Appendices

Appendix A: List of sectors targeted within Ontario Regulation 419/05

Note: A fossil-fuel electric power generation facility with a maximum electrical power output capacity of less than 25 megawatts shall be deemed not to be part of the class identified by NAICS code 221112 (Fossil-Fuel Electric Power Generation).

Notes:

1. A mobile PCB destruction facility within the meaning of Regulation 352 of the Revised Regulations of Ontario, 1990 (Mobile PCB Destruction Facilities) made under the Act shall be deemed not to be part of the class identified by NAICS code 5622 (Waste Treatment and Disposal); and
2. A facility shall be deemed not to be part of the class identified by NAICS code 5622 (Waste Treatment and Disposal) unless the facility,
   • is a solid waste combustor or incinerator, or
   • is used for hazardous waste treatment or disposal.

Appendix B: Supporting information for the assessment of the significance of contaminants and sources

B.1 Screening–Out contaminants that are emitted in negligible amounts

The product of a conservative dispersion modelling factor (in micrograms per cubic metre per gram per second emission) and the aggregate facility-wide emission rate of a contaminant (using the appropriate averaging period) can be compared to the corresponding ministry POI Limit as a means to conservatively but simply assess POI concentrations as appropriate. A series of appropriate conservative dispersion modelling factors have been developed for a short stack on a 6 metre tall building in combination with distances from the stack, as set out below.

This Table contains three columns. The first column contains the distance from the source, and the remaining two columns contain the corresponding Dispersion Factor. The second column contains values that are to be used if modelling in urban areas, while the third column is to be used if modelling in rural areas. Refer to the ministry guidance document titled Air Dispersion Modelling Guideline for Ontario, 2005 for urban and rural definitions.

If the aggregate facility-wide emission rate of a contaminant multiplied by the appropriate dispersion factor from Table B-1 Guidance for Screening-Out with Dispersion Factors (Table values based on 1 hour average) is less than the ministry POI Limit (or converted to a 24-hour average concentration in the case of 24-hour average ministry POI Limit) then the assessment for that contaminant is complete.

For cases where a facility has some significant emission sources of a contaminant and other sources with small emission rates, the following approach may be used:

• sum the emissions from the less significant sources and multiply the sum by the appropriate dispersion factor;
• Add resulting concentration to the screen3 or tier 2 or 3 model results for the more significant sources of that contaminant to assess against the ministry POI Limit.

However, if the maximum concentration for the less significant sources is less than 5% of the ministry POI Limit (consistent with the conditions identified in Chapter 6.2 Description of the Contaminants that May be Discharged of this Procedure Document) those sources can be dropped from further assessments for that contaminant. Alternatively the maximum concentration for the less significant sources could be added to screen3 or tier 2 or 3 modelling results for the more significant sources of that contaminant to assess against the ministry POI Limit. The rationale for assessing contaminants and sources as insignificant must be documented in the ESDM report.

Contaminants without ministry POI Limits that can be considered insignificant in specific situations

If the substance is listed in the ministry document, “Summary of Standards and Guidelines to Support Ontario Regulation 419/05: Air Pollution – Local Air Quality” (PIBS # 6569e) or the document “Jurisdictional Screening Level (JSL) List - A Screening Tool for Ontario Regulation 419: Air Pollution – Local Air Quality” (PIBS # 6547e) (JSL list), then the following de minimus or threshold concentrations are not applicable. The following table presents de minimus concentrations, by contaminant type/group, for contaminants that are not listed in the above-noted document.

Notes:

1. List of ministry POI Limits = ministry document “Summary of Standards and Guidelines to Support Ontario Regulation 419/05: Air Pollution – Local Air Quality” (as amended from time to time);
2. JSL List = ministry document “Jurisdictional Screening Level (JSL) List – A Screening Tool for Ontario Regulation 419: Air Pollution – Local Air Quality” (PIBS # 6547e) as amended or updated

B.2 Screening-Out sources that may emit contaminants in negligible amounts

An explanation of how it was determined that a contaminant is discharged in a negligible amount must be provided. The results of this assessment may be summarized in a Sources and Contaminants Identification Table. A facility may emit a contaminant in a significant amount but there may be some sources that emit this contaminant in a negligible amount.

Table B-3A lists examples of sources that likely emit contaminants in negligible amounts. Regardless of the guidance provided in these tables, when a source listed in Table B-3A is screened out as negligible, a ministry reviewer may at any time request an additional explanation on a case by case basis to justify the assertion that the source emits a negligible amount of contaminant. Table B-3B lists examples of sources that may emit contaminants in negligible amounts but an additional rationale is needed.

