DAQ-2024-010416

DAQE-AN124440011-24

{{$d1 }}

Chris Rose
Staker Parson Companies
89 West 13490 South, Suite 100
Draper, UT 84020
[e-mail]

Dear Mr. Rose:

Re: Approval Order: Modification to Approval Order DAQE-AN124440009-18 to Add Fuel Storage
Tanks, a Dust Mill, Drilling, and Blasting Operations
Project Number: N124440011

The attached Approval Order (AO) is issued pursuant to the Notice of Intent (NOI) received on May 26,
2023. Staker Parson Companies must comply with the requirements of this AO, all applicable state
requirements (R307), and Federal Standards.

The project engineer for this action is Mr. Enqiang He, who can be contacted at [phone] or
[e-mail]. Future correspondence on this AO should include the engineer's name as well as the
DAQE number shown on the upper right-hand corner of this letter. No public comments were received on
this action.

Sincerely,

{{$s }}

Bryce C. Bird
Director

BCB:EH:jg

cc: Utah County Health Department

195 North 1950 West • Salt Lake City, UT
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 144820 • Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4820
Telephone [phone] • Fax [phone] • T.D.D. [phone]
www.deq.utah.gov
Printed on 100% recycled paper
State of Utah

SPENCER J. COX
Governor

DEIDRE HENDERSON
Lieutenant Governor

Department of
Environmental Quality

Kimberly D. Shelley
Executive Director

DIVISION OF AIR QUALITY
Bryce C. Bird
Director

August 13, 2024

STATE OF UTAH
Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Air Quality

{{#s=Sig_es_:signer1:signature}}
{{#d1=date1_es_:signer1:date:format(date, "mmmm d, yyyy")}}
{{#d2=date1_es_:signer1:date:format(date, "mmmm d, yyyy"):align(center)}}

APPROVAL ORDER
DAQE-AN124440011-24
Modification to Approval Order DAQE-AN124440009-18
to Add Fuel Storage Tanks, a Dust Mill, Drilling ,
and Blasting Operations

Prepared By
Mr. Enqiang He, Engineer
[phone]
[e-mail]

Issued to
Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry

Issued On
{{$d2 }}

Issued By

{{$s }}

Bryce C. Bird
Director
Division of Air Quality

August 13, 2024
TABLE OF CONTENTS

TITLE/SIGNATURE PAGE ....................................................................................................... 1
GENERAL INFORMATION ...................................................................................................... 3
CONTACT/LOCATION INFORMATION ............................................................................... 3
SOURCE INFORMATION ........................................................................................................ 3
General Description ................................................................................................................ 3
NSR Classification .................................................................................................................. 3
Source Classification .............................................................................................................. 3
Applicable Federal Standards ................................................................................................. 3
Project Description.................................................................................................................. 4
SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS .................................................................................................... 4
SECTION I: GENERAL PROVISIONS .................................................................................... 5
SECTION II: PERMITTED EQUIPMENT .............................................................................. 5
SECTION II: SPECIAL PROVISIONS ..................................................................................... 7
PERMIT HISTORY ................................................................................................................... 12
ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................................... 13

DAQE-AN124440011-24
Page 3

GENERAL INFORMATION

CONTACT/LOCATION INFORMATION

Owner Name Source Name
Staker Parson Companies Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry

Mailing Address Physical Address
89 West 13490 South, Suite 100 12370 South West Mountain Highway
Draper, UT 84020 Genola, UT

Source Contact UTM Coordinates
Name: Chris Rose 430,716 m Easting
Phone: [phone],428,598 m Northing
Email: [e-mail] Datum NAD83
UTM Zone 12

SIC code 1442 (Construction Sand & Gravel)

SOURCE INFORMATION
General Description
Staker Parson Companies operates an aggregate and asphalt processing plant at its Keigley Quarry in
Utah County. The aggregate processing plant includes crushers, screens, conveyors/stackers, feeders, and
loaders. The asphalt plant is equipped with a hot-mix asphalt plant and associated baghouse, storage silos
and bins, a wash plant, a feeder, and support equipment including oil heaters, conveyors, loaders,
bulldozers, and holding tanks. The dust mill includes a feeder, a hopper, a grinder, a furnace, silos, and
dust collectors. Annual production is limited to 6 million tons of aggregate, 0.5 million tons of asphalt,
and 0.1 million tons of rock dust.

NSR Classification
Minor Modification at Minor Source

Source Classification
Located in Southern Wasatch Front O3 NAA, Provo CO Maintenance Area, Provo UT PM2.5 NAA
Utah County
Airs Source Size: SM

Applicable Federal Standards
NSPS (Part 60), A: General Provisions
NSPS (Part 60), I: Standards of Performance for Hot Mix Asphalt Facilities
NSPS (Part 60), OOO: Standards of Performance for Nonmetallic Mineral Processing Plants
MACT (Part 63), A: General Provisions
DAQE-AN124440011-24
Page 4

MACT (Part 63), CCCCCC: National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Source Category: Gasoline Dispensing Facilities
Title V (Part 70) Area Source

Project Description
Staker Parson Companies has proposed to:

1. Add a dust mill to the Keigley Quarry. Processed aggregate will be conveyed and transferred to a
grinder, where the aggregate is pulverized into rock dust. The rock dust is flash-dried by a furnace and
then transferred to a storage silo. The rock dust is then conveyed to a fully enclosed bagging operation.
The bagged rock dust will then be shipped out to customers. The source proposes to produce 100,000 tons
of rock dust per year. The emissions from the dust mill will be added to the site’s total PTE.

2. Add drilling and blasting operations to the Keigley Quarry. The source proposes to conduct 24 blasts a
year and use 20 tons of ANFO per blast. The emissions from the drilling and blasting operations will be
added to the site’s total PTE.

3. Add three (3) fuel storage tanks. The source proposes to install one (1) 10,000-gallon diesel fuel tank,
one (1) 4,000-gallon diesel fuel tank, and one (1) 1,000-gallon gasoline tank. The emissions from the new
fuel storage tanks will be added to the site’s total PTE.

SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS

The emissions listed below are an estimate of the total potential emissions from the source. Some
rounding of emissions is possible.

Criteria Pollutant Change (TPY) Total (TPY)
CO2 Equivalent 1580 9830.00
Carbon Monoxide 16.43 48.98
Nitrogen Oxides 5.49 19.44
Particulate Matter - PM10 1.74 75.49
Particulate Matter - PM2.5 0.49 29.54
Sulfur Dioxide 0.48 15.69
Volatile Organic Compounds 0.35 8.35

Hazardous Air Pollutant Change (lbs/yr) Total (lbs/yr)
Acetaldehyde (CAS #75070) 0 660
Acrolein (CAS #107028) 0 20
Benzene (Including Benzene From Gasoline) (CAS #71432) 0 200
Ethyl Benzene (CAS #100414) 0 120
Formaldehyde (CAS #50000) 0 1560
Generic HAPs (CAS #GHAPS) 0 300
Hexane (CAS #110543) 0 460
Naphthalene (CAS #91203) 0 320
Toluene (CAS #108883) 0 1460
Xylenes (Isomers And Mixture) (CAS #1330207) 0 100
Change (TPY) Total (TPY)
Total HAPs 0 2.60
DAQE-AN124440011-24
Page 5

SECTION I: GENERAL PROVISIONS

I.1 All definitions, terms, abbreviations, and references used in this AO conform to those used in
the UAC R307 and 40 CFR. Unless noted otherwise, references cited in these AO conditions
refer to those rules. [R307-101]

I.2 The limits set forth in this AO shall not be exceeded without prior approval. [R307-401]

I.3 Modifications to the equipment or processes approved by this AO that could affect the
emissions covered by this AO must be reviewed and approved. [R307-401-1]

I.4 All records referenced in this AO or in other applicable rules, which are required to be kept by
the owner/operator, shall be made available to the Director or Director's representative upon
request, and the records shall include the two-year period prior to the date of the request.
Unless otherwise specified in this AO or in other applicable state and federal rules, records
shall be kept for a minimum of two (2) years. [R307-401-8]

I.5 At all times, including periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction, owners and operators
shall, to the extent practicable, maintain and operate any equipment approved under this AO,
including associated air pollution control equipment, in a manner consistent with good air
pollution control practice for minimizing emissions. Determination of whether acceptable
operating and maintenance procedures are being used will be based on information available to
the Director which may include, but is not limited to, monitoring results, opacity observations,
review of operating and maintenance procedures, and inspection of the source. All maintenance
performed on equipment authorized by this AO shall be recorded. [R307-401-4]

I.6 The owner/operator shall comply with UAC R307-107. General Requirements: Breakdowns.
[R307-107]

I.7 The owner/operator shall comply with UAC R307-150 Series. Emission Inventories.
[R307-150]

I.8 The owner/operator shall submit documentation of the status of construction or modification to
the Director within 18 months from the date of this AO. This AO may become invalid if
construction is not commenced within 18 months from the date of this AO or if construction is
discontinued for 18 months or more. To ensure proper credit when notifying the Director, send
the documentation to the Director, attn.: NSR Section. [R307-401-18]

SECTION II: PERMITTED EQUIPMENT

II.A THE APPROVED EQUIPMENT

II.A.1 Keigley Quarry

II.A.2 Four (4) Tri-Deck Screens
Capacity: 700 tph (each)

II.A.3 Two (2) Screen Plants
Capacity: 700 tph (each)

II.A.4 Two (2) Cone Crushers
Capacity: 700 tph (each)

DAQE-AN124440011-24
Page 6

II.A.5 Two (2) Jaw Crushers
Capacity: 700 tph (each)

II.A.6 One (1) VSI Crusher
Capacity: 700 tph

II.A.7 Additional Crushing Equipment
Includes: Various Conveyors, Feeders, Loaders, and Stackers

II.A.8 Dust Mill/Bagging Operations - new
The operations include the following equipment:

One (1) feeder bin
One (1) chip hopper
Two (2) product storage silos
Two (2) dust collectors
One (1) cyclone
One (1) grinder with a classifier
One (1) diesel-fired furnace rated at 2.3 MMBtu/hr
Associated conveyors, robot, and bag plant

II.A.9 One (1) Grizzly Feeder

II.A.10 One (1) Hot Drum Mix Asphalt Plant
Capacity: 500 tph

II.A.11 Three (3) Hot Mix Storage Silos
Capacity: 300 tons (each)

II.A.12 One (1) Asphalt Storage Silo
Capacity: 75 tons

II.A.13 One (1) Lime Silo
Capacity: 3,600 Cu. Ft.

II.A.14 Eight (8) Cold Feed Bins

II.A.15 Two (2) Recycled Asphalt Pavement Bins

II.A.16 One (1) Baghouse
Rating: 70,000 acfm

II.A.17 Various Aggregate & Asphalt Equipment
Includes: Conveyors, Loaders, Bulldozers, Haul Trucks; Holding Tanks, Hot Oil Heaters, and
Feeders

II.A.18 One (1) Wash Plant
Includes: Screens, Belts, and Feeders

II.A.19 Three (3) Fuel Storage Tanks - new
Two (2) diesel fuel storage tanks with capacities of 4,000 and 10,000 gallons
One (1) gasoline storage tank with a capacity of 1,000 gallons

II.A.20 Drilling and blasting operations - new

DAQE-AN124440011-24
Page 7

SECTION II: SPECIAL PROVISIONS

II.B REQUIREMENTS AND LIMITATIONS

II.B.1 Site Wide Requirements
II.B.1.a The owner/operator shall not produce more than the following:

A. 6,000,000 tons of processed aggregate material per rolling 12-month period.

B. 500,000 tons of asphalt material per rolling 12-month period.

C. 100,000 tons of rock dust per rolling 12-month period.

[R307-401-8]

II.B.1.a.1 The owner/operator shall:

A. Determine production by scale house records or vendor receipts.

B. Keep the records of production on a daily basis.

C. Calculate a new 12-month total by the 20th day of each month using data from the
previous 12 months.

D. Keep the records of production for all periods when the plant is in operation.

[R307-401-8]

II.B.1.b The owner/operator shall not allow visible emissions from the following emission points to
exceed the following values:

A. Crushers and the grinder - 12% opacity.

B. Screens - 7% opacity.

C. All Conveyor Transfer Points - 7% opacity.

D. The Dust Mill Furnace - 20% opacity.

E. All control equipment, including baghouses, fabric filters, and the cyclone - 10%
opacity.

F. All Conveyor Drop Points - 20% opacity.

G. All Other Points - 20% opacity.

[R307-312, R307-401-8]

II.B.1.b.1 Visible emission observations shall be conducted according to 40 CFR 60, Appendix A,
Method 9. [R307-305]

II.B.1.c The owner/operator shall conduct an initial performance test for all crushers, screens, and
conveyor transfer points on site within 60 days after achieving the maximum production rate but
not later than 180 days after initial startup. Performance tests shall meet the limitations specified
in Table 3 to Subpart OOO. [40 CFR 60 Subpart OOO, R307-401-8]

DAQE-AN124440011-24
Page 8

II.B.1.c.1 Initial performance tests for fugitive emissions limits shall be conducted according to 40 CFR
60.675(c). The owner or operator may use methods and procedures specified in 40 CFR
60.675(e) as alternatives to the reference methods and procedures specified in 40 CFR 60.675(c).
[40 CFR 60 Subpart OOO, R307-401-8]

II.B.1.c.2 The owner/operator shall keep records of the initial performance test for each crusher, screen,
and conveyor for the life of the equipment. [40 CFR 60 Subpart OOO, R307-401-8]

II.B.2 Haul Road and Fugitive Dust Requirements
II.B.2.a The owner/operator shall water spray and/or chemically treat all unpaved roads and other
unpaved operational areas that are used by mobile equipment to control fugitive dust. Treatment
shall be of sufficient frequency and quantity to maintain the surface material in a damp/moist
condition unless it is below freezing and to maintain the opacity limits listed in this AO. If
chemical treatment is to be used, the plan must be approved by the Director. [R307-401-8]

II.B.2.a.1 The owner/operator shall keep all records of water and/or chemical treatment for all periods
when the plant is in operation. The records shall include the following items:

A. Date of treatment.

B. Number of treatments made, dilution ratio, and quantity of water applied.

C. Rainfall received, if any, and approximate amount.

D. Records of temperature if the temperature is below freezing.

[R307-401-8]

II.B.2.b The owner/operator shall not allow visible emissions from any fugitive dust source to exceed
20 percent opacity on site and 10 percent at the property boundary during all times the areas are
in use. [R307-309-5, R307-401-8]

II.B.2.b.1 Visible emission determinations for fugitive dust emissions from haul-road traffic and mobile
equipment in operational areas shall use procedures similar to Method 9. The normal requirement
for observations to be made at 15-second intervals over a six-minute period, however, shall not
apply. Visible emissions shall be measured at the densest point of the plume but at a point not
less than 1/2 vehicle length behind the vehicle and not less than 1/2 the height of the vehicle.
[R307-309]

II.B.2.c The owner/operator shall control fugitive dust emissions from disturbed or stripped areas at all
times for the duration of the project/operation. [R307-309]

II.B.2.d The owner/operator shall periodically vacuum sweep or spray clean the paved haul roads as
necessary to meet the opacity limits in this AO. [R307-401-8]

II.B.2.d.1 Records of cleaning paved roads shall be made available to the Director or the Director's
representative upon request. [R307-401-8]

II.B.2.e The owner/operator shall water spray storage piles as necessary to meet the opacity limit in this
AO. [R307-401-8]

DAQE-AN124440011-24
Page 9

II.B.3 The Dust Mill shall be subject to the following
II.B.3.a The owner/operator shall use partial enclosures for conveying, grinding, and flash drying
operations at the Dust Mill. [R307-401-8]

II.B.3.b The owner/operator shall use fully enclosed pipes to transport the rock dust to storage silos.
[R307-401-8]

II.B.3.c The owner/operator shall use fabric filters to control emissions from the storage silos and the
enclosed bagging operations. [R307-401-8]

II.B.4 Asphalt Plant Requirements
II.B.4.a The owner/operator shall maintain the following operating parameters within the indicated
ranges as follows:

A. Temperature of the gases exiting the baghouse shall be between 100 °F and
350 °F - Plus or minus 10 °F.

B. Asphalt mix temperature not to exceed 350 °F - Plus or minus 10 °F.

[R307-401-8]

II.B.4.a.1 The owner/operator shall install temperature gauges to monitor temperatures of gases exiting the
baghouse and asphalt mix. The temperature gauges shall be located such that an operator and/or
inspector can read the output safely at any time. [R307-401-8]

II.B.4.a.2 The owner/operator shall take temperature readings of asphalt mix at least once every
15 minutes, and record the readings in a log. [R307-401-8]

II.B.4.a.3 A current year of temperature readings shall be available for evaluation by the Director upon
request. [R307-401-8]

II.B.4.b The owner/operator shall calibrate the temperature gauges in accordance with manufacturer's
instructions or recommendations. [R307-401-8]

II.B.4.c The owner/operator shall not emit more than the following rates and concentrations from the
asphalt plant baghouse exhaust stack:

Pollutant lb/hr grain/dscf

PM 5.80 0.030
PM (RAP) 6.78 0.035
PM10 4.64 0.024
PM10 (RAP) 5.42 0.028
PM10 (Filterable) 4.64 0.024
PM2.5 (Filterable) (RAP) 4.64 0.024

[R307-401-8]
II.B.4.c.1 Compliance Demonstration
To demonstrate compliance with the emission limitations above, the owner/operator shall
perform stack testing on the emissions unit according to the stack testing conditions contained in
this AO. [R307-165-2, R307-401-8]

DAQE-AN124440011-24
Page 10

II.B.4.c.2 Test Frequency
The owner/operator shall conduct a stack test on the emission unit within three (3) years after the
date of the most recent stack test of the emission unit. The Director may require the
owner/operator to perform a stack test at any time. Compliance testing shall not be required for
both virgin and recycled materials during the same testing period. Testing shall be performed for
the product being produced during the time of testing. [R307-165-2, R307-401-8]

II.B.5 Asphalt Plant Baghouse Requirements
II.B.5.a The owner/operator shall control process streams from the asphalt plant drum mixer using a
baghouse. This baghouse shall be sized to handle at least 70,000 ACFM for the existing
conditions. All exhaust air from the drum mixer shall be routed through the baghouse before
being vented to the atmosphere. [R307-401-8]

II.B.5.b The owner/operator shall not allow a stack exhaust flow rate to exceed 75,000 ACFM without
prior approval by the Director in accordance with R307-401. This will be verified during stack
testing. [R307-401-8]

II.B.5.c The owner/operator shall install a manometer or magnehelic pressure gauge to measure the static
pressure differential across the baghouse. [R307-401-8]

II.B.5.c.1 The pressure gauge shall be located such that an inspector/operator can safely read the indicator
at any time. [R307-401-8]

II.B.5.c.2 The pressure gauge shall measure the static pressure differential in 1-inch water column
increments or less. [R307-401-8]

II.B.5.d The owner/operator shall maintain the static pressure differential of the baghouse between 2.0
and 7.0 inches of water column as measured on the pressure gauge. [R307-401-8]

II.B.5.d.1 The owner/operator shall record the pressure drop reading every time the baghouse is operated.
[R307-401-8]

II.B.5.e At least once every 12 months, the owner/operator shall calibrate the baghouse pressure gauges
in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions or replace the pressure gauges. [R307-401-8]

II.B.5.e.1 The owner/operator shall maintain records of the pressure gauge calibrations and replacements.
[R307-401-8]

II.B.6 Stack Testing Requirements
II.B.6.a The owner/operator shall conduct any stack testing required by this AO according to the
following conditions. [R307-401-8]

II.B.6.a.1 Notification
At least 30 days prior to conducting a stack test, the owner/operator shall submit a source test
protocol to the Director. The source test protocol shall include the items contained in
R307-165-3. If directed by the Director, the owner/operator shall attend a pretest conference.
[R307-165-3, R307-401-8]

II.B.6.a.2 Testing & Test Conditions
The owner/operator shall conduct testing according to the approved source test protocol and
according to the test conditions contained in R307-165-4. [R307-165-4, R307-401-8]

II.B.6.a.3 Access
The owner/operator shall provide Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)- or
Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA)-approved access to the test location.
[R307-401-8]

DAQE-AN124440011-24
Page 11

II.B.6.a.4 Reporting
No later than 60 days after completing a stack test, the owner/operator shall submit a written
report of the results from the stack testing to the Director. The report shall include validated
results and supporting information. [R307-165-5, R307-401-8]

II.B.6.a.5 Possible Rejection of Test Results
The Director may reject stack testing results if the test did not follow the approved source test
protocol or for a reason specified in R307-165-6. [R307-165-6, R307-401-8]

II.B.6.a.6 Test Methods
When performing stack testing, the owner/operator shall use the appropriate EPA-approved test
methods as acceptable to the Director. Acceptable test methods for pollutants are listed below.
[R307-401-8]

II.B.6.b Standard Conditions

A. Temperature - 68 degrees Fahrenheit (293 K).

B. Pressure - 29.92 in Hg (101.3 kPa).

C. Averaging Time - As specified in the applicable test method.

[40 CFR 60 Subpart A, 40 CFR 63 Subpart A, R307-401-8]

II.B.6.b.1 PM
40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Method 5, or other EPA-approved testing method as acceptable to the
Director. [R307-401-8]

II.B.6.b.2 PM10
Total PM10 = Filterable PM10 + Condensable PM

Filterable PM10
40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Method 5; 40 CFR 51, Appendix M, Method 201; Method 201A; or
other EPA-approved testing method as acceptable to the Director. If other approved testing
methods are used which cannot measure the PM10 fraction of the filterable particulate emissions,
all of the filterable particulate emissions shall be considered PM10.

