trinity Consultants
Address: 3539 Governors Rd 325 Arlington Avenue, Suite 500
Lewiston Woodville,NC 27849 Charlotte,NC 28203
Contact Name: Garald Cottrell, General Manager Contact Name: Tom Muscenti, Managing Consultant
Phone Number: [phone] Phone Number: [phone]
Email: garald.cottrell(awellons.com Email: [e-mail]
GENERAL
Description of New Source or Source/Process Modification:provide a short description of the new or Report,
modified source(s)and a brief discussion of how this change affects facility production or process operation. Section 1
Source/Pollutant Identification:provide a table of the affected pollutants,by source,which identifies the source Report,
type(point,area,or volume),maximum pollutant emission rates over the applicable averaging period(s),and,for point Section 3
sources,indicate if the stack is capped or non-vertical(C/N).
Pollutant Emission Rate Calculations: indicate how the pollutant emission rates were derived(e.g.,AP-42, Report,
mass balance,etc.)and where applicable,provide the calculations. Section 3
Site/Facility Diagram:provide a diagram or drawing showing the location of all existing and proposed emission Report,
sources,buildings or structures,public right-of-ways,and the facility property(toxics)/fence line(criteria pollutants) Appendix A
boundaries. The diagram should also include a scale,true north indicator,and the UTM or latitude/longitude of at least
one point.
Certified Plat or Signed Survey:a certified plat(map)from the County Register of Deeds or a signed survey Report,
must be submitted to validate property boundaries modeled. Appendix A
Topographic Map: A topographic map covering approximately 5km around the facility must be submitted. The Report,
facility boundaries should be annotated on the map as accurately as possible. Appendix D
Cavity Impact Analysis:If using SCREENS,a cavity impact analysis must be conducted for all structures with a
region of influence extending to one or more sources modeled to determine if cavity regions extend off property NA
(toxics)or beyond the fence line(criteria pollutants). No separate cavity analysis is required if using AERMOD. See
Section 4.2
Ii

GENERAL (continued)
Background Concentrations (criteria pollutant analyses only): Background concentrations must be determined
for each pollutant for each averaging period evaluated. The averaged background value used(e.g.,high,high-second-
high,high-third-high,etc.)is based on the pollutant and averaging period evaluated. The background concentrations NA
are added to the modeled concentrations,which are then compared to the applicable air quality standard to determine
compliance.
Offsite Source Inventories(criteria pollutant analyses only): Offsite source inventories must be developed and
modeled for all pollutants for which onsite sources emissions are modeled in excess of the specific pollutant significant NA
impact levels(SILs)as defined in the PSD New Source Review Workshop Manual. The DAQ AQAB must approve
the inventories. An initial working inventory can be requested from the AQAB.
SCREEN LEVEL MODELING
Model: The latest version of the SCREEN3 model must be used until AERSCREEN is developed and approved. The NA
use of other screening models should be approved by NCDAQ prior to submitting the modeling report.
Source/Source emission parameters: Provide a table listing the sources modeled and the applicable source NA
emission parameters. See NC Form 3—Appendix A.
Merged Sources: Identify merged sources and show all appropriate calculations. See Section 3.3 NA
GEP Analysis: SCREEN3—for each source modeled,show all calculations identifying the critical structure used in NA
the model run. See section 3.2 and NC Form I-Appendix A.
Cavity Impact Analysis: A cavity impact analysis using SCREEN3 must be conducted for all structures with a NA
region of influence extending to one or more sources modeled to determine if cavity regions extend off property
(toxics)or beyond the fence line(criteria pollutants). See Section 4.2
Terrain:Indicate the terrain modeled: simple(Section 4.4),and complex (Section 4.5 and NCFo?m 4—Appendix
A). If complex terrain is within 5 kilometers of the facility,complex terrain must be evaluated. Simple terrain must
include terrain elevations if any terrain is greater than the stack base of any source modeled. NA
Simple: Complex:
Meteorology:In SCREENS, select full meteorology. NA
Receptors: SCREEN3—use shortest distance to property boundary for each source modeled and use sufficient range NA
to find maximum(See Section 4.1 (1)and 0)). Terrain above stack base must be evaluated.
Modeling Results: For each affected pollutant,modeling results should be summarized,converted to the applicable NA
averaging period(See Table 3),and presented in tabular format indicating compliance status with the applicable AAL,
SIL or NAAQS. See NC Form SS—Appendix A.
Modeling Files: Either electronic or hard copies of SCREEN3 output must be submitted. NA