Section 8 of the Regulation sets out requirements for assessing negligible sources of contaminant(s). The Director has the authority to require a person who discharges or causes or permits discharges of a contaminant to consider a source of contaminant as not being negligible (see subsection 8 (2) of the Regulation). For more information on negligible sources, please refer to Chapters 6 Initial Identification Of Sources And Contaminants and 7 Assessment Of The Significance Of Contaminants And Sources of this Procedure Document.

Table B-3A: Specific Examples of Sources that Likely Emit Contaminants in Negligible Amounts

• Minor surface coating operations within larger operations such as a touch up paint booth at an automotive manufacturing facility.
• Chemical storage room ventilation.
• Fume hoods for laboratories that are used for quality control and quality assurance purposes at industrial facilities.
• Parts washers for maintenance shops.
• On-site storage tanks and facilities that are used for fueling on-site vehicles.
• Battery chargers.
• Storage and emission of nitrogen and oxygen.
• Small maintenance and janitorial activities.
• Exhaust of inert gases.

One standby power generator unit rated less than 700 kilowatts (for more information see Table B-3B Examples of Sources that may Emit Contaminants in Negligible Amounts).

Appendix C: Reference material for emission rate estimating

The following Table C-1: Emission Rate Estimating Reference Material is a summary list of websites (which may change with time but are accurate according to the date of this Addendum) that may assist in obtaining emissions information for specific sources. This list is not exhaustive and only intended as additional guidance.

This Table C-1: Emission Rate Estimating Reference Material contains two columns. The first column contains the name of the reference material, the second column contains a description of reference material.

Table C-2: Summary of some useful equations and general guidance

Evaporation equation

This equation (provided by staff of the ministry, Environmental Monitoring and Reporting Branch), may be used to approximate evaporation rates from spills, open tanks, drums or pools:

Q = (8.5 × 10⁻¹⁰) × A_p × P* × M × (u)^0.78 (kg/s at 293 K or 20°C)

Where;

Q

evaporation rate (vapour release rate), kg/s at 293 K or 20°C

A_p

pool area, in square metres

P*

partial vapour pressure (this can be estimated from the liquid mole-fraction), Pascal’s

M

molecular weight, (summation of individual element molecular weights)

u

wind speed, metres per second

For evaporation rates at temperatures other than 293 K or 20°C, use

Q_t= Q × (P_t ⁄ P_{293 K}) × (293 ⁄ T_t); kg/s at T_t K

Notes:

1. The wind speed can be estimated from site-specific data; or an assumption of typical wind-speed (i.e., 5 m/s for outdoor and 1 m/s for indoors).
2. Molecular weight can be calculated from the chemical formula for the compound and use of the periodic table.
3. Partial vapour pressures for mixtures of compounds can be approximated from the equation/pro-ratio procedure set out below.
4. The above equations will be conservative for situations where the liquid level is well-below the tank/drum top. See the TANKS program (US EPA, US EPA TTN web-site) for guidance on how to account for this situation.

Approximating the vapour pressure within a mixture of compounds

In many cases it is necessary to estimate the vapour pressure of a specific compound within a liquid mixture (contained in a drum, tank, etc.) where the Material Safety Data Sheet for the mixture includes only a vapour pressure for the mixture at standard temperature and pressure. The following approach can be used to estimate emissions of constituent ‘i’ in the liquid mixture. However, this procedure is only a “rough” approximation using Raoult’s Law.

For an ideal solution, the equilibrium partial pressure, P*_i , of constituent ‘i’, in a mixture at a fixed temperature equals the product of it’s vapour pressure, P_i , when pure at this temperature and its mole fraction in the liquid, M_f-l …

P*_i = P_i x M_f-l

where M_f-l = [ (mass fraction in liquid of i) ÷ (molecular weight of i) ] ⁄ [Summation of (mass fraction/molecular weight) for all constituents]

Notes:

The vapour pressure, P_i (in Pascal where 1 atmosphere= 101.3 kilopascals or 14.7 psi or 760 mm mercury), of constituent ‘i’ can be identified from reference texts such as Perry’s.

This Table C-2: Summary Of Some Useful Equations And General Guidance Continued contains just one column, and is intended to emphasize its contents.