Condensable PM
40 CFR 51, Appendix M, Method 202, or other EPA-approved testing method as acceptable to
the Director.

[R307-401-8]

II.B.6.b.3 Filterable PM2.5
40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Method 5; 40 CFR 51, Appendix M, Method 201A, or other EPA-
approved testing method as acceptable to the Director. If other approved testing methods are
used which cannot measure the PM2.5 fraction of the filterable particulate emissions, all of the
filterable particulate emissions shall be considered PM2.5. [R307-401-8]

II.B.7 Fuel Storage Tank Requirements
II.B.7.a The owner/operator shall fill the fuel storage tanks using submerged fill pipes. [R307-401-8]

II.B.7.b The owner/operator shall keep the storage tank thief hatches and other tank openings closed
except during tank loading, unloading, or other maintenance activities. [R307-401-8]

II.B.7.c The owner/operator shall comply with applicable requirements in R307-328 and MACT Subpart
CCCCCC. [40 CFR 63 Subpart CCCCCC, R307-328]

DAQE-AN124440011-24
Page 12

II.B.8 Fuel Requirements
II.B.8.a The owner/operator shall use fuel oil as fuel for the dust mill furnace, and propane, natural gas,
or fuel oil as fuel in the asphalt plant. [R307-401-8]

II.B.8.a.1 The sulfur content of any fuel oil burned in the asphalt plant and the dust mill furnace shall not
exceed 0.50% by weight. [R307-401-8]

II.B.8.a.2 The sulfur content shall be determined by ASTM Method D-4294-89 or approved equivalent.
Certification of fuels shall be either by the owner/operators own testing or test reports from the
fuel marketer. [R307-203]

II.B.9 Drilling and Blasting Operations shall be subject to the following
II.B.9.a The owner/operator shall use water injection when drilling to control fugitive dust emissions.
[R307-401-8]

II.B.9.b The owner/operator shall not use more than 480 tons of ANFO per rolling 12-month period.
[R307-401-8]

II.B.9.b.1 The owner/operator shall:

A. Determine the amount of explosives used by maintaining an operations log or purchase
records on a monthly basis.

B. Calculate a new rolling 12- month total by the 20th day of each month using data from
the previous 12 months.

C. Keep the records for all periods the plant is in operation.

[R307-401-8]

PERMIT HISTORY

This Approval Order shall supersede (if a modification) or will be based on the following documents:

Supersedes AO DAQE-AN124440009-18 dated October 1, 2018
Incorporates NOI dated May 26, 2023
Incorporates Additional information dated January 4, 2024
Incorporates Additional information dated February 16, 2024
Incorporates DAQE-MN124440011-24 dated April 17, 2024

DAQE-AN124440011-24
Page 13

ACRONYMS

The following lists commonly used acronyms and associated translations as they apply to this document:

40 CFR Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations
AO Approval Order
BACT Best Available Control Technology
CAA Clean Air Act
CAAA Clean Air Act Amendments
CDS Classification Data System (used by Environmental Protection Agency to classify
sources by size/type)
CEM Continuous emissions monitor
CEMS Continuous emissions monitoring system
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CMS Continuous monitoring system
CO Carbon monoxide
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
CO2e Carbon Dioxide Equivalent - Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 98,
Subpart A, Table A-1
COM Continuous opacity monitor
DAQ/UDAQ Division of Air Quality
DAQE This is a document tracking code for internal Division of Air Quality use
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FDCP Fugitive dust control plan
GHG Greenhouse Gas(es) - Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations 52.21 (b)(49)(i)
GWP Global Warming Potential - Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 86.1818-
12(a)
HAP or HAPs Hazardous air pollutant(s)
ITA Intent to Approve
LB/YR Pounds per year
MACT Maximum Achievable Control Technology
MMBTU Million British Thermal Units
NAA Nonattainment Area
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NESHAP National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
NOI Notice of Intent
NOx Oxides of nitrogen
NSPS New Source Performance Standard
NSR New Source Review
PM10 Particulate matter less than 10 microns in size
PM2.5 Particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size
PSD Prevention of Significant Deterioration
PTE Potential to Emit
R307 Rules Series 307
R307-401 Rules Series 307 - Section 401
SO2 Sulfur dioxide
Title IV Title IV of the Clean Air Act
Title V Title V of the Clean Air Act
TPY Tons per year
UAC Utah Administrative Code
VOC Volatile organic compounds

DAQE-IN124440011-24

July 8, 2024

Chris Rose
Staker Parson Companies
89 West 13490 South, Suite 100
Draper, UT 84020
[e-mail]

Dear Mr. Rose:

Re: Intent to Approve: Modification to Approval Order DAQE-AN124440009-18 to Add Fuel
Storage Tanks, a Dust Mill, Drilling, and Blasting Operations
Project Number: N124440011

The attached document is the Intent to Approve (ITA) for the above-referenced project. The ITA is
subject to public review. Any comments received shall be considered before an Approval Order (AO) is
issued. The Division of Air Quality is authorized to charge a fee for reimbursement of the actual costs
incurred in the issuance of an AO. An invoice will follow upon issuance of the final AO.

Future correspondence on this ITA should include the engineer's name, Mr. Enqiang He, as well as the
DAQE number as shown on the upper right-hand corner of this letter. Mr. Enqiang He, can be reached at
[phone] or [e-mail], if you have any questions.

Sincerely,

{{$s }}

Alan D. Humpherys, Manager
New Source Review Section

ADH:EH:jg

cc: Utah County Health Department

195 North 1950 West • Salt Lake City, UT
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 144820 • Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4820
Telephone [phone] • Fax [phone] • T.D.D. [phone]
www.deq.utah.gov
Printed on 100% recycled paper
State of Utah

SPENCER J. COX
Governor

DEIDRE HENDERSON
Lieutenant Governor

Department of
Environmental Quality

Kimberly D. Shelley
Executive Director

DIVISION OF AIR QUALITY
Bryce C. Bird
Director

STATE OF UTAH
Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Air Quality

INTENT TO APPROVE
DAQE-IN124440011-24
Modification to Approval Order DAQE-AN124440009-18
to Add Fuel storage Tanks, a Dust Mill, Drilling ,
and Blasting Operations

Prepared By
Mr. Enqiang He, Engineer
[phone]
[e-mail]

Issued to
Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry

Issued On
July 8, 2024

{{$s }}

New Source Review Section Manager
Alan D. Humpherys
{{#s=Sig_es_:signer1:signature}}

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TITLE/SIGNATURE PAGE ....................................................................................................... 1
GENERAL INFORMATION ...................................................................................................... 3
CONTACT/LOCATION INFORMATION ............................................................................... 3
SOURCE INFORMATION ........................................................................................................ 3
General Description ................................................................................................................ 3
NSR Classification .................................................................................................................. 3
Source Classification .............................................................................................................. 3
Applicable Federal Standards ................................................................................................. 3
Project Description.................................................................................................................. 4
SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS .................................................................................................... 4
PUBLIC NOTICE STATEMENT............................................................................................... 5
SECTION I: GENERAL PROVISIONS .................................................................................... 5
SECTION II: PERMITTED EQUIPMENT .............................................................................. 6
SECTION II: SPECIAL PROVISIONS ..................................................................................... 7
PERMIT HISTORY ................................................................................................................... 13
ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................................... 14

DAQE-IN124440011-24
Page 3

GENERAL INFORMATION

CONTACT/LOCATION INFORMATION

Owner Name Source Name
Staker Parson Companies Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry

Mailing Address Physical Address
89 West 13490 South, Suite 100 12370 South West Mountain Highway
Draper, UT 84020 Genola, UT

Source Contact UTM Coordinates
Name: Chris Rose 430,716 m Easting
Phone: [phone],428,598 m Northing
Email: [e-mail] Datum NAD83
UTM Zone 12

SIC code 1442 (Construction Sand & Gravel)

SOURCE INFORMATION
General Description
Staker Parson Companies operates an aggregate and asphalt processing plant at its Keigley Quarry in
Utah County. The aggregate processing plant includes crushers, screens, conveyors/stackers, feeders, and
loaders. The asphalt plant is equipped with a hot-mix asphalt plant and associated baghouse, storage silos
and bins, a wash plant, a feeder, and support equipment including oil heaters, conveyors, loaders,
bulldozers, and holding tanks. The dust mill includes a feeder, a hopper, a grinder, a furnace, silos, and
dust collectors. Annual production is limited to 6 million tons of aggregate, 0.5 million tons of asphalt,
and 0.1 million tons of rock dust.
NSR Classification
Minor Modification at Minor Source

Source Classification
Located in Southern Wasatch Front O3 NAA, Provo CO Maintenance Area, Provo UT PM2.5 NAA
Utah County
Airs Source Size: SM

Applicable Federal Standards
NSPS (Part 60), A: General Provisions
NSPS (Part 60), I: Standards of Performance for Hot Mix Asphalt Facilities
NSPS (Part 60), OOO: Standards of Performance for Nonmetallic Mineral Processing Plants
MACT (Part 63), A: General Provisions
MACT (Part 63), CCCCCC: National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Source Category: Gasoline Dispensing Facilities
Title V (Part 70) Area Source
DAQE-IN124440011-24
Page 4

Project Description
Staker Parson Companies has proposed to:

1. Add a dust mill to the Keigley Quarry. Processed aggregate will be conveyed and transferred to a
grinder, where the aggregate is pulverized into rock dust. The rock dust is flash-dried by a furnace and
then transferred to a storage silo. The rock dust is then conveyed to a fully enclosed bagging operation.
The bagged rock dust will then be shipped out to customers. The source proposes to produce 100,000 tons
of rock dust per year. The emissions from the dust mill will be added to the site’s total PTE.

2. Add drilling and blasting operations to the Keigley Quarry. The source proposes to conduct 24 blasts a
year and use 20 tons of ANFO per blast. The emissions from the drilling and blasting operations will be
added to the site’s total PTE.

3. Add three (3) fuel storage tanks. The source proposes to install one (1) 10,000-gallon diesel fuel tank,
one (1) 4,000-gallon diesel fuel tank, and one (1) 1,000-gallon gasoline tank. The emissions from the new
fuel storage tanks will be added to the site’s total PTE.

SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS

The emissions listed below are an estimate of the total potential emissions from the source. Some
rounding of emissions is possible.

Criteria Pollutant Change (TPY) Total (TPY)
CO2 Equivalent 9830.00
Carbon Monoxide 16.43 48.98
Nitrogen Oxides 5.49 19.44
Particulate Matter - PM10 1.74 75.49
Particulate Matter - PM2.5 0.49 29.54
Sulfur Dioxide 0.48 15.69
Volatile Organic Compounds 0.35 8.35

Hazardous Air Pollutant Change (lbs/yr) Total (lbs/yr)
Acetaldehyde (CAS #75070) 0 660
Acrolein (CAS #107028) 0 20
Benzene (Including Benzene From Gasoline) (CAS #71432) 0 200
Ethyl Benzene (CAS #100414) 0 120
Formaldehyde (CAS #50000) 0 1560
Generic HAPs (CAS #GHAPS) 0 300
Hexane (CAS #110543) 0 460
Naphthalene (CAS #91203) 0 320
Toluene (CAS #108883) 0 1460
Xylenes (Isomers And Mixture) (CAS #1330207) 0 100
Change (TPY) Total (TPY)
Total HAPs 0 2.60

DAQE-IN124440011-24
Page 5

PUBLIC NOTICE STATEMENT

The NOI for the above-referenced project has been evaluated and has been found to be consistent with the
requirements of UAC R307. Air pollution producing sources and/or their air control facilities may not be
constructed, installed, established, or modified prior to the issuance of an AO by the Director.

A 30-day public comment period will be held in accordance with UAC R307-401-7. A notification of the
intent to approve will be published in The Daily Herald on July 10, 2024. During the public comment
period the proposal and the evaluation of its impact on air quality will be available for the public to
review and provide comment. If anyone so requests a public hearing within 15 days of publication, it will
be held in accordance with UAC R307-401-7. The hearing will be held as close as practicable to the
location of the source. Any comments received during the public comment period and the hearing will be
evaluated. The proposed conditions of the AO may be changed as a result of the comments received.

SECTION I: GENERAL PROVISIONS

The intent is to issue an air quality AO authorizing the project with the following recommended
conditions and that failure to comply with any of the conditions may constitute a violation of the AO.

I.1 All definitions, terms, abbreviations, and references used in this AO conform to those used in
the UAC R307 and 40 CFR. Unless noted otherwise, references cited in these AO conditions
refer to those rules. [R307-101]

I.2 The limits set forth in this AO shall not be exceeded without prior approval. [R307-401]

I.3 Modifications to the equipment or processes approved by this AO that could affect the
emissions covered by this AO must be reviewed and approved. [R307-401-1]

I.4 All records referenced in this AO or in other applicable rules, which are required to be kept by
the owner/operator, shall be made available to the Director or Director's representative upon
request, and the records shall include the two-year period prior to the date of the request.
Unless otherwise specified in this AO or in other applicable state and federal rules, records
shall be kept for a minimum of two (2) years. [R307-401-8]

I.5 At all times, including periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction, owners and operators
shall, to the extent practicable, maintain and operate any equipment approved under this AO,
including associated air pollution control equipment, in a manner consistent with good air
pollution control practice for minimizing emissions. Determination of whether acceptable
operating and maintenance procedures are being used will be based on information available to
the Director which may include, but is not limited to, monitoring results, opacity observations,
review of operating and maintenance procedures, and inspection of the source. All maintenance
performed on equipment authorized by this AO shall be recorded. [R307-401-4]

I.6 The owner/operator shall comply with UAC R307-107. General Requirements: Breakdowns.
[R307-107]

I.7 The owner/operator shall comply with UAC R307-150 Series. Emission Inventories.
[R307-150]

DAQE-IN124440011-24
Page 6

I.8 The owner/operator shall submit documentation of the status of construction or modification to
the Director within 18 months from the date of this AO. This AO may become invalid if
construction is not commenced within 18 months from the date of this AO or if construction is
discontinued for 18 months or more. To ensure proper credit when notifying the Director, send
the documentation to the Director, attn.: NSR Section. [R307-401-18]

SECTION II: PERMITTED EQUIPMENT

The intent is to issue an air quality AO authorizing the project with the following recommended
conditions and that failure to comply with any of the conditions may constitute a violation of the AO.

II.A THE APPROVED EQUIPMENT

II.A.1 Keigley Quarry

II.A.2 Four (4) Tri-Deck Screens
Capacity: 700 tph (each)

II.A.3 Two (2) Screen Plants
Capacity: 700 tph (each)

II.A.4 Two (2) Cone Crushers
Capacity: 700 tph (each)

II.A.5 Two (2) Jaw Crushers
Capacity: 700 tph (each)

II.A.6 One (1) VSI Crusher
Capacity: 700 tph

II.A.7 Additional Crushing Equipment
Includes: Various Conveyors, Feeders, Loaders, and Stackers

II.A.8 Dust Mill/Bagging Operations - new
The operations include the following equipment:

One (1) feeder bin
One (1) chip hopper
Two (2) product storage silos
Two (2) dust collectors
One (1) cyclone
One (1) grinder with a classifier
One (1) diesel-fired furnace rated at 2.3 MMBtu/hr
Associated conveyors, robots, and bag plants

II.A.9 One (1) Grizzly Feeder

II.A.10 One (1) Hot Drum Mix Asphalt Plant
Capacity: 500 tph

II.A.11 Three (3) Hot Mix Storage Silos
Capacity: 300 tons (each)

DAQE-IN124440011-24
Page 7

II.A.12 One (1) Asphalt Storage Silo
Capacity: 75 tons

II.A.13 One (1) Lime Silo
Capacity: 3,600 Cu. Ft.

II.A.14 Eight (8) Cold Feed Bins

II.A.15 Two (2) Recycled Asphalt Pavement Bins

II.A.16 One (1) Baghouse
Rating: 70,000 acfm

II.A.17 Various Aggregate & Asphalt Equipment
Includes: Conveyors, Loaders, Bulldozers, Haul Trucks; Holding Tanks, Hot Oil Heaters, and
Feeders

II.A.18 One (1) Wash Plant
Includes: Screens, Belts, and Feeders

II.A.19 Three (3) Fuel Storage Tanks - new
Two (2) diesel fuel storage tanks with capacities of 4,000 and 10,000 gallons
One (1) gasoline storage tank with a capacity of 1,000 gallons

II.A.20 Drilling and blasting operations - new

SECTION II: SPECIAL PROVISIONS

The intent is to issue an air quality AO authorizing the project with the following recommended
conditions and that failure to comply with any of the conditions may constitute a violation of the AO.