REFINED LEVEL MODELING
Model: The latest version of AERMOD should be used,and may be found at Report,
http://www.epa.gov/scram001/dispersion_prefrec.htm. The use of other refined models must be approved by NCDAQ Section 2.1
prior to submitting the modeling report.
Source/Source emission parameters: Provide a table listing the sources modeled and the applicable source Report,
emission parameters. See NC Form 3-Appendix A. Section 3.2
GEP Analysis: Use BPIF-Prime with AERMOD. Section
2.6,App.B
Cavity Impact Analysis: No separate cavity analysis is required when using AERMOD as long as receptors are NA
placed in cavity susceptible areas. See Section 4.2 and 5.2.
Terrain: Use digital elevation data from the USGS NED database htt //seamiess.us s. ov/index. h Use of other Report,
g ( p� g g p p)
sources of terrain elevations or the non-regulatory Flat Terrain option will require prior approval from DAQ AQAB. Section 2.3
Receptors:The receptor grid should be of sufficient size and resolution to identify the maximum pollutant impact. Report,
See Section 5.3.
Section 2.7
Meteorology:Indicate the AQAB,pre-processed,5-year data set used in the modeling demonstration:
(See Section 5.5 and Appendix B)
AERMOD Norfolk_Virginia and Wallops Island Virginia
If processing your own raw meteorology,then pre-approval from AQAB is required. Additional documentation files
(e.g. AERMET stage processing files)will also be necessary.
For NC toxics,the modeling demonstration requires only the last year of the standard 5 year data set(e.g.,2005)
provided the maximum impacts are less than 50%of the applicable AAL s .
Modeling Results:For each affected pollutant and averaging period,modeling results should be summarized and Report,
presented in tabular format indicating compliance status with the applicable AAL,SIL or NAAQS. See NC Form R5-
Appendix A. Section 4
Modeling Files: Submit input and output files for AERMOD. Also include BPIF-Prime files,AERMAP files,DEM Report,
files,and any AERMET input and output files,including raw meteorological data. Appendix B

APPENDIX D-AREA TOPOGRAPHICAL MAP
Wellons Energy Solutions Group Trinity Consultants
Lewiston Site D-1 103402.0195

�- -. -y. -. - • Y W. ... ... .. ..-_�.�... ...- -.._._.�... ..._- _ .. ..... - - - _--__--_
--�'s
- ------ { ----- - --- - % .
oodville
- -------------------i --•--•---•------ r `---- - - -----.-'tl'l' ,"-_-'-"-----'-- -r---- ------
---` - •- -;-
i
1n �
■i

Article Vill. Wellons Energy Background Material
71 IPage

Mr� ELLONS
Energy Solutions Group
Providing Capital,
Expertise and Equipment
Solutions for Biomass
Thermal and Cogeneration
Systems