1. Approximating the specific volume of a gas (from Ideal Gas Law)

V = (T ÷ 460) ⁄ (1.369 × M_w), ft³/lb

where;

V

specific volume, cubic feet per pound of gas;

T

temperature, degrees Fahrenheit

M_w

molecular weight, (summation of individual element molecular weights)

Conversion to cubic metres per kilogram: multiply the above by (2.2046 ⁄ 35.315) or (0.0624).

2. Approximating particulate emissions from baghouses

An emission factor of 0.01 grains/ft³ or ~20 milligrams per cubic metre (mg/m³) of gas can be assumed at the outlet of a fabric filter dust collector. In cases of sites with multiple baghouse (also known as fabric filter dust collectors) discharging simultaneously, an emission factor of 20 mg/m³ can be assumed for the most significant dust collector and 10 mg/m³ for the remaining units.

A review of ministry compiled source testing data (n=96) for fabric filter dust collectors between 1994-2007 showed that 90% of the measured particulate outlet concentrations were below 20 mg/m³ and the mean of the test results were approximately 9 mg/m³. These tests were conducted on a wide range of dust collector types at numerous industrial and waste management facilities and are considered to have a data quality of “Average“ to “Above- Average” as all of the tests were conducted under approved pre-test plans and the results were validated by the ministry. The results of this analysis support a reasonable level of “conservatism” in using the above emission factors where no other emission estimation information is available for the fabric filtration devices.

The review of this source test data also indicated that a segment of the test results measured concentrations below 10 mg/m³. Proponents proposing to use emission factor(s) of less than 20 mg/m³ or 10 mg/m³ (as applicable to emission estimation scenario under consideration) will need to demonstrate that the fabric filter dust collector has been selected/designed appropriately for the source of emissions and is maintained and monitored to ensure that filtration is occurring under optimal conditions. If the proponent can demonstrate the above, which are indicators of a system that is capable of consistently operating at a lower outlet loading, then at the discretion of the review engineer, emission factors less than 20 mg/m³ or 10 mg/m³ (as applicable to emission estimation scenario under consideration) may be accepted. These claims can be substantiated by providing information such as: validated source tests, design information (i.e. air to cloth ratios, bag materials…) documentation of proper operation and maintenance practices and the presence of bag leak detection devices (where warranted).

In summary, the following scenarios can guide the development of particulate emission estimating for baghouses:

1. Facilities with a single baghouse: 20 mg/m³.
2. Facilities with multiple simultaneously operating units: 20 mg/m³ for the most significant baghouse and 10 mg/m³ for other units.
3. Facilities that use a baghouse to control particulate emissions (other than the metals listed in item 4, below) and have a dust collector maintenance program: can use a lower particulate outlet loading than identified in items 1 and 2, above provided this is supported with appropriate information such as: validated source tests, design information (i.e. air to cloth ratios, bag materials, etc.) and documentation of proper operation and maintenance practices.
4. Facilities that use a baghouse to control particulate emissions (that include priority metals such as arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel and vanadium) and have a bag leak detection/alarm system: can use a lower particulate outlet loading than identified in items 1 and 2, above provided this is supported with appropriate information such as: validated source tests, design information (i.e. air to cloth ratios, bag materials, etc.) and documentation of proper operation and maintenance practices.

References: United States Environmental Protection Agency, “Handbook – Control Technology for Hazardous Air Pollutants, June 1991, EPA/625/6-91/014”; section 3.3.1 Control Techniques for Particulate from Point Sources, Page 3-14 and section 4.9.4 Determination of Baghouse Operating Parameters, Page 4-70 and 4-71. Ministry source testing data from 1994-2007.

3. Approximating Isocyanate emissions

Many spray-painting operations include the use of an isocyanate-based catalyst/activator. Recent information has caused the ministry to consider re-evaluating the acceptable emission rate estimating calculations from painting operations for a number of hexamethylene diisocyanate compounds (HDI). In 2004 (tests conducted between June and August of 2004), ministry worked with representatives of industrial users and suppliers of HDI and coatings containing these compounds, to implement a study to develop air emission factors. HDI emission factors were developed for the following situations:

• Down-draft type spray booth with high volume low pressure (HVLP) spray guns using a high solids content coating;
• Down-draft spray booth with conventional spray guns using a low solids content coating; and
• Water-wash type spray booth with electrostatic conventional gun and a high solids content coating (i.e., typically, assembly-line type applications).

This information is available in a technical bulletin “Emission Factors For 1,6-Hexamethylene Diisocyanate (HDI) Emissions From Spray Booth Operations”, dated April 2006 is available on the ministry website.