II.B REQUIREMENTS AND LIMITATIONS

II.B.1 Site Wide Requirements
II.B.1.a The owner/operator shall not produce more than the following:

A. 6,000,000 tons of processed aggregate material per rolling 12-month period.

B. 500,000 tons of asphalt material per rolling 12-month period.

C. 100,000 tons of rock dust per rolling 12-month period.

[R307-401-8]

DAQE-IN124440011-24
Page 8

II.B.1.a.1 The owner/operator shall:

A. Determine production by scale house records or vendor receipts.

B. Keep the records of production on a daily basis.

C. Calculate a new 12-month total by the 20th day of each month using data from the
previous 12 months.

D. Keep the records of production for all periods when the plant is in operation.

[R307-401-8]

II.B.1.b The owner/operator shall not allow visible emissions from the following emission points to
exceed the following values:

A. Crushers and the grinder - 12% opacity.

B. Screens - 7% opacity.

C. All Conveyor Transfer Points - 7% opacity.

D. The Dust Mill Furnace - 20% opacity.

E. All control equipment including baghouses, fabric filters, and the cyclone - 10% opacity.

F. All Conveyor Drop Points - 20% opacity.

G. All Other Points - 20% opacity.

[R307-312, R307-401-8]

II.B.1.b.1 Visible emission observations shall be conducted according to 40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Method
9. [R307-305]

II.B.1.c The owner/operator shall conduct an initial performance test for all crushers, screens, and
conveyor transfer points on site within 60 days after achieving the maximum production rate but
not later than 180 days after initial startup. Performance tests shall meet the limitations specified
in Table 3 to Subpart OOO. [40 CFR 60 Subpart OOO, R307-401-8]

II.B.1.c.1 Initial performance tests for fugitive emissions limits shall be conducted according to 40 CFR
60.675(c). The owner or operator may use methods and procedures specified in 40 CFR
60.675(e) as alternatives to the reference methods and procedures specified in 40 CFR 60.675(c).
[40 CFR 60 Subpart OOO, R307-401-8]

II.B.1.c.2 The owner/operator shall keep records of the initial performance test for each crusher, screen,
and conveyor for the life of the equipment. [40 CFR 60 Subpart OOO, R307-401-8]

II.B.2 Haul Road and Fugitive Dust Requirements
II.B.2.a The owner/operator shall water spray and/or chemically treat all unpaved roads and other
unpaved operational areas that are used by mobile equipment to control fugitive dust. Treatment
shall be of sufficient frequency and quantity to maintain the surface material in a damp/moist
condition unless it is below freezing and to maintain the opacity limits listed in this AO. If
chemical treatment is to be used, the plan must be approved by the Director. [R307-401-8]

DAQE-IN124440011-24
Page 9

II.B.2.a.1 The owner/operator shall keep all records of water and/or chemical treatment for all periods
when the plant is in operation. The records shall include the following items:

A. Date of treatment.

B. Number of treatments made, dilution ratio, and quantity of water applied.

C. Rainfall received, if any, and approximate amount.

D. Records of temperature if the temperature is below freezing.

[R307-401-8]

II.B.2.b The owner/operator shall not allow visible emissions from any fugitive dust source to exceed 20
percent opacity on site and 10 percent at the property boundary during all times the areas are in
use. [R307-309-5, R307-401-8]

II.B.2.b.1 Visible emission determinations for fugitive dust emissions from haul-road traffic and mobile
equipment in operational areas shall use procedures similar to Method 9. The normal requirement
for observations to be made at 15-second intervals over a six-minute period, however, shall not
apply. Visible emissions shall be measured at the densest point of the plume but at a point not
less than 1/2 vehicle length behind the vehicle and not less than 1/2 the height of the vehicle.
[R307-309]

II.B.2.c The owner/operator shall control fugitive dust emissions from disturbed or stripped areas at all
times for the duration of the project/operation. [R307-309]

II.B.2.d The owner/operator shall periodically vacuum sweep or spray clean the paved haul roads as
necessary to meet the opacity limits in this AO. [R307-401-8]

II.B.2.d.1 Records of cleaning paved roads shall be made available to the Director or the Director's
representative upon request. [R307-401-8]

II.B.2.e The owner/operator shall water spray storage piles as necessary to meet the opacity limit in this
AO. [R307-401-8]

II.B.3 The Dust Mill shall be subject to the following
II.B.3.a The owner/operator shall use partial enclosures for conveying, grinding, and flash drying
operations at the Dust Mill. [R307-401-8]

II.B.3.b The owner/operator shall use fully enclosed pipes to transport the rock dust to storage silos.
[R307-401-8]

II.B.3.c The owner/operator shall use fabric filters to control emissions from the storage silos and the
enclosed bagging operations. [R307-401-8]

II.B.4 Asphalt Plant Requirements
II.B.4.a The owner/operator shall maintain the following operating parameters within the indicated
ranges as follows:

A. Temperature of the gases exiting the baghouse shall be between 100 °F and
350 °F - Plus or minus 10 °F.

B. Asphalt mix temperature not to exceed 350 °F - Plus or minus 10 °F.

[R307-401-8]

DAQE-IN124440011-24
Page 10

II.B.4.a.1 The owner/operator shall install temperature gauges to monitor temperatures of gases exiting the
baghouse and asphalt mix. The temperature gauges shall be located such that an operator and/or
inspector can read the output safely at any time. [R307-401-8]

II.B.4.a.2 The owner/operator shall take temperature readings of asphalt mix at least once every 15
minutes, and record the readings in a log. [R307-401-8]

II.B.4.a.3 A current year of temperature readings shall be available for evaluation by the Director upon
request. [R307-401-8]

II.B.4.b The owner/operator shall calibrate the temperature gauges in accordance with manufacturer's
instructions or recommendations. [R307-401-8]

II.B.4.c The owner/operator shall not emit more than the following rates and concentrations from the
asphalt plant baghouse exhaust stack:

Pollutant lb/hr grain/dscf

PM 5.80 0.030
PM (RAP) 6.78 0.035
PM10 4.64 0.024
PM10 (RAP) 5.42 0.028
PM10 (Filterable) 4.64 0.024
PM2.5 (Filterable) (RAP) 4.64 0.024
[R307-401-8]
II.B.4.c.1 Compliance Demonstration
To demonstrate compliance with the emission limitations above, the owner/operator shall
perform stack testing on the emissions unit according to the stack testing conditions contained in
this AO. [R307-165-2, R307-401-8]

II.B.4.c.2 Test Frequency
The owner/operator shall conduct a stack test on the emission unit within three (3) years after the
date of the most recent stack test of the emission unit. The Director may require the
owner/operator to perform a stack test at any time. Compliance testing shall not be required for
both virgin and recycled materials during the same testing period. Testing shall be performed for
the product being produced during the time of testing. [R307-165-2, R307-401-8]

II.B.5 Asphalt Plant Baghouse Requirements
II.B.5.a The owner/operator shall control process streams from the asphalt plant drum mixer using a
baghouse. This baghouse shall be sized to handle at least 70,000 ACFM for the existing
conditions. All exhaust air from the drum mixer shall be routed through the baghouse before
being vented to the atmosphere. [R307-401-8]

II.B.5.b The owner/operator shall not allow a stack exhaust flow rate to exceed 75,000 ACFM without
prior approval by the Director in accordance with R307-401. This will be verified during stack
testing. [R307-401-8]

II.B.5.c The owner/operator shall install a manometer or magnehelic pressure gauge to measure the static
pressure differential across the baghouse. [R307-401-8]

II.B.5.c.1 The pressure gauge shall be located such that an inspector/operator can safely read the indicator
at any time. [R307-401-8]

II.B.5.c.2 The pressure gauge shall measure the static pressure differential in 1-inch water column
increments or less. [R307-401-8]

DAQE-IN124440011-24
Page 11

II.B.5.d The owner/operator shall maintain the static pressure differential of the baghouse between 2.0
and 7.0 inches of water column as measured on the pressure gauge. [R307-401-8]

II.B.5.d.1 The owner/operator shall record the pressure drop reading every time the baghouse is operated.
[R307-401-8]

II.B.5.e At least once every 12 months, the owner/operator shall calibrate the baghouse pressure gauges
in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions or replace the pressure gauges. [R307-401-8]

II.B.5.e.1 The owner/operator shall maintain records of the pressure gauge calibrations and replacements.
[R307-401-8]

II.B.6 Stack Testing Requirements
II.B.6.a The owner/operator shall conduct any stack testing required by this AO according to the
following conditions. [R307-401-8]

II.B.6.a.1 Notification
At least 30 days prior to conducting a stack test, the owner/operator shall submit a source test
protocol to the Director. The source test protocol shall include the items contained in
R307-165-3. If directed by the Director, the owner/operator shall attend a pretest conference.
[R307-165-3, R307-401-8]

II.B.6.a.2 Testing & Test Conditions
The owner/operator shall conduct testing according to the approved source test protocol and
according to the test conditions contained in R307-165-4. [R307-165-4, R307-401-8]

II.B.6.a.3 Access
The owner/operator shall provide Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)- or
Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA)-approved access to the test location.
[R307-401-8]

II.B.6.a.4 Reporting
No later than 60 days after completing a stack test, the owner/operator shall submit a written
report of the results from the stack testing to the Director. The report shall include validated
results and supporting information. [R307-165-5, R307-401-8]

II.B.6.a.5 Possible Rejection of Test Results
The Director may reject stack testing results if the test did not follow the approved source test
protocol or for a reason specified in R307-165-6. [R307-165-6, R307-401-8]

II.B.6.a.6 Test Methods
When performing stack testing, the owner/operator shall use the appropriate EPA-approved test
methods as acceptable to the Director. Acceptable test methods for pollutants are listed below.
[R307-401-8]

II.B.6.b Standard Conditions

A. Temperature - 68 degrees Fahrenheit (293 K).

B. Pressure - 29.92 in Hg (101.3 kPa).

C. Averaging Time - As specified in the applicable test method.

[40 CFR 60 Subpart A, 40 CFR 63 Subpart A, R307-401-8]

DAQE-IN124440011-24
Page 12

II.B.6.b.1 PM
40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Method 5 or other EPA-approved testing method as acceptable to the
Director. [R307-401-8]

II.B.6.b.2 PM10
Total PM10 = Filterable PM10 + Condensable PM

Filterable PM10
40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Method 5; 40 CFR 51, Appendix M, Method 201; Method 201A; or
other EPA-approved testing method as acceptable to the Director. If other approved testing
methods are used which cannot measure the PM10 fraction of the filterable particulate emissions,
all of the filterable particulate emissions shall be considered PM10.

Condensable PM
40 CFR 51, Appendix M, Method 202 or other EPA-approved testing method as acceptable to
the Director.

[R307-401-8]

II.B.6.b.3 Filterable PM2.5
40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Method 5; 40 CFR 51, Appendix M, Method 201A or other
EPA-approved testing method as acceptable to the Director. If other approved testing methods
are used which cannot measure the PM2.5 fraction of the filterable particulate emissions, all of the
filterable particulate emissions shall be considered PM2.5. [R307-401-8]

II.B.7 Fuel Storage Tank Requirements
II.B.7.a The owner/operator shall fill the fuel storage tanks using submerged fill pipes. [R307-401-8]

II.B.7.b The owner/operator shall keep the storage tank thief hatches and other tank openings closed
except during tank loading/unloading or other maintenance activities. [R307-401-8]

II.B.7.c The owner/operator shall comply with applicable requirements in R307-328 and MACT Subpart
CCCCCC. [40 CFR 63 Subpart CCCCCC, R307-328]

II.B.8 Fuel Requirements
II.B.8.a The owner/operator shall use fuel oil as fuel for the dust mill furnace, and propane, natural gas,
or fuel oil as fuel in the asphalt plant. [R307-401-8]

II.B.8.a.1 The sulfur content of any fuel oil burned in the asphalt plant and the dust mill furnace shall not
exceed 0.50% by weight. [R307-401-8]

II.B.8.a.2 The sulfur content shall be determined by ASTM Method D-4294-89 or approved equivalent.
Certification of fuels shall be either by the owner/operators own testing or test reports from the
fuel marketer. [R307-203]

II.B.9 Drilling and Blasting Operations shall be subject to the following
II.B.9.a The owner/operator shall use water injection when drilling to control fugitive dust emissions.
[R307-401-8]

II.B.9.b The owner/operator shall not use more than 480 tons of ANFO per rolling 12-month period.
[R307-401-8]

DAQE-IN124440011-24
Page 13

II.B.9.b.1 The owner/operator shall:

A. Determine the amount of explosives used by maintaining an operations log or purchase
records on a monthly basis.

B. Calculate a new rolling 12- month total by the 20th day of each month using data from
the previous 12 months.

C. Keep the records for all periods the plant is in operation.

[R307-401-8]

PERMIT HISTORY

This Approval Order shall supersede (if a modification) or will be based on the following documents:

Supersedes AO DAQE-AN124440009-18 dated October 1, 2018
Incorporates NOI dated May 26, 2023
Incorporates Additional information dated January 4, 2024
Incorporates Additional information dated February 16, 2024
Incorporates DAQE-MN124440011-24 dated April 17, 2024

DAQE-IN124440011-24
Page 14

ACRONYMS

The following lists commonly used acronyms and associated translations as they apply to this document:

40 CFR Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations
AO Approval Order
BACT Best Available Control Technology
CAA Clean Air Act
CAAA Clean Air Act Amendments
CDS Classification Data System (used by Environmental Protection Agency to classify
sources by size/type)
CEM Continuous emissions monitor
CEMS Continuous emissions monitoring system
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CMS Continuous monitoring system
CO Carbon monoxide
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
CO2e Carbon Dioxide Equivalent - Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 98,
Subpart A, Table A-1
COM Continuous opacity monitor
DAQ/UDAQ Division of Air Quality
DAQE This is a document tracking code for internal Division of Air Quality use
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FDCP Fugitive dust control plan
GHG Greenhouse Gas(es) - Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations 52.21 (b)(49)(i)
GWP Global Warming Potential - Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 86.1818-
12(a)
HAP or HAPs Hazardous air pollutant(s)
ITA Intent to Approve
LB/YR Pounds per year
MACT Maximum Achievable Control Technology
MMBTU Million British Thermal Units
NAA Nonattainment Area
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NESHAP National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
NOI Notice of Intent
NOx Oxides of nitrogen
NSPS New Source Performance Standard
NSR New Source Review
PM10 Particulate matter less than 10 microns in size
PM2.5 Particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size
PSD Prevention of Significant Deterioration
PTE Potential to Emit
R307 Rules Series 307
R307-401 Rules Series 307 - Section 401
SO2 Sulfur dioxide
Title IV Title IV of the Clean Air Act
Title V Title V of the Clean Air Act
TPY Tons per year
UAC Utah Administrative Code
VOC Volatile organic compounds

Daily Herald
Publication Name:
Daily Herald
Publication URL:
Publication City and State:
Provo, UT
Publication County:
Utah
Notice Popular Keyword Category:
Notice Keywords:
staker
Notice Authentication Number:
202407111115471904298
3429962642
Notice URL:
Back
Notice Publish Date:
Wednesday, July 10, 2024
Notice Content
NOTICE A Notice of Intent for the following project submitted in accordance with R307-401-1, Utah Administrative Code (UAC), has been
received for consideration by the Director: Company Name: Staker Parson Companies Location: Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry -
12370 South West Mountain Highway, Genola, UT Project Description: Staker Parson Companies operates an aggregate and asphalt
processing plant at its Keigley Quarry in Utah County. The aggregate processing plant includes crushers, screens, conveyors/stackers,
feeders, and loaders. The asphalt plant is equipped with a hot-mix asphalt plant and associated baghouse, storage silos and bins, a wash
plant, a feeder, and support equipment including oil heaters, conveyors, loaders, bulldozers, and holding tanks. The source has proposed to
add a dust mill plant that includes a grinder with a classifier, a feeder, a hopper, storage silos, dust collectors, and a 2.3 MMBtu/hr furnace. In
addition, the source shall also use two (2) diesel fuel storage tanks and one (1) gasoline storage tank. Annual production is limited to 6
million tons of aggregate, 0.5 million tons of asphalt, and 0.1 million tons of rock dust. The completed engineering evaluation and air quality
impact analysis showed the proposed project meets the requirements of federal air quality regulations and the State air quality rules. The
Director intends to issue an Approval Order pending a 30-day public comment period. The project proposal, estimate of the effect on local air
quality and draft Approval Order are available for public inspection and comment at the Utah Division of Air Quality, 195 North 1950 West,
Salt Lake City, UT 84116. Written comments received by the Division at this same address on or before August 9, 2024, will be considered in
making the final decision on the approval/disapproval of the proposed project. Email comments will also be accepted at [e-mail]. If
anyone so requests to the Director in writing within 15 days of publication of this notice, a hearing will be held in accordance with R307-401-
7, UAC. Under Section 19-1-301.5, a person who wishes to challenge a Permit Order may only raise an issue or argument during an
adjudicatory proceeding that was raised during the public comment period and was supported with sufficient information or documentation to
enable the Director to fully consider the substance and significance of the issue. Date of Notice: July 10, 2024 Legal Notice 13042 Published
in the Daily Herald on July 10, 2024
Back

DAQE-NN124440011-24

July 8, 2024

The Daily Herald
Legal Advertising Dept
1555 N 200 W
Provo, UT 84601

RE: Legal Notice of Intent to Approve

This letter will confirm the authorization to publish the attached NOTICE in The Daily Herald (Account
Number: 00032838) on July 10, 2024.

Please mail the invoice and affidavit of publication to the Utah State Department of Environmental
Quality, Division of Air Quality, P.O. Box 144820, Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-4820. If you have any
questions, contact Jeree Greenwood, who may be reached at [phone].

Sincerely,

{{$s }}

Jeree Greenwood
Office Technician

Enclosure

cc: Utah County
cc: Mountainland Association of Governments

195 North 1950 West • Salt Lake City, UT
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 144820 • Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4820
Telephone [phone] • Fax [phone] • T.D.D. [phone]
www.deq.utah.gov
Printed on 100% recycled paper
State of Utah

SPENCER J. COX
Governor

DEIDRE HENDERSON
Lieutenant Governor

Department of
Environmental Quality

Kimberly D. Shelley
Executive Director

DIVISION OF AIR QUALITY
Bryce C. Bird
Director

DAQE-NN124440011-24
Page 2
NOTICE

A Notice of Intent for the following project submitted in accordance with R307-401-1, Utah
Administrative Code (UAC), has been received for consideration by the Director:

Company Name: Staker Parson Companies
Location: Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry – 12370 South West Mountain
Highway, Genola, UT
Project Description: Staker Parson Companies operates an aggregate and asphalt processing plant at
its Keigley Quarry in Utah County. The aggregate processing plant includes
crushers, screens, conveyors/stackers, feeders, and loaders. The asphalt plant is
equipped with a hot-mix asphalt plant and associated baghouse, storage silos and
bins, a wash plant, a feeder, and support equipment including oil heaters,
conveyors, loaders, bulldozers, and holding tanks. The source has proposed to
add a dust mill plant that includes a grinder with a classifier, a feeder, a hopper,
storage silos, dust collectors, and a 2.3 MMBtu/hr furnace. In addition, the source
shall also use two (2) diesel fuel storage tanks and one (1) gasoline storage tank.
Annual production is limited to 6 million tons of aggregate, 0.5 million tons of
asphalt, and 0.1 million tons of rock dust.

The completed engineering evaluation and air quality impact analysis showed the proposed project meets
the requirements of federal air quality regulations and the State air quality rules. The Director intends to
issue an Approval Order pending a 30-day public comment period. The project proposal, estimate of the
effect on local air quality and draft Approval Order are available for public inspection and comment at the
Utah Division of Air Quality, 195 North 1950 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116. Written comments
received by the Division at this same address on or before August 9, 2024, will be considered in making
the final decision on the approval/disapproval of the proposed project. Email comments will also be
accepted at [e-mail]. If anyone so requests to the Director in writing within 15 days of publication
of this notice, a hearing will be held in accordance with
R307-401-7, UAC.

Under Section 19-1-301.5, a person who wishes to challenge a Permit Order may only raise an issue or
argument during an adjudicatory proceeding that was raised during the public comment period and was
supported with sufficient information or documentation to enable the Director to fully consider the
substance and significance of the issue.

Date of Notice: July 10, 2024

{{#s=Sig_es_:signer1:signature}}

DAQE-

RN124440011
April 18, 2024

Christian Boudreau
Staker Parson Companies
89 West 13490 South, Suite 100
Draper, UT 84020
[e-mail]

Dear Christian Boudreau,

Re: Engineer Review:
Modification to Approval Order DAQE-AN124440009-18 to Add Fuel storage Tanks, a Dust
Mill, Drilling and Blasting Operations
Project Number: N124440011

The DAQ requests a company representative review and sign the attached Engineer Review (ER). This
ER identifies all applicable elements of the New Source Review permitting program. Staker Parson
Companies should complete this review within 10 business days of receipt.

Staker Parson Companies should contact Mr. Enqiang He at [phone] if there are questions or
concerns with the review of the draft permit conditions. Upon resolution of your concerns, please email
Mr. Enqiang He at [e-mail] the signed cover letter. Upon receipt of the signed cover letter, the
DAQ will prepare an ITA for a 30-day public comment period. At the completion of the comment period,
the DAQ will address any comments and will prepare an Approval Order (AO) for signature by the DAQ
Director.

If Staker Parson Companies does not respond to this letter within 10 business days, the project will move
forward without source concurrence. If Staker Parson Companies has concerns that cannot be resolved
and the project becomes stagnant, the DAQ Director may issue an Order prohibiting construction.