Providing • •
partners,Wellons Energy Solutions, in conjunction with our
divisional . . . .
challenging project on a turn-key basis. Elements of
.�
a project that Wellons can provide include:
• Preliminary
�•"
Feasibility .
Proposal• Development
• Equipment Design/Selection
Project• • • .
Financing• Operations
"
Suitability• Fuel
• Building Design• Project Design
i b
Project•
• •
• Fuel Procurement
Providing Answers:
By establishing formal partnerships with financial
institutions, Wellons has the capability of providing
•
biomass steam plants utilizing innovative capital
t. a�
structures. Typical projects provide IRR's in excess of
1 ' payback • • positive operating cash
Challenge:
North Carolina-based chemical company, utilizing 45,000 pounds per hour of high
pressure saturated steam, had experienced rapidly increasing utility costs for natural
gas. In addition, corporate management had established acorporate-wide goal of 20%
reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and 20% renewable energy target.
Solution:
Two (2) 600 HP reciprocating grate biomass boilers capable of 41,000 pph of saturated
steam.Yearly savings projected to exceed $2,600,000 per year. In addition, the biomass
proposal provided a projected 21% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions while imple-
menting a proven renewable energy technology. Wellons Energy Solutions secured
project financing which provided for financing with a 60-month FMV lease.
*Savings will vary based on boiler size,fuel type, efficiency of existing boiler, boiler utilization and biomass
fuel selection. Engineering analysis will document projected savings upon project implementation.
i� YI

' I
• • • • • • •
i
Design Consultation
- Provide preliminary feasibility studies
- Identify fuel suppliers and coordinate fuel delivery contracts
- Assist in evaluating applicability of cogeneration and securing necessary
Power Purchase Agreements
` - Coordinate design of facility with manufacturing engineering support
Finance
` - Facilitate lender relationships to ensure project suitability for long-term financing
- Provide Design, Build, Own and Operate proposals that encompasses no capital
investment on behalf of the steam host
- Review of applicable Federal and State Renewable Energy Tax Credit and
Grant Incentives
Equipment Manufacturing and Procurement
- Manufacture and procure new equipment
- Wellons will, as a vertically integrated manufacturer, supply all material receiving,
classifying, storage, combustion and environmental emissions control equipment
Construction Installation and Management
- Evaluate proposed site selection and provide alternative solutions if appropriate
- Supervise site preparation
I� - Manage facility construction by Wellons as the General Contractor and
appropriate sub-contractors as required
Start-up, Training and Maintenance
- Provide start-up and commissioning services
- Provide on-site training to customer's operators
j - Offer service and maintenance contracts
` - Oversee warranty issues
h - Assist with environmental and safety compliance inspections
I
I
`r
f
• Design Consultation
• Material Procurement
• Construction Management
• Training and Maintenance
• Project Financing

Wellons Energy Solutions, a division of Wellons, Inc., is an alternative energy proj-
ect developer that specializes in biomass steam and cogeneration projects for
industrial manufacturers. Headquartered in High Point, NC, the division was
founded in 2006 to own and operate inside-the-fence biomass cogeneration
projects at large manufacturing facilities. By leveraging Wellons' 40 years of
technical knowledge and extensive experience, exemplified by more than 350
installations, Wellons Energy Solutions is positioned to be a leader in the design,
build, own and operate biomass cogeneration market.
Wellons has been a leader in providing biomass steam systems since 1965 and has
an impeccable track record of success in deploying biomass steam plants
throughout North America and Europe. In addition to the steam generation-only
projects, Wellons has successfully installed more than 40 cogeneration facilities
and brings a long record of success installing power generation equipment. J
I
I
Wellons is capable, with the CERTIFICATE OF CERTIFICATE OF
AUTHORIZATION AUTHORIZATION
H, S, U and R accreditation UV
and General Contractor's _
license, of providing the full
scope of project design and
build as well as own and
operate should our customers Z Z
wish to evaluate a steam
purchase agreement option. a»="" n •w"�"
We look forward to discussing
how biomass cogeneration — a
may be the option of choice
for your steam generation
® CERTIFICATE OF THE NATIONAL BOARD
needs. AUTHORIZATION �T—".......
. •C"Vf,,te fAatFonzation
�Ry i
l
■� �ft LON S
Energy Solutions Group
1836 Eastchester Dr. Suite 108
High Point, NC 27265
P: 360.750.3500 _
P: 360.750.3583 - s—
F: 360.750.3483
www.Wellons.com
s3009:Wellons Energy Solutions Groop-Wellons,In..
I