This Table C-2: Summary Of Some Useful Equations And General Guidance Continued contains contains just one column, and is intended to emphasize its contents.

Appendix D : ESDM report Check-List and Suggested Format for an ESDM report

Download ESDM Modelling Report Checklist.

Suggested Table of Contents for an ESDM report

Executive Summary and Emission Summary Tab

1. Introduction and Facility Description
2. Initial Identification of Sources and Contaminants
3. Assessment of the Significance of Contaminants and Sources
4. Operating Conditions, Emission rate estimating and Data Quality
5. Source Summary Table and Site Plan
6. Dispersion Modelling
7. Emission Summary Table and Conclusions

Appendices

List of Insignificant Sources
Supporting Calculations
Dispersion Modelling Files

List of Tables

Sources and Contaminants Identification Table
Source Summary Table
Emission Summary Table

List of Figures

Site Plan
Zoning Designation Plan
Dispersion Modelling Map - Chemical X

Notes:

1. It is recommended that an ESDM report prepared in support of an application for CofA should include a completed Emission Summary and Dispersion Modelling Report Checklist
2. Alternate formats for an ESDM report are acceptable if they comply with the ESDM report requirements of the Regulation.

Download Suggested Formats for an ESDM Report

Appendix E : Guidance for standards with annual averages

Estimation of particulate emissions from paved and unpaved roads

For vehicles travelling on roads at industrial sites, particulate emissions are estimated based on the US EPA, AP-42 Emission Factors Guide, Section 13.2.1 for paved roads, and Section 13.2.2 for unpaved roads. For Ontario, this guidance is only applicable for standards with annual averaging times. For compliance with shorter term (24-hour) standards, the use of precipitation corrections must not be used. AP-42 states “Equation 1 may be extrapolated to average uncontrolled conditions (but including natural mitigation) under the simplifying assumption that annual (or other long-term) average emissions are inversely proportional to the frequency of measurable (> 0.254 mm [ 0.01 inch]) precipitation by application of a precipitation correction term.”

In addition, AP 42 the guidance notes that these assumptions have not been validated in any way, and thus the data quality must be downgraded by one level if they’re used. Data quality is also downgraded if default silt loadings are used – this could result in uncertain data quality “D”.

Methodology

The methodology assumed that annual (or other long-term) average emissions are inversely proportional to the frequency of measurable (> 0.254 mm [0.01 inch]) precipitation by application of a precipitation correction term. For assessment of annual averaging periods, the daily precipitation correction term is recommended. This correction factor would be applied equally to all hours in the modelling period, to provide an average reduction due to natural mitigation.

Paved Roads - Daily Basis:

For the daily basis, emissions from vehicles travelling on paved roads are estimated based on Equation 1 (see Section 13.2.1 of AP-42 Guide for details).

(1) E_ext = [ k (sL)^0.91 × (W)^1.02 ] (1 − P ⁄ 4N)

where:

E_ext

annual or other long-term average emission factor,

k

particle size multiplier for particle size range,

sL

road surface silt loading,

W

average weight of the vehicles travelling the road,

P

number of "wet" days with at least 0.254 mm (0.01 in) of precipitation during the averaging period, and

N

number of days in the averaging period (e.g., 365 for annual).

Table G-1 Percentage (Number) Of Days And Hours Above 0.254 mm Of Precipitation In Ontario presents the value of day percent for the term “P ⁄ N” in the above equation, which is the percentage of days above 0.254 mm of precipitation, produced by ministry based on a 5-year average Ontario-specific data.

Information on the “sL” silt loading term can be developed on a site-specific basis from Appendix C.1 of AP-42 Guide.

AP 42 also references a correction factor based on hourly data. This approach is generally not recommended as it would be applicable only in specific modelling approaches. If any proponent has questions about using the hourly correction, they should contact EMRB for additional guidance.

Unpaved Roads - Daily Basis:

For the daily basis, emissions from vehicles traveling on unpaved surfaces are estimated from Equation 3 (see Section 13.2.2 of AP-42 Guide for details):

E_ext = E [(365 − P)] ⁄ 365]

where:

E_ext

annual size-specific emission factor extrapolated for natural mitigation,

E

size-specific emission factor,

P

number of days in a year with at least 0.254 mm (0.01 in) of precipitation.

Table G-1 Percentage (Number) Of Days And Hours Above 0.254 mm Of Precipitation In Ontario gives the value of P, which is the number of days in a year above 0.254 mm precipitation.