Approval Signature _____________________________________________________________
(Signature & Date)

195 North 1950 West • Salt Lake City, UT
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 144820 • Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4820
Telephone [phone] • Fax [phone] • T.D.D. [phone]
www.deq.utah.gov
Printed on 100% recycled paper
Department of
Environmental Quality

Kimberly D. Shelley Executive Director

DIVISION OF AIR QUALITY
Bryce C. Bird Director

State of Utah

SPENCER J. COX
Governor

DEIDRE HENDERSON
Lieutenant Governor

Engineer Review N124440011: Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry
April 18, 2024
Page 1
UTAH DIVISION OF AIR QUALITY
ENGINEER REVIEW

SOURCE INFORMATION

Project Number N124440011
Owner Name Staker Parson Companies
Mailing Address 89 West 13490 South, Suite 100
Draper, UT 84020

Source Name Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry
Source Location 12370 South West Mountain Highway
Genola, UT

UTM Projection 430,716 m Easting, 4,428,598 m Northing
UTM Datum NAD83
UTM Zone UTM Zone 12
SIC Code 1442 (Construction Sand & Gravel)

Source Contact Christian Boudreau
Phone Number [phone]
Email [e-mail]

Billing Contact Christian Boudreau
Phone Number [phone]
Email [e-mail]

Project Engineer Mr. Enqiang He, Engineer
Phone Number [phone]
Email [e-mail]

Notice of Intent (NOI) Submitted May 26, 2023
Date of Accepted Application April 18, 2024

Engineer Review N124440011: Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry
April 18, 2024
Page 2
SOURCE DESCRIPTION

General Description
Staker Parson Companies operates an aggregate and asphalt processing plant at its Keigley
Quarry in Utah County. The aggregate processing plant includes crushers, screens,
conveyors/stackers, feeders, and loaders. The asphalt plant is equipped with a hot-mix asphalt
plant and associated baghouse, storage silos and bins, a wash plant, a feeder, and support
equipment including oil heaters, conveyors, loaders, bulldozers, and holding tanks. The dust mill
includes a feeder, a hopper, a grinder, a furnace, silos, and dust collectors. Annual production is
limited to 6 million tons of aggregate, 0.5 million tons of asphalt, and 0.1 million tons of rock
dust.

NSR Classification:
Minor Modification at Minor Source

Source Classification
Located in Southern Wasatch Front O3 NAA, Provo CO Maintenance Area, Provo UT PM2.5
NAA
Utah County
Airs Source Size: SM

Applicable Federal Standards
NSPS (Part 60), A: General Provisions
NSPS (Part 60), I: Standards of Performance for Hot Mix Asphalt Facilities
NSPS (Part 60), OOO: Standards of Performance for Nonmetallic Mineral Processing Plants
MACT (Part 63), A: General Provisions
MACT (Part 63), CCCCCC: National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Source Category: Gasoline Dispensing Facilities
Title V (Part 70) Area Source

Project Proposal
Modification to Approval Order DAQE-AN124440009-18 to Add Fuel storage Tanks, a Dust
Mill, Drilling and Blasting Operations

Project Description
Staker Parson Companies has proposed to:

1. Add a dust mill to the Keigley Quarry. Processed aggregate will be conveyed and transferred
to a grinder where the aggregate is pulverized into rock dust. The rock dust is flash dried by a
furnace and then transferred to a storage silo. The rock dust is then conveyed to a fully enclosed
bagging operation. The bagged rock dust will then be shipped out to customers. The source
proposes to produce 100,000 tons of rock dust per year. The emissions from the dust mill will be
added to the site total PTE.

2. Add drilling and blasting operations to the Keigley Quarry. The source proposes to conduct
24 blasts a year and uses 20 tons of ANFO per blast. The emissions from the drilling and blasting
operations will be added to the site total PTE.

3. Add three (3) fuel storage tanks. The source proposes to install one (1) 10,000-gallon diesel

Engineer Review N124440011: Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry
April 18, 2024
Page 3
fuel tank, one (1) 4,000-gallon diesel fuel tank, and one (1) 1,000-gallon gasoline tank. The
emissions from the new fuel storage tanks will be added to the site total PTE.

EMISSION IMPACT ANALYSIS
All criteria pollutant emission increases are below the modeling thresholds contained in R307-410-4. All HAP
emission increases are below their respective modeling thresholds contained in R307-410-5. Modeling is not
required from the source at this time. The DAQ modeling staff has conducted an in-house modeling analysis
for 24-hr PM10 and found that the predicted total PM10 concentrations are less than that of NAAQS, if the
source complies with the conditions and requirements in this ER. Therefore, there are no additional
requirements the source has to comply as a result of the in-house modeling.

[Last updated April 18, 2024]

Engineer Review N124440011: Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry
April 18, 2024
Page 4
SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS

The emissions listed below are an estimate of the total potential emissions from the source. Some
rounding of emissions is possible.

Criteria Pollutant Change (TPY) Total (TPY)
CO2 Equivalent 9830.00
Carbon Monoxide 16.43 48.98
Nitrogen Oxides 5.49 19.44
Particulate Matter - PM10 1.74 75.49
Particulate Matter - PM2.5 0.49 29.54
Sulfur Dioxide 0.48 15.69
Volatile Organic Compounds 0.35 8.35

Hazardous Air Pollutant Change (lbs/yr) Total (lbs/yr)
Acetaldehyde (CAS #75070) 0 660
Acrolein (CAS #107028) 0 20
Benzene (Including Benzene From Gasoline) (CAS #71432) 0 200
Ethyl Benzene (CAS #100414) 0 120
Formaldehyde (CAS #50000) 0 1560
Generic HAPs (CAS #GHAPS) 0 300
Hexane (CAS #110543) 0 460
Naphthalene (CAS #91203) 0 320
Toluene (CAS #108883) 0 1460
Xylenes (Isomers And Mixture) (CAS #1330207) 0 100
Change (TPY) Total (TPY)
Total HAPs 0 2.60

Note: Change in emissions indicates the difference between previous AO and proposed modification.

Engineer Review N124440011: Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry
April 18, 2024
Page 5
Review of BACT for New/Modified Emission Units

1. BACT review regarding the dust mill
The dust mill processes include grinding, transferring, conveying, storing and bagging operations.
These processes will produce PM emissions. The technologies that help reduce the emissions
include wet scrubbers, cyclones, electrostatic precipitators, coverings, wet suppression, and
enclosures. Enclosures and fabric filters provide the best control among the technologies. The
Keigley Quarry has partial enclosures for the conveying, grinding, and flash drying operations.
After the product is flash dried, it is transported through fully enclosed pipes to the storage silo
controlled with a fabric filter. The fully enclosed pipes are controlled by a cyclone. The product is
then conveyed to the bagging operations which are totally enclosed. Visible emissions from these
operations are limited to 10% opacity. The Minor NSR Section considers the control technologies
used and the opacity limit as BACT. [Last updated February 5, 2024]

2. BACT review regarding the dust mill furnace
The source uses a furnace to flash dry the rock dust. The furnace is fired with diesel fuel and rated
at 2.3 MMBtu/hr. NOx Emissions, based on 8,600 hrs annual operation, are the highest at 1.41 tpy.
All other emissions are less than 0.35 tpy. Control technologies that could be used to control NOx
emissions include pre-combustion modifications, combustion controls, flue gas recirculation
(FGR), low NOx burners, ultra-low NOx burners, selective catalytic reduction (SCR), selective
non-catalytic reduction (SNCR). However, due to the age of the furnace, the cost of add-on
control equipment and operations, and low NOx emissions, the add-on control technologies
mentioned above are either technologically and/or economically infeasible to control the NOx
emissions from this furnace. The source selects proper maintenance and operations as BACT. As
part of the BACT, visible emissions from the furnace are limited to 20% opacity. [Last updated
February 28, 2024]

3. BACT review regarding fuel storage tanks
The source operates three (3) fuel storage tanks. Two of them are diesel tanks with capacities of
10,000 and 4,000 gallons. The third tank is gasoline service with a capacity of 1,000 gallons.
Total VOC emissions from the tanks are estimated at 0.33 tpy. For such small VOC emissions,
any add-on control technologies such as vapor recovery systems or flares would not be
economically feasible. The source selects submerged fill pipes as a BACT. Additionally, BACT
to reduce VOC emissions from the tanks is best work practices, such as keeping thief hatches
closed and regular maintenance. The gasoline tank is also subject to applicable requirements under
MACT Subpart CCCCCC and R307-328. The Minor NSR Section considers these measures and
requirements as BACT. [Last updated March 19, 2024]

4. BACT review regarding paved and unpaved haul roads
Unpaved haul road: paving the haul roads with sweeping and water applications would provide
95% control efficiency. However, paving the dust mill haul road would cost more than $100,000
per ton of PM10 removed, which is economically infeasible. The source selects the chemical
suppressant and water application to control particulate emissions from the unpaved haul road.
This method would provide 85% control efficiency. Visible emissions from the haul road traffic
are limited to 20% opacity on site and 10% opacity at the property boundary. The Minor NSR
Section considers the control method and the opacity limit as BACT.

Paved haul road: the haul roads for the dust mill also include a 0.1-mile paved haul road. The
source will vacuum sweep and water spray the paved haul road to control dust emissions. Visible
emissions from the paved haul road traffic are limited to 20% opacity on site and 10% opacity at
the property boundary. The Minor NSR Section considers the control methods and the opacity

Engineer Review N124440011: Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry
April 18, 2024
Page 6
limit as BACT. [Last updated February 28, 2024]
5. BACT review regarding drilling and blasting
Drilling
Control options include water injection and dust collection. Either method can provide particulate
control up to 90%. Dust collection involves logistical constraints when used in non-stationary
drilling operations. In addition, maintenance of the collection equipment would cause additional
expenses. Water injection, on the other hand, is a low cost and common practice to control
particulate emissions from drilling operations. As part of the BACT, visible emissions from the
drilling operations are limited to 10% opacity. The minor NSR Section considers the water
injection and the opacity limit as BACT.

Blasting
Blasting operations generate NOx, CO, and SO2, in addition to particulate emissions. The
emissions are dependent on the surface area and amount of ANFO used. Water application is not
feasible because of the large area and volume involved in the blasts. The source proposes to limit
the ANFO usage to 480 tons per year. In addition, the source proposes to use best management
practices to minimize dust caused by blasting. These practices include conducting blasting
operations during low wind periods, limiting over-shoot, and designing blasts to maximize hole
depth. The minor NSR Section considers the limit and the management practices as BACT.

[Last updated February 7, 2024]

SECTION I: GENERAL PROVISIONS

The intent is to issue an air quality AO authorizing the project with the following recommended
conditions and that failure to comply with any of the conditions may constitute a violation of the
AO. (New or Modified conditions are indicated as “New” in the Outline Label):

I.1 All definitions, terms, abbreviations, and references used in this AO conform to those used in
the UAC R307 and 40 CFR. Unless noted otherwise, references cited in these AO conditions
refer to those rules. [R307-101]

I.2 The limits set forth in this AO shall not be exceeded without prior approval. [R307-401]

I.3 Modifications to the equipment or processes approved by this AO that could affect the
emissions covered by this AO must be reviewed and approved. [R307-401-1]

I.4 All records referenced in this AO or in other applicable rules, which are required to be kept by
the owner/operator, shall be made available to the Director or Director's representative upon
request, and the records shall include the two-year period prior to the date of the request.
Unless otherwise specified in this AO or in other applicable state and federal rules, records
shall be kept for a minimum of two (2) years. [R307-401-8]

Engineer Review N124440011: Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry
April 18, 2024
Page 7
I.5 At all times, including periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction, owners and operators
shall, to the extent practicable, maintain and operate any equipment approved under this AO,
including associated air pollution control equipment, in a manner consistent with good air
pollution control practice for minimizing emissions. Determination of whether acceptable
operating and maintenance procedures are being used will be based on information available
to the Director which may include, but is not limited to, monitoring results, opacity
observations, review of operating and maintenance procedures, and inspection of the source.
All maintenance performed on equipment authorized by this AO shall be recorded. [R307-
401-4]

I.6 The owner/operator shall comply with UAC R307-107. General Requirements: Breakdowns.
[R307-107]

I.7 The owner/operator shall comply with UAC R307-150 Series. Emission Inventories. [R307-
150]

I.8 The owner/operator shall submit documentation of the status of construction or modification
to the Director within 18 months from the date of this AO. This AO may become invalid if
construction is not commenced within 18 months from the date of this AO or if construction is
discontinued for 18 months or more. To ensure proper credit when notifying the Director,
send the documentation to the Director, attn.: NSR Section. [R307-401-18]

SECTION II: PERMITTED EQUIPMENT
The intent is to issue an air quality AO authorizing the project with the following recommended
conditions and that failure to comply with any of the conditions may constitute a violation of the
AO. (New or Modified conditions are indicated as “New” in the Outline Label):

II.A THE APPROVED EQUIPMENT

II.A.1 Keigley Quarry

II.A.2 Four (4) Tri-Deck Screens
Capacity: 700 tph (each)

II.A.3 Two (2) Screen Plants
Capacity: 700 tph (each)

II.A.4 Two (2) Cone Crushers
Capacity: 700 tph (each)

II.A.5 Two (2) Jaw Crushers
Capacity: 700 tph (each)

II.A.6 One (1) VSI Crusher
Capacity: 700 tph

Engineer Review N124440011: Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry
April 18, 2024
Page 8
II.A.7 Additional Crushing Equipment
Includes: Various Conveyors, Feeders, Loaders, and Stackers

II.A.8
NEW
Dust Mill/Bagging Operations - new
The operations include the following equipment:
One (1) feeder bin
One (1) chip hopper
Two (2) product storage silos
Two (2) dust collectors
One (1) cyclone
One (1) grinder with a classifier
One (1) diesel-fired furnace rated at 2.3 MMBtu/hr
Associated conveyors, robot, and bag plant

II.A.9 One (1) Grizzly Feeder

II.A.10 One (1) Hot Drum Mix Asphalt Plant
Capacity: 500 tph

II.A.11 Three (3) Hot Mix Storage Silos
Capacity: 300 tons (each)

II.A.12 One (1) Asphalt Storage Silo
Capacity: 75 tons

II.A.13 One (1) Lime Silo
Capacity: 3,600 Cu. Ft.

II.A.14 Eight (8) Cold Feed Bins

II.A.15 Two (2) Recycled Asphalt Pavement Bins

II.A.16 One (1) Baghouse
Rating: 70,000 acfm

II.A.17 Various Aggregate & Asphalt Equipment
Includes: Conveyors, Loaders, Bulldozers, Haul Trucks; Holding Tanks, Hot Oil Heaters and
Feeders

II.A.18 One (1) Wash Plant
Includes: Screens, Belts, and Feeders

II.A.19
NEW
Three (3) Fuel Storage Tanks - new
Two (2) diesel fuel storage tanks with capacities of 4,000 and 10,000 gallons
One (1) gasoline storage tank with a capacity of 1,000 gallons

II.A.20
NEW
Drilling and blasting operations - new

Engineer Review N124440011: Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry
April 18, 2024
Page 9
SECTION II: SPECIAL PROVISIONS
The intent is to issue an air quality AO authorizing the project with the following recommended
conditions and that failure to comply with any of the conditions may constitute a violation of the
AO. (New or Modified conditions are indicated as “New” in the Outline Label):

II.B REQUIREMENTS AND LIMITATIONS

II.B.1 Site Wide Requirements
II.B.1.a
NEW
The owner/operator shall not produce more than the following:

A. 6,000,000 tons of processed aggregate material per rolling 12-month period

B. 500,000 tons of asphalt material per rolling 12-month period

C. 100,000 tons of rock dust per rolling 12-month period.

[R307-401-8]

II.B.1.a.1
NEW
The owner/operator shall:

A. Determine production by scale house records or vendor receipts

B. Keep the records of production on a daily basis

C. Calculate a new 12-month total by the 20th day of each month using data from the
previous 12 months

D. Keep the records of production for all periods when the plant is in operation.

[R307-401-8]

II.B.1.b
NEW
The owner/operator shall not allow visible emissions from the following emission points to
exceed the following values:

A. Crushers and the grinder - 12% opacity

B. Screens - 7% opacity

C. All Conveyor Transfer Points - 7% opacity

D. The Dust Mill Furnace - 20% opacity

E. All control equipment including baghouses, fabric filters, and the cyclone - 10%
opacity

F. All Conveyor Drop Points - 20% opacity

G. All Other Points - 20% opacity.

[R307-312, R307-401-8]

Engineer Review N124440011: Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry
April 18, 2024
Page 10
II.B.1.b.1
NEW
Visible emission observations shall be conducted according to 40 CFR 60, Appendix A,
Method 9. [R307-305]

II.B.1.c
NEW
The owner/operator shall conduct an initial performance test for all crushers, screens, and
conveyor transfer points on site within 60 days after achieving the maximum production rate
but not later than 180 days after initial startup. Performance tests shall meet the limitations
specified in Table 3 to Subpart OOO. [40 CFR 60 Subpart OOO, R307-401-8]

II.B.1.c.1
NEW
Initial performance tests for fugitive emissions limits shall be conducted according to 40 CFR
60.675(c). The owner or operator may use methods and procedures specified in 40 CFR
60.675(e) as alternatives to the reference methods and procedures specified in 40 CFR
60.675(c). [40 CFR 60 Subpart OOO, R307-401-8]

II.B.1.c.2
NEW
The owner/operator shall keep records of the initial performance test for each crusher, screen,
and conveyor for the life of the equipment. [40 CFR 60 Subpart OOO, R307-401-8]

II.B.2 Haul Road and Fugitive Dust Requirements
II.B.2.a
NEW
The owner/operator shall water spray and/or chemically treat all unpaved roads and other
unpaved operational areas that are used by mobile equipment to control fugitive dust.
Treatment shall be of sufficient frequency and quantity to maintain the surface material in a
damp/moist condition unless it is below freezing and to maintain the opacity limits listed in
this AO. If chemical treatment is to be used, the plan must be approved by the Director.
[R307-401-8]

II.B.2.a.1
NEW
The owner/operator shall keep all records of water and/or chemical treatment for all periods
when the plant is in operation. The records shall include the following items:

A. Date of treatment

B. Number of treatments made, dilution ratio, and quantity of water applied

C. Rainfall received, if any, and approximate amount

D. Records of temperature if the temperature is below freezing.

[R307-401-8]

II.B.2.b The owner/operator shall not allow visible emissions from any fugitive dust source to exceed
20 percent opacity on site and 10 percent at the property boundary during all times the areas
are in use. [R307-401-8, R307-309-5]

II.B.2.b.1 Visible emission determinations for fugitive dust emissions from haul-road traffic and mobile
equipment in operational areas shall use procedures similar to Method 9. The normal
requirement for observations to be made at 15-second intervals over a six-minute period,
however, shall not apply. Visible emissions shall be measured at the densest point of the
plume but at a point not less than 1/2 vehicle length behind the vehicle and not less than 1/2
the height of the vehicle. [R307-309]

II.B.2.c
NEW
The owner/operator shall control fugitive dust emissions from disturbed or stripped areas at all
times for the duration of the project/operation. [R307-309]

Engineer Review N124440011: Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry
April 18, 2024
Page 11
II.B.2.d
NEW
The owner/operator shall periodically vacuum sweep or spray clean the paved haul roads as
necessary to meet the opacity limits in this AO. [R307-401-8]

II.B.2.d.1 Records of cleaning paved roads shall be made available to the Director or the Director's
representative upon request. [R307-401-8]

II.B.2.e
NEW
The owner/operator shall water spray storage piles as necessary to meet the opacity limit in
this AO. [R307-401-8]

II.B.3
NEW
The Dust Mill shall be subject to the following
II.B.3.a
NEW
The owner/operator shall use partial enclosures for conveying, grinding, and flash drying
operations at the Dust Mill. [R307-401-8]

II.B.3.b
NEW
The owner/operator shall use fully enclosed pipes to transport the rock dust to storage silos.
[R307-401-8]

II.B.3.c
NEW
The owner/operator shall use fabric filters to control emissions from the storage silos and the
enclosed bagging operations. [R307-401-8]

II.B.4 Asphalt Plant Requirements
II.B.4.a
NEW
The owner/operator shall maintain the following operating parameters within the indicated
ranges as follows:

A. Temperature of the gases exiting the baghouse shall be between 100 oF and 350 oF -
Plus or minus 10 oF

B. Asphalt mix temperature not to exceed 350 oF - Plus or minus 10 oF

[R307-401-8]

II.B.4.a.1
NEW
The owner/operator shall install temperature gauges to monitor temperatures of gases exiting
the baghouse and asphalt mix. The temperature gauges shall be located such that an operator
and/or inspector can read the output safely at any time. [R307-401-8]

II.B.4.a.2
NEW
The owner/operator shall take temperature readings of asphalt mix at least once every 15
minutes, and record the readings in a log. [R307-401-8]

II.B.4.a.3
NEW
A current year of temperature readings shall be available for evaluation by the Director upon
request. [R307-401-8]

II.B.4.b
NEW
The owner/operator shall calibrate the temperature gauges in accordance with manufacturer's
instructions or recommendations. [R307-401-8]

Engineer Review N124440011: Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry
April 18, 2024
Page 12
II.B.4.c
NEW
The owner/operator shall not emit more than the following rates and concentrations from the
asphalt plant baghouse exhaust stack:

Pollutant lb/hr grain/dscf

PM 5.80 0.030
PM (RAP) 6.78 0.035
PM10 4.64 0.024
PM10 (RAP) 5.42 0.028
PM10 (Filterable) 4.64 0.024
PM2.5 (Filterable) (RAP) 4.64 0.024

[R307-401-8]

II.B.4.c.1
NEW
Compliance Demonstration
To demonstrate compliance with the emission limitations above, the owner/operator shall
perform stack testing on the emissions unit according to the stack testing conditions contained
in this AO. [R307-165-2, R307-401-8]

II.B.4.c.2
NEW
Test Frequency
The owner/operator shall conduct a stack test on the emission unit within three (3) years after
the date of the most recent stack test of the emission unit. The Director may require the
owner/operator to perform a stack test at any time. Compliance testing shall not be required
for both virgin and recycled materials during the same testing period. Testing shall be
performed for the product being produced during the time of testing. [R307-165-2, R307-401-
8]

II.B.5
NEW
Asphalt Plant Baghouse Requirements
II.B.5.a
NEW
The owner/operator shall control process streams from the asphalt plant drum mixer using a
baghouse. This baghouse shall be sized to handle at least 70,000 ACFM for the existing
conditions. All exhaust air from the drum mixer shall be routed through the baghouse before
being vented to the atmosphere. [R307-401-8]

II.B.5.b
NEW
The owner/operator shall not allow a stack exhaust flow rate to exceed 75,000 ACFM without
prior approval by the Director in accordance with R307-401. This will be verified during stack
testing. [R307-401-8]

II.B.5.c
NEW
The owner/operator shall install a manometer or magnehelic pressure gauge to measure the
static pressure differential across the baghouse. [R307-401-8]

II.B.5.c.1
NEW
The pressure gauge shall be located such that an inspector/operator can safely read the
indicator at any time. [R307-401-8]

II.B.5.c.2
NEW
The pressure gauge shall measure the static pressure differential in 1-inch water column
increments or less. [R307-401-8]

II.B.5.d
NEW
The owner/operator shall maintain the static pressure differential of the baghouse between 2.0
and 7.0 inches of water column as measured on the pressure gauge. [R307-401-8]

Engineer Review N124440011: Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry
April 18, 2024
Page 13
II.B.5.d.1
NEW
The owner/operator shall record the pressure drop reading every time the baghouse is
operated. [R307-401-8]

II.B.5.e
NEW
At least once every 12 months, the owner/operator shall calibrate the baghouse pressure
gauges in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions or replace the pressure gauges.
[R307-401-8]

II.B.5.e.1
NEW
The owner/operator shall maintain records of the pressure gauge calibrations and
replacements. [R307-401-8]

II.B.6
NEW
Stack Testing Requirements
II.B.6.a
NEW
The owner/operator shall conduct any stack testing required by this AO according to the
following conditions. [R307-401-8]

II.B.6.a.1
NEW
Notification
At least 30 days prior to conducting a stack test, the owner/operator shall submit a source test
protocol to the Director. The source test protocol shall include the items contained in
R307-165-3. If directed by the Director, the owner/operator shall attend a pretest conference.
[R307-165-3, R307-401-8]

II.B.6.a.2
NEW
Testing & Test Conditions
The owner/operator shall conduct testing according to the approved source test protocol and
according to the test conditions contained in R307-165-4. [R307-165-4, R307-401-8]

II.B.6.a.3
NEW
Access
The owner/operator shall provide Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)- or
Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA)-approved access to the test location.
[R307-401-8]

II.B.6.a.4
NEW
Reporting
No later than 60 days after completing a stack test, the owner/operator shall submit a written
report of the results from the stack testing to the Director. The report shall include validated
results and supporting information. [R307-165-5, R307-401-8]

II.B.6.a.5
NEW
Possible Rejection of Test Results
The Director may reject stack testing results if the test did not follow the approved source test
protocol or for a reason specified in R307-165-6. [R307-165-6, R307-401-8]

II.B.6.a.6
NEW
Test Methods
When performing stack testing, the owner/operator shall use the appropriate EPA-approved
test methods as acceptable to the Director. Acceptable test methods for pollutants are listed
below. [R307-401-8]

Engineer Review N124440011: Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry
April 18, 2024
Page 14
II.B.6.b
NEW
Standard Conditions

A. Temperature - 68 degrees Fahrenheit (293 K)

B. Pressure - 29.92 in Hg (101.3 kPa)

C. Averaging Time - As specified in the applicable test method

[40 CFR 60 Subpart A, 40 CFR 63 Subpart A, R307-401-8]

II.B.6.b.1
NEW
PM
40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Method 5 or other EPA-approved testing method as acceptable to
the Director. [R307-401-8]

II.B.6.b.2
NEW
PM10
Total PM10 = Filterable PM10 + Condensable PM

Filterable PM10
40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Method 5; 40 CFR 51, Appendix M, Method 201; Method 201A; or
other EPA-approved testing method as acceptable to the Director. If other approved testing
methods are used which cannot measure the PM10 fraction of the filterable particulate
emissions, all of the filterable particulate emissions shall be considered PM10.

Condensable PM
40 CFR 51, Appendix M, Method 202 or other EPA-approved testing method as acceptable to
the Director.

[R307-401-8]

II.B.6.b.3
NEW
Filterable PM2.5

40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Method 5; 40 CFR 51, Appendix M, Method 201A or other EPA-
approved testing method as acceptable to the Director. If other approved testing methods are
used which cannot measure the PM2.5 fraction of the filterable particulate emissions, all of the
filterable particulate emissions shall be considered PM2.5.

[R307-401-8]

II.B.7
NEW
Fuel Storage Tank Requirements
II.B.7.a
NEW
The owner/operator shall fill the fuel storage tanks using submerged fill pipes. [R307-401-8]

II.B.7.b
NEW
The owner/operator shall keep the storage tank thief hatches and other tank openings closed
except during tank loading/unloading or other maintenance activities. [R307-401-8]

II.B.7.c
NEW
The owner/operator shall comply with applicable requirements in R307-328 and MACT
Subpart CCCCCC. [40 CFR 63 Subpart CCCCCC, R307-328]

II.B.8 Fuel Requirements

Engineer Review N124440011: Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry
April 18, 2024
Page 15
II.B.8.a
NEW
The owner/operator shall use fuel oil as fuel for the dust mill furnace, and propane, natural
gas, or fuel oil as fuel in the asphalt plant. [R307-401-8]

II.B.8.a.1
NEW
The sulfur content of any fuel oil burned in the asphalt plant and the dust mill furnace shall not
exceed 0.50% by weight. [R307-401-8]

II.B.8.a.2
NEW
The sulfur content shall be determined by ASTM Method D-4294-89 or approved equivalent.
Certification of fuels shall be either by the owner/operators own testing or test reports from
the fuel marketer. [R307-203]

II.B.9
NEW
Drilling and Blasting Operations shall be subject to the following
II.B.9.a
NEW
The owner/operator shall use water injection when drilling to control fugitive dust emissions.
[R307-401-8]

II.B.9.b
NEW
The owner/operator shall not use more than 480 tons of ANFO per rolling 12-month period.
[R307-401-8]

II.B.9.b.1
NEW
The owner/operator shall:

A. Determine the amount of explosives used by maintaining an operations log or
purchase records on a monthly basis

B. Calculate a new rolling 12- month total by the 20th day of each month using data from
the previous 12 months

C. Keep the records for all periods the plant is in operation.

[R307-401-8]

Engineer Review N124440011: Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry
April 18, 2024
Page 16
PERMIT HISTORY

When issued, the approval order shall supersede (if a modification) or will be based on the
following documents:

Supersedes AO DAQE-AN124440009-18 dated October 1, 2018
Incorporates NOI dated May 26, 2023
Incorporates Additional information dated January 4, 2024
Incorporates Additional information dated February 16, 2024
Incorporates DAQE-MN124440011-24 dated April 17, 2024

REVIEWER COMMENTS

1. Comment regarding emission estimates from new equipment/processes:
Dust mill: emissions including from grinding, classification, flash drying, product storage, and
unpaved haul road. Emissions factors for these processes were obtained from AP-42 Chapter 11.19-
2, Chapter 1.3, Chapter 13.2.2 Rock dust production was limited to 100,000 tons per year. Operating
hrs for the grinder and furnace are 8,600 per year. Unpaved haul road length was 0.19 miles.
Control efficiency of Chemical suppressant applied to the unpaved haul road was 85%. Paved haul
road length was 0.1 miles. Control efficiency for the paved haul road with vacuum sweeping and
water application was assumed to be 90%.

Fuel storages: an annual throughput of 149,293 gallons of diesel fuel was assumed for each of the
diesel tanks; an annual throughput of 150,582 gallons of gasoline was assumed for the gasoline tank.
Oklahoma Tank Tool on SIEIS was used for VOC emission calculations.

Drilling operations: emission factor was taken from AP-42 Table 11.9-4. Appendix B.2 Generalized
Particle Size Distributions Table B.2-2 was used to calculate PM10 and PM2.5 emission factors.
Control efficiency of 90% was used to account for water injection.

Blasting operations: emission factor from AP-42 Table 13.3-1 and annual ANFO usage of 480 tons
were used to calculate CO, NOx, and SO2 emissions. [Last updated February 7, 2024]

2. Comment regarding Emissions Estimates for Existing Equipment:
Emissions were estimated from the following sources:

Emissions from the aggregate equipment on site was calculated using emission factors from AP-42
Table 11.19.2-2 and Section 13.2.4.

Emissions from the asphalt drum mix plant were calculated using emission factors from AP-42
Section 11.1, more specifically: Table 11.1-3, Table 11.1-4, Table 11.1-7, Table 11.1-8, Table 11.1-
10, Table 11.1-12, Table 11.1-14, Table 11.1-15, and Table 11.1-16.

Emission from disturbed areas and stockpiles were estimated using emission factors from AP-42
Table 8.19.1-1.

Emissions form heaters on site were calculated using emission factors from AP-42 Section 1.5,
assuming heaters will operate at full capacity year round.

Emissions from unpaved haul roads were calculated using emission factors from AP-42 Section

Engineer Review N124440011: Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry
April 18, 2024
Page 17
13.2.2.

[Last updated February 7, 2024]

3. Comment regarding conditions removed:
The following conditions in the AO DAQE-AN124440009-18 has been removed:

II.B.1.a.C: 500 tons per hour of asphalt material produced
The asphalt plant has a maximum production capacity of 500 tons per hour as listed in II.A.9;
therefore, this condition is unnecessary.

All conditions under II.B.2.e are updated and replaced by the current permit language and format.

II.B.3.b: The haul road speed limit of 15 mph shall be posted, at a minimum, at the beginning
of the haul road where it is clearly visible
The haul road speed limit is no longer a factor used to estimate emissions, therefore, this condition is
removed.

II.B.3.d: Visible fugitive dust emissions from haul-road traffic and mobile equipment in
operational areas shall not exceed 20% opacity on site and 10% opacity at the property
boundary
This condition was included in II.B.3.a; therefore, it is removed. However, its tertiary condition,
II.B.3.d.1, is moved to under II.B.3.a.

II.B.4: Fuel Requirements
All conditions under the fuel requirements are updated to reflect the fact that the source will no
longer burn used oil. Specifically, Conditions under II.B.4.c have been removed. [Last updated
February 28, 2024]

4. Comment regarding NSPS Applicability:
40 CFR 60 NSPS Subpart F applies to facilities that operate Portland cement plants. This facility
will not have a Portland cement plant; therefore, NSPS Subpart F does not apply to this facility.

40 CFR 60 NSPS Subpart I applies to facilities that operate a Hot Mix Asphalt Plant that commences
construction or modification after June 11, 1973. This facility will have a Hot Mix Asphalt Plant,
therefore NSPS Subpart I applies to this facility.

40 CFR 60 NSPS Subpart OOO applies to all non-metallic mineral processing plants that do not
meet the following criteria, and commence construction, modification or reconstruction after August
31, 1983:
A) Located in underground mines
B) No crushing or milling operations
C) Wet material processing
D) Subject to NSPS Subpart F or Subpart I
E) Fixed Sand and Gravel Plants with capacities less than 25 tons per hour
F) Portable sand and Gravel operations with less than 150 tons per hour
G) Clay and pumice plants with capacities less than 10 tons per hour

This facility does not meet the exemption requirements listed above and commences construction
after August 31, 1983; therefore NSPS Subpart OOO applies to this facility.

40 CFR 60 NSPS Subpart Kb applies to each storage vessel with a capacity greater than or equal to

Engineer Review N124440011: Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry
April 18, 2024
Page 18
75 cubic meters (m3) that is used to store volatile organic liquids (VOL) for which construction,
reconstruction, or modification is commenced after July 23, 1984. The fuel storage tanks each have
a capacity less than 75 cubic meters (19,800 gallons). Therefore, this standard does not apply to the
source. [Last updated February 28, 2024]

5. Comment regarding Title V Applicability:
Title V of the 1990 Clean Air Act (Title V) applies to the following:

1. Any major source
2. Any source subject to a standard, limitation, or other requirement under Section 111 of the Act,
Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources;
3. Any source subject to a standard or other requirement under Section 112 of the Act, Hazardous
Air Pollutants.
4. Any Title IV affected source.

This facility is not a major source and is not a Title IV source. NSPS Subparts I and OOO apply to
the source; this facility is a Title V Area Source.
[Last updated February 28, 2024]

Engineer Review N124440011: Staker Parson Companies - Keigley Quarry
April 18, 2024
Page 19
ACRONYMS
The following lists commonly used acronyms and associated translations as they apply to this
document:
40 CFR Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations
AO Approval Order
BACT Best Available Control Technology
CAA Clean Air Act
CAAA Clean Air Act Amendments
CDS Classification Data System (used by EPA to classify sources by size/type)
CEM Continuous emissions monitor
CEMS Continuous emissions monitoring system
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CMS Continuous monitoring system
CO Carbon monoxide
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
CO2e Carbon Dioxide Equivalent - 40 CFR Part 98, Subpart A, Table A-1
COM Continuous opacity monitor
DAQ/UDAQ Division of Air Quality
DAQE This is a document tracking code for internal UDAQ use
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FDCP Fugitive dust control plan
GHG Greenhouse Gas(es) - 40 CFR 52.21 (b)(49)(i)
GWP Global Warming Potential - 40 CFR Part 86.1818-12(a)
HAP or HAPs Hazardous air pollutant(s)
ITA Intent to Approve
LB/HR Pounds per hour
LB/YR Pounds per year
MACT Maximum Achievable Control Technology
MMBTU Million British Thermal Units
NAA Nonattainment Area
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NESHAP National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
NOI Notice of Intent
NOx Oxides of nitrogen
NSPS New Source Performance Standard
NSR New Source Review
PM10 Particulate matter less than 10 microns in size
PM2.5 Particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size
PSD Prevention of Significant Deterioration
PTE Potential to Emit
R307 Rules Series 307
R307-401 Rules Series 307 - Section 401
SO2 Sulfur dioxide
Title IV Title IV of the Clean Air Act
Title V Title V of the Clean Air Act
TPY Tons per year
UAC Utah Administrative Code
VOC Volatile organic compounds

DAQE-MN124440011-24

M E M O R A N D U M

TO: EQ He, NSR Engineer

FROM: Dave Prey, Air Quality Modeler

DATE: April 17, 2024
SUBJECT: Modeling Analysis Review for the Notice of Intent for Staker Parson Companies
- Keigley Quarry, Utah County, Utah
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
This is not a Major Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Source.

I. OBJECTIVE
Staker Parson Companies (Staker) is seeking an approval order for their Keigley Quarry located in
Utah County, Utah. Staker operates an aggregate and asphalt processing plant at its Keigley Quarry.
The aggregate processing plant includes crushers, screens, conveyors/stackers, feeders, and loaders.
The asphalt plant is equipped with a hot-mix asphalt plant and associated baghouse, storage silos
and bins, a wash plant, a feeder, and support equipment including oil heaters, conveyors, loaders,
bulldozers, and holding tanks. The dust mill includes a feeder, a hopper, a grinder, a furnace, silos,
and dust collectors. Annual production is limited to 6 million tons of aggregate, 0.5 million tons of
asphalt, and 0.1 million tons of rock dust. Staker is seeking to add Fuel storage Tanks, a Dust Mill,
and Drilling and Blasting Operations.

This report, prepared by the Staff of the New Source Review Section (NSR), contains a review of
the air quality impact analysis (AQIA) including the information, data, assumptions and modeling
results used to determine if the facility would be in compliance with State and Federal
concentration standards.

195 North 1950 West • Salt Lake City, UT
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 144820 • Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4820
Telephone [phone] • Fax [phone] • T.D.D. [phone]
www.deq.utah.gov
Printed on 100% recycled paper
State of Utah

SPENCER J. COX
Governor

DEIDRE HENDERSON
Lieutenant Governor

Department of
Environmental Quality

Kimberly D. Shelley
Executive Director

DIVISION OF AIR QUALITY
Bryce C. Bird
Director

+ .
DP
DP
DAQE-MN124440011-24
Page 2
II. APPLICABLE RULE(S)

Utah Air Quality Rules:

R307-401-6 Condition for Issuing an Approval Order
R307-410-3 Use of Dispersion Models
R307-410-4 Modeling of Criteria Pollutants in Attainment Areas

III. MODELING METHODOLOGY

A. Applicability

Emissions from the facility include PM10, NOx, CO, SO2, and HAPs. Modeling for PM10 was
performed by the UDAQ.

B. Assumptions

1. Topography/Terrain

The Plant is at an elevation 4780 feet with terrain features that have little affect on
concentration predictions.

a. Zone: 12

b. Approximate Location:

UTM (NAD83): 431640 meters East
4429382 meters North

2. Urban or Rural Area Designation

After a review of the appropriate 7.5 minute quadrangles, it was concluded the area is
“rural” for air modeling purposes.

3. Ambient Air

It was determined the Plant boundary used in the AQIA meets the State’s definition of
ambient air.

4. Building Downwash

The source was modeled with the AERMOD model. All structures at the plant were used in
the model to account for their influence on downwash.

DAQE-MN124440011-24
Page 3
5. Meteorology

Five (5) years of off-site surface and upper air data were used in the analysis consisting of
the following:

Surface – Spanish Fork Airport, UT NWS: 2016-2020
Upper Air – Salt Lake Airport, UT NWS: 2016-2020

6. Background

The background concentrations were based on concentrations measured in Lindon, Utah.

7. Receptor and Terrain Elevations

The modeling domain used consisted of receptors including property boundary receptors.
This area of the state contains mountainous terrain and the modeling domain has simple and
complex terrain features in the near and far fields. Therefore, receptor points representing
actual terrain elevations from the area were used in the analysis.

8. Model and Options

The State-accepted AERMOD model was used to predict air pollutant concentrations under
a simple/complex terrain/wake effect situation. In quantifying concentrations, the
regulatory default option was selected.

9. Air Pollutant Emission Rates

Source
UTM Coordinates Modeled Emission Rates
Easting Northing PM10
(m) (m) (lb/hr) (tons/yr) hrs/year
P_HMA 431640 4429382 0.2100 0.920 8760
UP_HMA 431370 4429250 0.0200 0.088 8760
P_AGG 431638 4429383 1.2200 5.344 8760
UP_AGG 431202 4429190 3.6400 15.943 8760
DISTAREA 431017 4429139 2.9018 12.710 8760
CONVEYOR 431180 4428962 0.7300 3.197 8760
PCRUSH 431196 4428963 1.0800 4.730 8760
SCRUSH 431045 4429303 0.2800 1.226 8760
SCREEN 431014 4429272 0.4000 1.752 8760
HMA 431264 4429247 5.4200 6.924 2555
UP_LOAD 430964 4429150 1.6600 7.271 8760
UP_LHMA 431207 4429261 0.2600 1.139 8760
DAQE-MN124440011-24
Page 4
PILES 430652 4429209 2.9200 12.790 8760
DOZER 430876 4428799 0.0500 0.219 8760
DROPS 431203 4428962 0.0500 0.219 8760
DUSTMILL 430636 4428678 0.3000 1.314 8760
DRLBLAST 431044 4428717 3.9400 0.410 208

Total 25.08 76.20

10. Source Location and Parameters

Source Type
Source Parameters
Elev
, Ht Te
mp
Flo
w
Di
a
Sigm
a-Y
Sigm
a-Z
X-
Dim
Y-
Dim Area
(ft) (m
) (ft) (K) (m/
s)
(m
) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m^2)
P_HMA
LINE_VOL
UME
4780
.1 4.3
13.
9 11.00 8.50
UP_HMA
LINE_VOL
UME
4872
.5 4.3
13.
9 11.00 8.50
P_AGG
LINE_VOL
UME
4780
.5 4.3
13.
9 11.00 8.50
UP_AGG
LINE_VOL
UME
4872
.0 4.3
13.
9 11.00 8.50
DISTAR
EA
AREA_POL
Y
4833
.9 1.0 3.3 0.00
27077
0.5
CONVEY
OR
LINE_VOL
UME
4640
.9 2.6 8.4 7.00 5.10
PCRUSH VOLUME
4632
.9 3.7
12.
0 0.00 1.83
SCRUSH VOLUME
4869
.3 3.7
12.
0 0.00 1.83
SCREEN VOLUME
4869
.7 3.7
12.
0 0.00 1.83
HMA POINT
4875
.4 6.7
22.
0 408
99.
49
0.6
5 0.00
UP_LOA
D
LINE_VOL
UME
4847
.3 3.4
11.
2 11.00 6.80
UP_LHM
A AREA
4877
.0 5.0
16.
4 0.00 2.50
139.
39
77.1
3
10751.
2
PILES
AREA_POL
Y
4743
.0 3.7
12.
0 0.00
78886.
9
DAQE-MN124440011-24
Page 5
DOZER AREA
4797
.3 1.0 3.3 0.00 68.1
71.1
3 4844.0
DROPS VOLUME
4634
.9 1.8 6.0 0.00 0.30
DUSTMI
LL AREA
4765
.9 6.0
19.
7 0.00 3.00
151.
38
135.
35
20489.
3
DRLBLA
ST
AREA_POL
Y
4810
.0
15.
2
50.
0 0.00 7.62
15172.
9

IV. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

A. National Ambient Air Quality Standards

The below table provides a comparison of the predicted total air quality concentrations with the
NAAQS. The predicted total concentrations are less than the NAAQS.

Pollutant Period
Prediction Others Background Total NAAQS Percent
(μg/m3) (μg/m3) (μg/m3) (μg/m3) (μg/m3) NAAQS
PM10 24-Hour 70.01 0.00 65 135.0 150 90.0%

DP:jg

Staker Parson - Keigley site-wide emissions (tpy)
Current (DAQE-AN124440009-18)Dust Mill/Bagging/Fuel storage Drilling/Blasting Total proposed emissions
from NOI 05/26/23 2/16/1924
PM10 73.75 1.33 0.41 75.49
PM2.5 29.05 0.45 0.04 29.54
Nox 13.95 1.41 4.08 19.44
SO2 15.21 0.00 0.48 15.69
CO 32.55 0.35 16.08 48.98
VOC 8.00 0.35 0.00 8.35
HAPs 2.59 0.00 0.00 2.59
CO2e 8250 1580 0.00 9830.00
2/27/24, 3:54 PM State of Utah Mail - Your NOI Submitted 5/26/23
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/?ik=20ff41d2e4&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f:1791077122320727923&simpl=msg-f:1791077122320727923 1/1
You don't often get email from [e-mail]. Learn why this is important
Enqiang He <[e-mail]>
Your NOI Submitted 5/26/23
Boudreau, Christian (Staker & Parson) <[e-mail]>Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 10:24
AM
To: Enqiang He <[e-mail]>
Answers to your questions below:

1. The quarry runs on line power.
2. The asphalt plant does not have the capability to run on used fuel oil,
3. The plant is currently rated at 400 TPH. There are plans to increase the production capacity of the plant in the
future (several years from now) however, the maximum capacity at that point will get to just under 500 TPH when
that happens.

From: Enqiang He <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, February 8, 2024 11:43 PM
To: Boudreau, Christian (Staker & Parson) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [EXT] Your NOI Submitted 5/26/23

[Quoted text hidden]

BACT for Drilling and BlasƟng
Keigley Quarry
BACT for Explosive Blasting
Step 1: Identify All Control Technologies
The process of blasting generates NOx, CO, SO2, PM10 and PM2. Pollutant emissions are
dependent on the surface area and amount of ammonium nitrate-fuel oil (ANFO) used per
blast. Due to the nature of blasting activities, there are no control technologies available to
employ beyond best management practices. Best management practices for this activity
include blasting during low wind events, limiting over-shoot, and designing blasts to
maximize hole depth to reduce surface area impacted by the blast.
Step 2: Eliminate Technically Infeasible Options
No additional controls are feasible due to the nature of the blasting process.
Step 3: Rank Remaining Control Technologies by Control Effectiveness
The only control option for blasting is best management practices.

Step 4: Evaluate Most Effective Controls and Document Results
Best management practices are considered BACT for this activity. Best management practices
include blasting during low wind periods, limiting over-shoot, and maximizing hole.
Step 5: Select BACT
Best management practices and sound blasting design are considered BACT for blasting activities at
Keigley Quarry.
BACT for Earthen Drilling
Step 1: Identify All Control Technologies
Earthen drilling generates PM10 and PM2.5 in the form of drill cuttings. Available control
technologies for earthen drilling are water injection and dust collection systems.
Step 2: Eliminate Technically Infeasible Options
Both water injection and dust collection systems are technically feasible control options.
Step 3: Rank Remaining Control Technologies by Control Effectiveness
1. Water Injection
2. Dust Collection
Step 4: Evaluate Most Effective Controls and Document Results
Water injection is a low-cost and common practice and is routinely implemented to control
particulate emissions from drilling at mining sites with control efficiencies reaching 90%. (Castle
Mountain Mine Open Pit Heap Leach Gold Mine Expansion Project, San Bernadino County, 1997)1
The control efficiencies for dust collection systems are similar to water injection control at around
90%. (Castle Mountain Mine Open Pit Heap Leach Gold Mine Expansion Project, San Bernadino
County, 1997)1 However, compared to water injection, dust collection systems introduce some
logistical constraints when implemented in non-stationary drilling operations like at Keigley Quarry.
In addition, the equipment employed by dust collection systems introduces maintenance and
upkeep costs making the technology more expensive than water injection.
Step 5: Select BACT
Water injection is considered BACT for earthen drilling at Keigley Quarry.1

1 Castle Mountain Mine Open Pit Heap Leach Gold Mine Expansion Project, San Bernadino County: Environmental
Impact Statement. (1997).

Drilling and BlasƟng Emissions Summary
Keigley Quarry

Company:Staker Parson
Site:Keigley
Date:1/2/2024
Reference:Current PTE (TPY)Requested PTE (TPY)Emission Difference (TPY)PM10 Nonattainment Emission Offset
PM10 73.75 74.77 1.02 8.38 TPY Not Applicable
PM2.5 29.05 14.79 -14.26
NOx 13.95 19.24 5.29 PM2.5 Nonattainment Emission Offset
SO2 15.21 17.28 2.07 2.48 TPY Not Applicable
CO 32.55 49.65 17.10
VOC 8.00 17.37 9.37
HAPs 2.59 0.00 -2.59
CO2e 8250.00 11876.71 3626.71
Company:Staker Parson
Site:Keigley
Date:1/2/2024
Total Annual Emissions in Tons per Year
Source Name PM10 PM2.5 NOx SOX CO VOC CO2e CH4 CO2 N2O
RMC 0.000 0.000 --------
MH-Trucks/Loaders 0.377 0.055 --------
MH-Dozer 3.297 1.812
MH-Conveyors 0.152 0.043 --------
Aggregate Throughput 26.809 3.069 --------
Dust Mill 0.030 0.013
Blasting & Drilling 0.410 0.044 4.08 0.48 16.08 ----------
Storage Piles 5.749 0.431 --------
Disturbed Area 5.700 0.855 --------
Unpaved Roads 22.144 2.214 --------
Paved Roads 3.687 0.369
Drum HMA 5.900 5.575 13.75 14.50 32.50 8 8325 3 8250 --
HMA Loading 0.143 0.143 ----0.29 3.05 --0.008 ----
HMA Loadout 0.130 0.130 ----0.34 0.98 1.690 0.07 ----
Lime Silo 0.079 0.012 ----------------
Asphalt Transport ----------0.275 --------
RAP 0.092 0.007 ----------------
Total - Fugitive 74.701 14.773 17.830 14.980 49.213 12.299 8326.690 3.076 8250.000 0.000
-
Water Heater 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Hot Oil System --------0.08 --1969.401 --1969.401 --
Generator
Asphalt Tank Emissions ----------4.725 --------
Diesel Tank Emission ----------0.330 --------
Dust Mill Furnace 0.071 0.018 1.41 2.30 0.35 0.018 1580.624 0.004 1575.336 0.018
Total 74.771 14.791 19.243 17.280 49.650 17.372 11876.715 3.079 11794.737 0.018
Total Hourly Emissions of HAPs (lb/hr)
HAP Name Water Heater Drum HMA HMA Loadout HMA Loading Hot Oil System
Dust Mill
Furnace Generator Total
Acetaldehyde 6.50E-01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 6.50E-01
Acrolein 1.30E-02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.30E-02
Benzene 0.00E+00 1.95E-01 1.08E-03 1.95E-03 0.00E+00 3.52E-06 0.00E+00 1.98E-01
Ethylbenzene 0.00E+00 1.20E-01 5.82E-03 2.32E-03 0.00E+00 1.04E-06 0.00E+00 1.28E-01
Formaldehyde 0.00E+00 1.55E+00 1.83E-03 4.20E-02 0.00E+00 5.42E-04 0.00E+00 1.59E+00
Hexane 4.60E-01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 4.60E-01
Isooctane 2.00E-02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.00E-02
Methyl Chloroform 2.40E-02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.40E-02
Methylene Chloride 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.65E-05 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.65E-05
Methyl Ethyl Ketone 1.00E-02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.00E-02
Propoinaldehyde 6.50E-02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 6.50E-02
Quinone 8.00E-02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 8.00E-02
Toluene 0.00E+00 1.45E+00 4.37E-03 3.78E-03 0.00E+00 1.02E-04 0.00E+00 1.46E+00
Xylene 0.00E+00 1.00E-01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.00E-01
2-Methylnaphthalene 8.50E-02 4.95E-02 3.21E-01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 4.56E-01
3-Methylnaphthalene 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00
Acenaphthene 0.00E+00 7.00E-04 5.41E-03 2.86E-02 8.51E-06 3.47E-07 0.00E+00 3.48E-02
Acenaphthylene 1.55E-03 5.82E-04 8.53E-04 3.21E-06 4.16E-09 0.00E+00 2.99E-03
Anthracene 0.00E+00 1.55E-03 1.46E-03 7.92E-03 2.89E-06 2.00E-08 0.00E+00 1.09E-02
Benzo(a)anthracene 0.00E+00 1.05E-04 3.95E-04 3.41E-03 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 3.91E-03
Criteria Pollutants Greenhous Gas Emissions
Benzo(a)pyrene 4.90E-06 4.78E-05 --0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 5.27E-05
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 5.00E-05 1.58E-04 --1.61E-06 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.10E-04
Benzo(e)pyrene 5.50E-05 1.62E-04 5.79E-04 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 7.96E-04
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 0.00E+00 2.00E-05 3.95E-05 --0.00E+00 3.71E-08 0.00E+00 5.95E-05
Benzo(b,k)fluoranthene 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.43E-08 0.00E+00 2.43E-08
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2.05E-05 4.57E-05 --0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 6.62E-05
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00
1,3-Butadiene 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00
Chrysene 0.00E+00 9.00E-05 2.14E-03 1.28E-02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.50E-02
Fluoranthene 0.00E+00 3.05E-04 1.04E-03 9.14E-03 7.07E-07 7.95E-08 0.00E+00 1.05E-02
Fluorene 0.00E+00 5.50E-03 1.60E-02 6.15E-02 5.14E-07 7.34E-08 0.00E+00 8.31E-02
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.00E+00 3.50E-06 9.77E-06 --0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.33E-05
Naphthalene 0.00E+00 3.25E-01 2.60E-02 1.11E-01 2.73E-04 1.86E-05 0.00E+00 4.62E-01
Perylene 4.40E-06 4.57E-04 1.83E-03 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.29E-03
Phenanthrene 0.00E+00 1.15E-02 1.68E-02 1.10E-01 7.87E-05 1.73E-07 0.00E+00 1.38E-01
Pyrene 0.00E+00 1.50E-03 3.12E-03 2.68E-02 5.14E-07 6.98E-08 0.00E+00 3.14E-02
Chloroethane 0.00E+00 4.37E-06 2.44E-04 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.48E-04
Chloromethane 0.00E+00 3.12E-04 1.40E-03 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.71E-03
Carbon Disulfide 0.00E+00 2.70E-04 9.75E-04 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.25E-03
Styrene 0.00E+00 1.52E-04 3.29E-04 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 4.81E-04
2-Butanone 0.00E+00 1.02E-03 2.38E-03 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 3.40E-03
Bromomethane 0.00E+00 2.00E-04 2.99E-04 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 4.98E-04
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 3.88E-06 0.00E+00 3.88E-06
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00
OCDD 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.57E-09 5.09E-11 0.00E+00 2.62E-09
TOTAL 0.00E+00 5.17E+00 1.38E-01 7.51E-01 3.70E-04 6.72E-04 0.00E+00 6.06E+00
Total HAPs in TPY
HAP Name Water Heater-NG Drum HMA HMA Loadout HMA Loading Hot Oil System
Dust Mill
Furnace Generator Total
Acetaldehyde 3.25E-01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 3.25E-01
Acrolein 6.50E-03 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 6.50E-03
Benzene 0.00E+00 9.75E-02 5.41E-04 9.75E-04 0.00E+00 1.51E-05 0.00E+00 9.90E-02
Ethylbenzene 0.00E+00 6.00E-02 2.91E-03 1.16E-03 0.00E+00 4.49E-06 0.00E+00 6.41E-02
Formaldehyde 0.00E+00 7.75E-01 9.15E-04 2.10E-02 0.00E+00 2.33E-03 0.00E+00 7.99E-01
Hexane 2.30E-01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.30E-01
Isooctane 1.00E-02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.00E-02
Methyl Chloroform 1.20E-02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.20E-02
Methylene Chloride 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 8.23E-06 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 8.23E-06
Methyl Ethyl Ketone 5.00E-03 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 5.00E-03
Propoinaldehyde 3.25E-02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 3.25E-02
Quinone 4.00E-02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 4.00E-02
Toluene 0.00E+00 7.25E-01 2.18E-03 1.89E-03 0.00E+00 4.38E-04 0.00E+00 7.30E-01
Xylene 0.00E+00 5.00E-02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 5.00E-02
2-Methylnaphthalene 4.25E-02 2.47E-02 1.61E-01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.28E-01
3-Methylnaphthalene 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00
Acenaphthene 0.00E+00 3.50E-04 2.70E-03 1.43E-02 3.73E-05 1.49E-06 0.00E+00 1.74E-02
Acenaphthylene 7.75E-04 2.91E-04 4.27E-04 1.41E-05 1.79E-08 0.00E+00 1.51E-03
Anthracene 0.00E+00 7.75E-04 7.28E-04 3.96E-03 1.27E-05 8.62E-08 0.00E+00 5.48E-03
Benzo(a)anthracene 0.00E+00 5.25E-05 1.98E-04 1.71E-03 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.96E-03
Benzo(a)pyrene 2.45E-06 2.39E-05 --0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.64E-05
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.00E+00 2.50E-05 7.90E-05 --7.03E-06 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.11E-04
Benzo(e)pyrene 2.75E-05 8.11E-05 2.89E-04 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 3.98E-04
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 0.00E+00 1.00E-05 1.98E-05 --0.00E+00 1.60E-07 0.00E+00 2.99E-05
Benzo(b,k)fluoranthene 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.05E-07 0.00E+00 1.05E-07
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 1.03E-05 2.29E-05 --0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 3.31E-05
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00
1,3-Butadiene 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00
Chrysene 0.00E+00 4.50E-05 1.07E-03 6.40E-03 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 7.51E-03
Fluoranthene 0.00E+00 1.53E-04 5.20E-04 4.57E-03 3.09E-06 3.42E-07 0.00E+00 5.25E-03
Fluorene 0.00E+00 2.75E-03 8.01E-03 3.08E-02 2.25E-06 3.16E-07 0.00E+00 4.15E-02
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.00E+00 1.75E-06 4.89E-06 --0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 6.64E-06
Naphthalene 0.00E+00 1.63E-01 1.30E-02 5.54E-02 1.20E-03 7.98E-05 0.00E+00 2.32E-01
Perylene 2.20E-06 2.29E-04 9.14E-04 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.14E-03
Phenanthrene 0.00E+00 5.75E-03 8.42E-03 5.48E-02 3.45E-04 7.42E-07 0.00E+00 6.94E-02
Pyrene 0.00E+00 7.50E-04 1.56E-03 1.34E-02 2.25E-06 3.00E-07 0.00E+00 1.57E-02
Chloroethane 0.00E+00 2.18E-06 1.22E-04 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.24E-04
Chloromethane 0.00E+00 1.56E-04 7.01E-04 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 8.57E-04
Carbon Disulfide 0.00E+00 1.35E-04 4.87E-04 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 6.23E-04
Styrene 0.00E+00 7.59E-05 1.65E-04 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.40E-04
2-Butanone 0.00E+00 5.09E-04 1.19E-03 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.70E-03
Bromomethane 0.00E+00 9.98E-05 1.49E-04 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.49E-04
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.67E-05 0.00E+00 1.67E-05
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00
OCDD 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.13E-08 2.19E-10 0.00E+00 1.15E-08
TOTAL 0.00E+00 2.58E+00 6.92E-02 3.75E-01 1.62E-03 2.89E-03 0.00E+00 3.03E+00
Source:Drilling & Blasting
Company:Staker Parson
Site:Keigley
Date:1/2/2024
Drilling and Blasting Parameters
Area per Blast: 24000 ft2
Average Hole Spacing:15 ft
Blasts per Year:24 blast(s)
ANFO used per Blast:20 tons
Drill Shroud Control Factor:0.90
Pollutant Emission Rate
(lbs/hr)
Emission Total
(tons/year)
NOx 14.17 4.08
CO 55.83 16.08
SO2 1.67 0.48
PM10 1.42 0.41
PM2.5 0.15 0.04
Emission Source TSP Emission
Factor
PM10 Emission
Factor
PM2.5 Emission
Factor
CO Emission
Factor
Nox Emission
Factor
SO2 Emission
Factor
Drilling (lb/hole)1.3 0.663 0.195 ------
Blasting (lb/blast)52.053 27.068 1.562 ------
ANFO (lb/ton)------67.00 17.00 2.00
Source of Data:Equations:
Emission Factor:AP-42, Section 11.9 Western Surface Coal Mines Emission Rates:
Table 11.9-1,4
AP-42, Section 13.3 Explosives Detonation
Table 13.3-1
Appendix B.2 Generalized Particle Size Distributions
Table B.2-2
Emission Rate: Calculated
Control Factor:Castle Mountain Mine Open Pit Heap Leach Gold Mine Expansion Project, San Bernadino County: Environmental Impact Statement. (1997).
Assumptions:
Assumes one blast results in emissions for 24hr
(𝐸𝐹௟௕
௧௢௡)(#௧௢௡௦ ஺ேிை
௕௟௔௦௧ )(1 ௕௟௔௦௧
ௗ௔௬ )(ଵ ௗ௔௬
ଶସ ௛௢௨௥௦) = (ER ௟௕
௛௥)
(𝐸𝐹௟௕
௕௟௔௦௧ +𝐸𝐹௟௕
௛௢௟௘ #௛௢௟௘௦
௕௟௔௦௧ 1 −𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙 𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑦)ଵ ௕௟௔௦௧
ଶସ ௛௥ =𝐸𝐹௟௕
௛௥
9/5/23, 10:07 AM State of Utah Mail - Staker Parson Companies Keigly Quarry
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=20ff41d2e4&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f:1776212090282826864&simpl=msg-f:177621209028282686…1/2
Enqiang He <[e-mail]>
Staker Parson Companies Keigly Quarry
4 messages
Susan Weisenberg <[e-mail]>Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 9:30 AM
To: Enqiang He <[e-mail]>
Cc: Chad Gilgen <[e-mail]>, Christine Bodell <[e-mail]>
Hello Eq, Christine Bodell and I inspected Staker Parson's Keigly Quarry Site 12444, last Wednesday (8/30). I was asked
to pass on some potential permitting additions as there is an AO modification in process.
There are currently 2 diesel fuel tanks, one reportedly at 10,000 gallons and one smaller. There is also a 1,000 gallon
gasoline tank.
In addition, part of this site's process includes an old Rock Dust Mill that has apparently been there since the 1940s, but it
isn't clearly identified on the AO. It might be great to have this process and the associated equipment explicitly defined so
there will be less confusion for inspectors in the future.
Let me know if you have any questions, thanks for your time with this. Please keep me or Chad posted if there are new
developments.
Susan Weisenberg,
Environmental Scientist
Office: 385-306-6512
Christine Bodell <[e-mail]>Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 9:35 AM
To: Susan Weisenberg <[e-mail]>
Cc: Enqiang He <[e-mail]>, Chad Gilgen <[e-mail]>
Also,
The source told us that the asphalt plant and aggregate processing operations are now run via line power - The fuel tanks
are for the onsite mobile equipment.
You might want to confirm with the source if this is the case, but Condition II.B.4 on the existing AO may no longer apply.
This would help you clean up the permit!
[Quoted text hidden]
Susan Weisenberg <[e-mail]>Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 9:42 AM
To: Christine Bodell <[e-mail]>
Cc: Enqiang He <[e-mail]>, Chad Gilgen <[e-mail]>
Thanks! I forgot about the conditions that may need to be removed. The source contact has also stated that they no
longer work with used fuel oil for the asphalt plant and have no plans to use it in the future. It is possible that conditions
II.B.4.c - II.B.4.c.3 can be removed as well.
Susan Weisenberg,
Environmental Scientist
Office: 385-306-6512
9/5/23, 10:07 AM State of Utah Mail - Staker Parson Companies Keigly Quarry
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=20ff41d2e4&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f:1776212090282826864&simpl=msg-f:177621209028282686…2/2
[Quoted text hidden]
Enqiang He <[e-mail]>Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 10:06 AM
To: Susan Weisenberg <[e-mail]>
Cc: Christine Bodell <[e-mail]>, Chad Gilgen <[e-mail]>
Susan and Christine,
Thanks for the information. I'll keep them in the file folder and incorporate them in the
AO.
EQ He, CPM
Permitting Engineer, Minor NSR Section, Permitting Branch |
Division of Air Quality
1950 West 195 North, Salt Lake City, UT 84116
Phone: [phone]
[e-mail]
[Quoted text hidden]

Notice of Intent (NOI) 
Keigley Quarry 
Submittal Date: 05/26/2023 

Prepared and Submitted By: 
Staker Parson Companies 
89 West 13490 South 
Draper, UT 84020 

To: 
Utah Division of Air Quality 
195 North 1950 West 
Salt Lake City, UT 84114 

NOTICE OF INTENT 
STAKER PARSON COMPANIES  
Keigley Quarry Operations 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 
Section           Page 
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 2 
1.1 Contact Information ............................................................................................................. 3 
2.0 SOURCE DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................................ 3 
2.1 FACILITIES PROCESSING OPERATIONS ................................................................................. 3 
Figure 2.1.2 ‐ Location and Property Boundary of HMA Facility ..................................................... 5 
Figure 2.1.3 Property Boundary ....................................................................................................... 6 
2.2 Equipment List ...................................................................................................................... 7 
3.0 AIR EMISSIONS ....................................................................................................................................... 7 
4.0 BEST AVAILABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES (BACT) ....................................................................... 8 
4.1 BACT for Dust Mill and Bagging Operation (Grinding, Conveying, Storing, Bagging) ........ 8 
4.2 BACT for Dust Mill Furnace .................................................................................................. 9 
4.3 BACT for Fuel Storage <30,000 Gallon Tanks .................................................................... 11 
4.4 BACT for Dust Mill Haul Roads ........................................................................................... 12 
5.0 REGULATORY REVIEW‐STATE ....................................................................................................... 14 
6.0 REGULATORY REVIEW‐FEDERAL ................................................................................................... 14 
7.0 DISPERSION MODELING/OFFSETS ................................................................................................ 14 
Appendix A ................................................................................................................................................. 16 
Appendix B.................................................................................................................................................. 18 

2 

NOTICE OF INTENT 
STAKER PARSON COMPANIES  
Keigley Quarry Operations 

1.0 INTRODUCTION 
Staker Parson Companies has prepared a Notice of Intent (NOI) to request the addition of a Dust Mill 
Operation to Staker’s current AO DAQE‐AN124440009‐18. The facility is in Utah County which is in 
serious non‐attainment for PM2.5, Marginal non‐attainment for Ozone, and Maintenance for PM10 and 
CO. The Universal Transvers Mercator (UTM) in NAD27 for the Keigley Quarry Dust Mill operations is 
4428.598 km Northing, 430.716 km Easting, Zone 12T. The facility is considered a minor source for both 
criteria pollutants and hazardous air pollutants (HAPs).  

The facility aggregate and hot mix plants currently operate under the AO DAQE‐AN124440009‐18. The 
current AO is under the name Staker Parson Companies, Keigley Quarry. The current and proposed 
potential to emit (PTEs) values are listed in Table 1 below.  

Table 1 Existing AO PTEs 
Reference: Current PTE (TPY) 
PM10 73.75 
PM2.5 29.05 
NOx 13.95 
SO2 15.21 
CO 32.55 
VOC 8.00 
HAPs 2.59 
CO2e 8250.00 

The current production limits are 6,000,000 tons or processed aggregate material per rolling 12‐month 
period, 500,000 tons of asphalt material per rolling 12‐month period and 500 tons per hour of asphalt 
materials. Staker Parson is requesting no change to existing production limits or hours. The proposed 
production for the Dust Mill is 100,000 Tons per rolling 12‐month period. Please see Section 2.2 for 
details on equipment associated with the Dust Mill. Staker is also proposing that fuel storage tanks be 
added to the equipment list.   

3 

1.1 Contact Information 
Any correspondence or communication regarding this NOI should be addressed to:  
Nakeasha Scovill 
Staker Parson Companies 
89 West 13490 South, Suite 100 
Mobile Phone: (385)‐266‐2060 
Facsimile: (801)‐871‐6869 
Email: [e-mail] 

2.0 SOURCE DESCRIPTION 
The following section presents a detailed description of the facilities processes, air pollution‐producing 
equipment:   
2.1 FACILITIES PROCESSING OPERATIONS 
The existing Keigley operations consists of an aggregate processing plant and an asphalt plant. 
Processed aggregate from the aggregate processing plant is utilized in the Dust Mill operation 
where the end product is rock dust. Processed aggregate is loaded into a feeder and conveyed 
through enclosed conveyors to a product storage bin where it is transferred to a grinder through 
an enclosed drop point. The grinder pulverizes the processed aggregate into rock dust where is 
also flash dried with a furnace. The rock dust is then transferred to a product storage silo where 
it is conveyed to the bagging operation which is fully enclosed. The rock dust is bagged manually 
and then palleted electronically. A small amount of rock dust is loaded out through the storage 
silo directly into trucks. Please see Appendix A for the visual process diagram.  

4 

Figure 2.1.1 ‐ Aerial of Staker Parson Keigley Facility 

5 

Figure 2.1.2 ‐ Location and Property Boundary of HMA Facility 

6 

Figure 2.1.3 Property Boundary 

7 

2.2  Equipment List 
The proposed equipment to be added on the Keigley AO is as follows:  
Dust Mill/Bagging Operation:  
 One (1) Feeder Bin 
 One (1) Chips Hopper 
 Two (2) Product Storage Silos 
 Two (2) Dust Collectors 
 One (1) Cyclone 
 One (1) Grinder with Classifier 
 One (1) 2.3 MMBtu Furnace 
 Associated equipment: Conveyors, Screw Conveyor, Robot, Bag Plant 

Fuel Storage:  
 One (1) 10,000 Gallon Diesel Fuel Tank 
 One (1) 4,000 Gallon Diesel Fuel Tank 
 One (1) 1,000 Gallon Gasoline Tank 
3.0 AIR EMISSIONS 
The Keigley Dust Mill and Bagging operations will have the potential to emit criteria pollutants. The 
conveying, grinding and storage processes have the potential to emit particulate matter. The drying and 
fuel storage operations have the potential to emit SOx, NOx, CO, VOCs, and Greenhouse Gases. Table 2 
shows the existing PTEs, proposed PTEs, and the increases that will result from the Dust Mill and Fuel 
Storage operations. 

Table 2 Current Vs Proposed PTEs 
Reference: 
Current PTE 
(TPY) 
Requested PTE 
(TPY) 
Emission Difference 
(TPY) 
PM10 73.75 75.08 1.33 
PM2.5 29.05 29.50 0.45 
NOx 13.95 15.36 1.41 
SO2 15.21 15.21 0.00 
CO 32.55 32.90 0.35 
VOC 8.00 8.35 0.35 
HAPs 2.59 2.59 0.00 
CO2e 8250.00 9830.62 1580.32 

 For detailed calculations on the potential to emit of the proposed operations please see Appendix B.  

8 

4.0 BEST AVAILABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES (BACT) 
According to UAC R307‐101‐2, “BACT means an emission limitation and/or other controls to include 
design, equipment, work practice, operation standard or combination thereof…” BACT then includes 
discussion based on five criteria. The criteria are energy impact, environmental impacts, economic 
impact, other considerations, and cost calculation. BACT only needs to be completed for new or 
modified equipment. Existing equipment is not included in the BACT process. In “Top‐Down Best 
Available Control Technology Guidance Document”, produced by the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) the following steps are suggested for completing a thorough BACT 
Analysis:  
1. Identify All Control Technologies 
2. Eliminate Technically Infeasible Options 
3. Rank Remaining Control Technologies by Control Effectiveness 
4. Evaluate Most Effective Controls and Document Results 
5. Select BACT 
The following sections demonstrates the feasibility of all air pollution control equipment the will be on 
the Keigley Dust Mill and Fuel Storage Operations: 
4.1 BACT for Dust Mill and Bagging Operation (Grinding, Conveying, Storing, Bagging) 

Step 1: Identify All Control Technologies 
The emissions that result from material handling components (i.e. conveying, grinding, transfers) 
consist primarily of fugitive PM10 and PM2.5. The technologies that are known to help reduce fugitive 
emissions and dust from material handling processes include wet scrubbers, cyclones, Electrostatic 
Precipitators (ESPS), coverings, wet suppression, windbreaks, enclosures, and soil stabilizers. 
Step 2: Eliminate Technically Infeasible Options 
All identified control technologies are technically feasible.  
Step 3: Rank Remaining Control Technologies by Control Effectiveness 
The following demonstrate the efficiency of control technologies from most effective to least 
effective:  
1) Enclosures/Coverings‐100%1 
2) Dust Collectors/Fabric Filters‐99‐99.9%1 
3) Cyclones‐60‐95% PM10, 20‐70% PM2.51 
4) Windbreaks (0‐100%) 
5) Soil Stabilizers 85% 
6) Wet Suppression 70% 

 1. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Air Pollution Control Technology Fact Sheet, Wet Scrubbers, Cyclones, Permanent Total 
Enclosures, ESPS, Dust Collectors, Wind Breaks, Soil Stabilizers, Wet Suppression EPA‐452/F‐03‐016. Web 2021 

9 

Step 4: Evaluate Most Effective Controls and Document Results 
The top control technologies as demonstrated in Step 3 are enclosures, fabric filters, and cyclones. 
The Keigley Quarry has partial enclosure of conveyors, grinding, and flash drying operations. After 
the product is flash dried it is transported through fully enclosed pipes that lead to a cyclone before 
dropping in a product storage silo that is equipped with a fabric filter. The product is conveyed to 
the bagging operation which is fully enclosed and piped back to the silo fabric filters. Based on Step 
3’s determination Staker defined these three control technologies as BACT for the Keigley Dust Mill 
and Bagging Operation.  
Step 5: Select BACT 
The cyclone, fabric filters, and partial enclosures are considered as BACT for the Keigley Dust Mill.  

4.2 BACT for Dust Mill Furnace 
Step 1: Identify All Control Technologies 
The process of combustion of fuel can generate NOx, PM, SO2, and VOC. PM, SO2, and VOC 
emissions are considered minor so the BACT analysis of the furnace will focus on NOx 
emissions. Control technologies that have been identified for controlling NOx emissions are 
as follows:  
 Good combustion practices 
 Pre‐combustion modifications (low excess air, air staging, etc…) 
 Combustion controls (temperature control, fuel‐to‐air ratio)  
 FGR 
 Low NOx burners 
 Ultra‐low NOx burners 
 Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 
 Selective Non‐Catalytic Reduction (SNCR)  
Step 2: Eliminate Technically Infeasible Options 
All identified control technologies are technically feasible. 
Step 3: Rank Remaining Control Technologies by Control Effectiveness 
SCR add‐on technology can have NOx removal efficiencies between 70‐90%. SNCR can have 
NOx removal efficiencies between 30‐70%. SCRs use a catalyst to react with injected ammonia 
to chemically reduce NOx emissions and some of the ammonia doesn’t react. The ammonia 
that doesn’t react will slip through and have adverse effects of the environment. SNCR is similar 
to SCR except for it doesn’t have a catalyst and injects ammonia directly into the combustion 
zone. Additionally, SCR is only effective at high temperatures between 450⁰F‐840⁰F and SNCR 
between 1,400⁰F‐2,000⁰F, meaning additional heating would be required to meet optimal 

10 

operating temperature. Also, since the initial cost of SCR systems are so significant it is usually 
only practical to install SCR or SNCR on large combustion units (>100 MMBTu/hr)3. Since the 
boiler at the Keigley site is rated at 2.3 MMbtu/hr, SCR and SNCR are not further 
considered as a controls. 
Low NOx burners reduce NOx by accomplishing the combustion process in stages. LNBs and 
ULNBs can have a control efficiency of 40‐85% depending on the uncontrolled emission levels. 
The efficiency depends on the design, furnace/spacing, fan capacity, and flame shaping. All 
those factors must be considered when choosing a low NOx burner that is right for desired 
reductions and heater. As a result, while the operation costs are low for LNBs and ULNBs the 
capital costs are significantly high. Conventional LNB retrofits will most likely require burner 
respacing, repiping, and pressure part changes which adds to the already high capital cost. The 
Keigley Dust Mill furnace was manufactured in 1975 and thus any reconstruction options are 
infeasible. A brand new unit would need to be installed to meet any Low NOx requirements.  

FGR: 
FGR is the process of recirculating exhausting flue gas back through the flame. FGR control 
percentages vary based on the NOx levels required, as a result the control efficiency relies 
largely on the NOx level desired and the type of fuel being burned. They are typically used in 
combination with low NOx burners. When FGRs and LNBs are used in combination the resulting 
reduction efficiency of NOx can be between 60‐90%. Although FGR is technically feasible and 
have favorable control efficiencies when used in combination with other NOx controls, they 
have the potential to affect combustion efficiency, burner capacity, flame stability and 
turndown. To accommodate the additional flue gas being moved through the burner, a lot of 
times, more horsepower is required. Many existing boilers also don’t have the mechanical 
construction to accommodate FGRs. Additionally, while slowing down the combustion reaction 
decreases the production of NOx it can have an adverse effect and result in an increase of CO, which 
may require another control technology. Due to the age of the furnace and the relatively small 
emissions FGR methods will not be further considered as a control option. 

The principal mechanism of NOx formation in natural gas combustion is thermal NOx and most 
thermal NOx is formed in the high temperature flame zone near the burners. As a result, the 
three factors that affect NOx formation are oxygen concentration, peak temperature, and time 
of exposure at peak temperature1. Combustion controls attempt to address those three factors 
but potentially do not affect the concentration of NOx leaving the exhaust and often require 
additional post‐combustion controls. Pre‐combustion modifications potentially reduce burner 
efficiency and increase fuel demand which can negate emission reduction obtained by the 
modification in the first place. Therefore, these modifications will not be further considered as 
control options. 

Good combustion practices include good equipment maintenance and operating procedures 
according to manufacturer recommendations, and use of low sulfur content fuel. 

Step 4: Evaluate Most Effective Controls and Document Results 

11 

The remaining control technologies include Low NOx burners and Good combustion practices. A 
brand new unit at 120‐140 PPM NOx emissions is approximately $163,000 and $90,000 to meet 80‐
90 PPM. These amounts do not include installation and any other connective piping, modification to 
existing fuel/air supply lines or any connective electrical craftwork. The NOx emissions for the 
existing 2.3 mmBTU/hr furnace is approximately 1.42 Tons per Year. This is based off of AP‐42 
emission factors. The quoted 120‐140 PPM furnace would emit more NOx emissions than a furnace 
with emission rates equivalent to AP‐42.  The quoted 80‐90 PPM furnace is a little better at 1.19 TPY 
and 0.23 Tons of NOx removed. The annualized cost of the 80‐90 PPM furnace is estimated at 
$12,839 giving the quoted furnace a cost effectiveness of $56,794/Ton of NOx removed.  Due to the 
fact that the furnace has such small emissions these quoted furnaces are considered economically 
infeasible for the dust mill operation.  
Step 5: Select BACT 
Good combustion practices and good equipment maintenance and operating procedures with low 
sulfur fuel are considered as BACT for the Keigley Dust Mill Furnace.  

4.3 BACT for Fuel Storage <30,000 Gallon Tanks 
Step 1: Identify All Control Technologies 
The Keigley facility has a 10,000‐gallon diesel fuel tank and a 4,000‐gallon diesel tank located 
on‐site. There is also one 1,000 Gallon gasoline tank located on‐site. Storage tanks have the 
potential to emit VOC and HAP emission from loading, unloading, and from working and 
breathing losses associated with temperature changes in storage units. Controls that have been 
identified to help reduce emissions are:  
 Submerged Fill Pipes 
 Vapor Control Systems 
Step 2: Eliminate Technically Infeasible Options 
All identified control technologies are technically feasible. 
Step 3: Rank Remaining Control Technologies by Control Effectiveness 
Submerged Fill Pipes: consists of hard pipes installed to the inlet of the storage tank that extend 
to no more than six inches above the bottom of the tank, or six inches above the maximum 
drain level of the tank. One other option to meet the definition of submerged fill is for the fill 
pipe discharge point to be at the bottom of the tanks so there is no drop during loading 
procedures.  

Vapor Control Systems: Vapor Recovery Systems (VRU’s) route light hydrocarbon condensate 
back through the system to reduce losses compared to venting or flaring vapors. 

12 

Implementation and installation of a VRU system can cost anywhere between $35,738 ‐ 
$103,9592. VRU’s are estimated to be able to recover 95% of hydrocarbon emissions as well as 
capture HAPs. The total losses from the storage tanks on‐site are estimated to emit 0.33 TPY. At 
a 95% reduction the VRU’s would still emit approximately 0.016 TPY. At $35,738 per tank that 
calculates out at a cost effectiveness of $27,464. VRUs are considered economically infeasible 
and not further considered as BACT.   
Step 4: Evaluate Most Effective Controls and Document Results 
The only remaining BACT is submerged fill pipes.  
Step 5: Select BACT  
Submerged fill pipes or filling procedures are considered as BACT for the Keigley storage tanks.  

4.4 BACT for Dust Mill Haul Roads 
Step 1: Identify All Control Technologies 
Haul road emissions for the dust mill operation sit at approximately 0.29 Tons Per Year. The 
following control technologies are identified for unpaved haul roads:  
 Water Application 
 Chemical Dust Suppressant 
 Partial Paving with Sweeping and Water 
 Paving with Sweeping and Water 
Step 2: Eliminate Technically Infeasible Options 
All identified control technologies are technically feasible. 
Step 3: Rank Remaining Control Technologies by Control Effectiveness 
The most effective control technology is paving with the addition of sweeping and watering 
with an estimated 95% control efficiency. If Staker Parson were to pave the total 0.19 miles 
of remaining unpaved haul road to the dust mill the total PM10 would be reduced by 0.16 
TPY. The cost effectiveness value for paving the full haul road was calculated to be 
$100,831/Ton of PM10 Removed. Due to high annualized cost and other said 
considerations, paving the full length of haul road is not further considered as BACT for 
Keigley Dust Mill Operations.  
Magnesium Chloride is estimated to reduce emissions at a total of 85%1 bringing the total 
PM10 for the unpaved portion to 0.24. Magnesium Chloride may or may not reduce the 
need for watering but does have significant impact on the amount of particulate if 
maintained and reapplied as needed. Water application is the most cost‐effective option for 
2.  Natural Gas STAR Partners, “Installing Vapor Recovery Units on Storage Tanks”, Web. 2023. 

13 

the facility and decreases the emissions by 70%. Only watering would calculated out the 
total PM10 for the unpaved portion to 0.48 Tons Per Year (TPY).  
Step 4: Evaluate Most Effective Controls and Document Results 
Both BACT and watering are considered feasible and effective controls.  
Step 5: Select BACT  
Magnesium Chloride and/or watering is considered as BACT for the Keigley facility.  

14 

5.0 REGULATORY REVIEW‐STATE 
The air quality regulations found in Title R307 of the Utah Administrative Code that will potentially apply 
to are as follows:  
 R307‐101 General Requirements 
 R307‐102 General Requirements: Broadly Applicable Requirements 
 R307‐103 General Requirements: Administrative Procedures 
 R307‐107 General Requirements: Breakdowns 
 R307‐110 General Requirements: State Implementation Plan  
 R307‐150 Emission Inventories 
 R307‐165 Emission Testing 
 R307‐201 Emission Standards: General Emission Standards 
 R307‐203 Emission Standards Sulfur Content of Fuels 
 R307‐205 Emission Standards: Fugitive Emissions and Fugitive Dust 
 R307‐210 Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources 
 R307‐214 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 
 R307‐305 Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas for PM10: Emission Standards 
 R307‐309 Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas for PM10 and PM2.5 
 R307‐312 Aggregate Processing Operations for PM2.5 Nonattainment Areas 
 R307‐313 VOC and Blue Smoke Controls for Hot Mix Asphalt Plants 
 R307‐401 Permit: New and Modified Sources 
 R307‐403 Permits: New and Modified Sources in Nonattainment Areas 
 R307‐410 Permit: Emission Impact analysis 
 R307‐414 Permits: Fees for Approval Orders 
 R307‐421 PM10 Offset Requirements in Salt Lake County and Utah County 

6.0 REGULATORY REVIEW‐FEDERAL 
The Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources found in Part 60 the Code of Federal 
Regulations that apply to the Keigley Facility are as follows:  
 Subpart A‐General Provisions 
 Subpart Kb‐Standards of Performance for Volatile Organic Liquid Storage Vessels 
(Including Petroleum Liquid Storage Vessels) for Which Construction, 
Reconstruction, or Modification Commenced After July 23, 1984 
 Subpart OOO‐Standards of Performance for Nonmetallic Mineral Processing Plants 
7.0 DISPERSION MODELING/OFFSETS 
Dispersion modelling and emission offsets are not applicable for the Keigley Site.  

15 
Intentionally let blank

16 

Appendix A 
Flow Diagrams

17 

18 

Appendix B 
PTE Calculations for Dust Mill
Source:Keigley Dust Mill
Company:Staker Parson
Site:Keigley
Date:5/26/2023
Dust Mill Processing
Tons Produced 100000 Ton/yr
Tons Per Hour 11.627907 ton/hr
Hours per Year 8600 hrs/yr
Number of Drops 2 drops
Dust Mill Furnace
Rating 2.3 mmBTU/hr
Hours 8600 hrs/yr
Fuel Storage
Tank 1 Annual Throughput 149293 gallons/yr
Tank 2 Annual Throughput 149292 gallons/yr
Tank 3 Annual Throughput 150582 gallons/yr
Unpaved Roads
Dust Mill Loadout 0.19 Miles
Dust Mill Pallets 0.19 Miles
Dust Mill Loader 0.03 Miles
Paved Roads
Dust Mill Loadout 0.1 Miles
Dust Mill Pallets 0.1 Miles
Dust Mill Loader 0 Miles
Requested AO Permit Conditions:
Source:Keigley Dust Mill
Company:Staker Parson
Site:Keigley
Date:5/26/2023
Equipment PM‐10 PM‐2.5 Nox SO2 CO VOC HAPs CO2e
Dust Mill 0.96 0.40 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐
Dust Mill Furnace 0.07 0.02 1.41 0.00 0.35 0.02 0.00 1580.62
MH‐Loader 0.01 0.00
MH‐Conveyors 0.00 0.00 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐
Unpaved Roads 0.24 0.02
Paved Roads 0.05 0.00
Fuel Storage ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐0.33 ‐‐ ‐‐
Total 1.33 0.45 1.41 0.00 0.35 0.35 0.00 1580.62
Company:Staker Parson
Site:Keigley
Date:5/26/2023
Reference:Current PTE (TPY) Requested PTE (TPY) Emission Difference (TPY)PM10 Nonattainment Emission Offset
PM10 73.75 75.08 1.33 2.75 TPY Not Applicable
PM2.5 29.05 29.50 0.45
NOx 13.95 15.36 1.41 PM2.5 Nonattainment Emission Offset
SO2 15.21 15.21 0.00 2.21 TPY Not Applicable
CO 32.55 32.90 0.35
VOC 8.00 8.35 0.35
HAPs 2.59 2.59 0.00
CO2e 8250.00 9830.62 1580.62
Source:Aggregate Throughput
Company:Staker Parson
Site:Keigley
Date:5/26/2023
Source Description
Annual 
Throughput (TPY)
Hourly 
Throughput 
(TPH)
PM10 
Emission 
Factor 
(lb/ton)
PM2.5 
Emission 
Factor 
(lb/ton)
Controlled PM10 
Emission (TPY)
 Controlled PM2.5 
Emissions (TPY)
Controlled PM10 
Emissions (lb/hr)
 Controlled PM2.5 
Emissions (lb/hr)
Controlled PM10 
Emission (TPY)
 Controlled PM2.5 
Emissions (TPY)
Controlled PM10 
Emissions (lb/hr)
 Controlled PM2.5 
Emissions (lb/hr)
Dust Mill Plan
Grinding 100,000 12 0.0339 0.0121 1.70 0.61 0.39 0.14 0.51 0.18 0.12 0.04
Classifier 100,000 12 0.0104 0.0041 0.52 0.21 0.12 0.05 0.16 0.06 0.04 0.01
Flash Drying 100,000 12 0.0146 0.0083 0.73 0.42 0.17 0.10 0.22 0.12 0.05 0.03
Product Storage 100,000 12 0.0016 0.00060 0.08 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.08 0.03 0.02 0.01
Total 3.03 1.26 0.70 0.29 0.96 0.40 0.22 0.09
Source of Data:Equations:
Emission Factor:AP‐42, Section 11.19.2 Crushed Stone Processing and Pulverized Mineral Processing Emission Rates:
Table 11.19.2-4
Production (Aggregate) Staker Parson A CRH Company/Estimated based on cycle of operation
Emission Rate: Calculated
Assumptions:
PM2.5/PM10 ratio ‐ 0.15, MRI 2006
Cyclone‐70%
Fabric Filters‐99%
Fabric Filter Cyclone + Fabric Filters
EF lbton PR tonyr 1ton2,000 lb
ER tonyr
Source:Dust Mill Furnace
Company:Staker Parson
Site:Keigley
Date:5/26/2023
Pollutant
Emission Factor 
(lb/mmBtu)
Fuel Consumed 
(mmBtu/yr)
Fuel Consumed 
(mmBtu/hr)
Emission Rates 
(ton/yr)
Emission Rates 
(lb/yr)
Emission 
Rates (lb/hr)
EF FC FC ER ER ER
Criteria Pollutants
PM10 7.14E‐03 19,780 2.3 0.0706 1.41E+02 0.02
PM2.5 1.79E‐03 19,780 2.3 0.0177 3.53E+01 0.00
SO2 5.14E‐06 19,780 2.3 0.0001 1.02E‐01 0.00
NOx 1.43E‐01 19,780 2.3 1.4129 2.83E+03 0.33
CO 3.57E‐02 19,780 2.3 0.3532 7.06E+02 0.08
VOC 1.80E‐03 19,780 2.3 0.0178 3.56E+01 0.00
GHG
CO2 1.6E+02 19,780 2.3 1,575 3.15E+06 366.4
CH4 3.71E‐04 19,780 2.3 3.67E‐03 7.35E+00 8.54E‐04
N2O 1.86E‐03 19,780 2.3 1.84E‐02 3.67E+01 4.27E‐03
CO2e 1,581
HAPs
Benzene 1.53E‐06 19,780 2.3 1.5E‐05 3.02E‐02 3.5E‐06
Ethylbenzene 4.54E‐07 19,780 2.3 4.5E‐06 8.99E‐03 1.0E‐06
Formaldehyde 2.36E‐04 19,780 2.3 2.3E‐03 4.66E+00 5.4E‐04
Naphthalene 8.07E‐06 19,780 2.3 8.0E‐05 1.60E‐01 1.9E‐05
1,1,1‐Trichloroethane 1.69E‐06 19,780 2.3 1.7E‐05 3.33E‐02 3.9E‐06
Toluene 4.43E‐05 19,780 2.3 4.4E‐04 8.76E‐01 1.0E‐04
o‐Xylene 7.79E‐07 19,780 2.3 7.7E‐06 1.54E‐02 1.8E‐06
Acenaphthene 1.51E‐07 19,780 2.3 1.5E‐06 2.98E‐03 3.5E‐07
Acenaphthylene 1.81E‐09 19,780 2.3 1.8E‐08 3.57E‐05 4.2E‐09
Anthracene 8.71E‐09 19,780 2.3 8.6E‐08 1.72E‐04 2.0E‐08
Benz(a)anthracene 2.86E‐08 19,780 2.3 2.8E‐07 5.67E‐04 6.6E‐08
Benzo(b,k)fluoranthene 1.06E‐08 19,780 2.3 1.0E‐07 2.09E‐04 2.4E‐08
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 1.61E‐08 19,780 2.3 1.6E‐07 3.19E‐04 3.7E‐08
Chrysene 2.38E‐06 C 1.70E‐08 19,780 2.3 1.7E‐07 3.36E‐04 3.9E‐08
Dibenzo(a,h) anthracene 1.19E‐08 19,780 2.3 1.2E‐07 2.36E‐04 2.7E‐08
Fluoranthene 3.46E‐08 19,780 2.3 3.4E‐07 6.84E‐04 8.0E‐08
Fluorene 3.19E‐08 19,780 2.3 3.2E‐07 6.32E‐04 7.3E‐08
Indo(1,2,3‐cd)pyrene 1.53E‐08 19,780 2.3 1.5E‐07 3.02E‐04 3.5E‐08
Phenanthrene 7.50E‐08 19,780 2.3 7.4E‐07 1.48E‐03 1.7E‐07
Pyrene 3.04E‐08 19,780 2.3 3.0E‐07 6.00E‐04 7.0E‐08
OCDD 2.21E‐11 19,780 2.3 2.2E‐10 4.38E‐07 5.1E‐11
Total HAP 2.9E‐03 5.8E+00 6.7E‐04
Source of Data:Equations:
Emission Factor:AP‐42, Fifth Edition, Section 1.3, Fuel Oil Combustion Emission Rates:
Table 1.3-1,2,3,9
Emission Rate: Calculated
Assumptions:
The emissions are assumed to be uncontrolled.
GWPs are averages from EPAs Website
To convert lb/10^3gal to lb/mmbtu, divide by 140 MMBtu/10^3 gal
EF lb
mmcf FC mmBtu
yr
HC Btu
cf
ER ton
yr
EF lb
mmcf FC mmBtu
yr
HC Btu
cf
ER lb
yr
EF lb
mmcf FC mmBtu
hr
HC Btu
cf








































1 ton
2,000 lb
1 mmBtu
1,000,000 Btu
1,000,000 cf
1 mmcf
1 mmBtu
1,000,000 Btu
1,000,000 cf
1 mmcf

















1 mmBtu
1,000,000 Btu
1,000,000 cf
1 mmcf
1 hr
3,600 sec
ER lb
hr
ER lb
hr
g
lb ER g45359.sec
Material Handling Operations ‐ Loaders/Trucks/Dozer
Company:Staker Parson dba Burdick Materials
Facility:Maeser East
Reference:AP‐42, Section 11.19.2 Crushed Stone Processing and Pulverized Mineral Processing, Truck Loading Crushed Stone
Hourly Annual
 PM10 PM2.5  PM10  PM10 PM2.5 PM2.5
Source Description Throughput Throughput Emission Factor Emission Factor Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions
(TPH) (TPY) (lb/ton) (lb/ton) (lb/hr) (TPY) (lb/hr) (TPY)
Dust Mill
  Loader to hopper 12 100,000 0.00010 0.00002 0.001 0.005 0.000 0.001
Assumptions:
PM2.5/PM10 ratio ‐ 0.15, MRI, 2006. Background Document for Revisions to Fine Fraction Ratios Used for AP‐42 Fugitive Emission Factors, prepared for the WRAP by Midwest Research Institute, Feb. 1.
Source:Material Handling-Conveyors
Company:Staker Parson
Site:Keigley
Date:5/26/2023
Source Description
Hourly 
Production 
(TPH)
Annual 
Production 
(TPY)
PM10             
EF            
(lb/ton)
PM2.5             
EF            
(lb/ton)
# of Conveyor 
Transfer Points 
(Drops)
 PM10             
Emissions     
(lb/hr) 
 PM10           
Emissions        
(TPY)
PM2.5 
Emissions 
(lb/hr)
PM2.5 
Emissions (TPY)
 PM10          
Emissions       
(lb/hr) 2
 PM10          
Emissions       
(TPY)3
PM2.5 
Emissions 
(lb/hr)4
PM2.5 
Emissions 
(TPY)5
To Grinder: 
Conveyors 12 100,000 0.001100 0.000165 2 0.026 0.110 0.004 0.017 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000
Bagging Operation: 
Conveyors 12 100,000 0.001100 0.000165 2 0.026 0.110 0.004 0.017 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000
Total 0.051 0.220 0.008 0.033 0.001 0.002 0.000 0.000
Source of Data:Equations:
Emission Factor:AP‐42, Section 11.19.2 Crushed Stone Processing and Pulverized Mineral Processing, Conveyor Transfer Point Controlled Emission Rates:
Table 11.19.2-2
Production (Aggregate/Concrete) Staker Parson A CRH Company
Emission Rate: Calculated
Assumptions:
Dust Mill Drop Points ‐ Field Visit
Enclosed‐99.9% Control Efficiency  
Uncontrolled Controlled
Unpaved Road Fugitives
Company:Staker Parson dba Burdick Materials
Facility:Keigley
Reference:AP‐42, Section 13.2.2 Unpaved Roads
PM10 Emission Factor => E =k * (s/12)a * (W/3)b PM2.5 Emission Factor => E = k * (s/12)a * (W/3)b 
Annual  PM10 Emission Factor => E =k * (s/12)a * (W/3)b *[(365‐P)/365]Annual PM2.5 Emission Factor => E = k * (s/12)a * (W/3)b *[(365‐P)/365]
Where
E = Emission factor (pounds per VMT)
k, a, b = constants (AP‐42, Section 13.2.2 Unpaved Roads Table 13.2.2‐2)
s = surface material silt content = 4.8
CF = Control Factor = 85%
 PM10 & PM2.5 a =0.9
 PM10 & PM2.5 b =0.45
P =0
Vehicle 24‐Hour Annual 24‐Hour Annual 24‐hour Annual Uncontrolled Controlled Uncontrolled Controlled Uncontrolled Controlled Uncontrolled Controlled
Source Description PM10 PM2.5 Silt Content Weight Mean Speed PM10 EF PM10 EF PM2.5 EF PM2.5 EF 24‐hour PM10 24‐hour PM10 24‐hour PM10 24‐hour PM10 24‐hour PM2.5 24‐hour PM2.5 24‐hour PM2.5 24‐hour PM2.5 
k k (%) (ton) (mph) (lb/VMT) (lb/VMT) (lb/VMT) (lb/VMT) VMT/hr VMT/yr lb/hr lb/hr tn/yr tn/yr lb/hr lb/hr tn/yr tn/yr
Dust Mill Loadout 1.5 0.15 4.80 40.5 10 2.12 2.12 0.212 0.212 0.26 655.2 0.56 0.08 0.69 0.104 0.06 0.008 0.069 0.010
Dust Mill Pallet 1.5 0.15 4.80 40.5 10 2.12 2.12 0.212 0.212 0.33 655.2 0.69 0.10 0.69 0.104 0.07 0.010 0.069 0.010
Dust Mill Loader 1.5 0.15 4.80 39.0 5 2.09 2.09 0.209 0.209 0.30 222.5 0.63 0.10 0.23 0.035 0.06 0.010 0.023 0.003
0.19 0.243 0.028 0.024
Vehicle 24‐Hour Annual 24‐Hour Annual 24‐hour Annual Uncontrolled Controlled Uncontrolled Controlled
Source Description PM10 PM2.5 Silt Content Weight Mean Speed PM10 EF PM10 EF PM2.5 EF PM2.5 EF Annual PM10 Annual PM10 Annual PM2.5 Annual PM2.5 
k k (%) (ton) (mph) (lb/VMT) (lb/VMT) (lb/VMT) (lb/VMT) VMT/hr VMT/yr tn/yr tn/yr tn/yr tn/yr
Dust Mill Loadout 1.5 0.15 4.80 40.5 10 2.12 2.12 0.212 0.212 0.26 655.2 0.695 0.104 0.069 0.010
Dust Mill Pallet 1.5 0.15 4.80 40.5 10 2.12 2.12 0.212 0.212 0.33 655.2 0.695 0.104 0.069 0.010
Dust Mill Loader 1.5 0.15 4.80 39.0 5 2.09 2.09 0.209 0.209 0.30 222.5 0.232 0.035 0.023 0.003
1.622 0.243 0.162 0.024
Assumptions:
70% control ‐ Watering
Dust Mill Loadout 0.19 miles round trip
Dust Mill Pallet 0.19 miles round trip
Dust Mill Loader 0.03 miles round trip
Vehicle weights Empty Capacity
Average 
Weight Throughput Trips/yr Trips/Day Trips/hr
Dust Mill Loadout 26 29 40.5 100,000 3,448.3 16.6 1.38
Dust Mill Pallet 26 29 40.5 100,000 3,448.3 25.2 1.72
Dust Mill Loader 33 12 39.0 100,000 8,333.3 34.2 11.38
Paved Road Fugitives
Company:Staker Parson dba Burdick Materials
Facility:Keigley
Reference:AP‐42, Section 13.2.2 Unpaved Roads
PM10 Emission Factor => E =k * (s/12)a * (W/3)b PM2.5 Emission Factor => E = k * (s/12)a * (W/3)b 
Annual  PM10 Emission Factor => E =k * (s/12)a * (W/3)b *[(365‐P)/365]Annual PM2.5 Emission Factor => E = k * (s/12)a * (W/3)b *[(365‐P)/365]
Where
E = Emission factor (pounds per VMT)
k, a, b = constants (AP‐42, Section 13.2.2 Unpaved Roads Table 13.2.2‐2)
s = surface material silt content = 4.8
CF = Control Factor = 90%
 PM10 & PM2.5 a =0.9
 PM10 & PM2.5 b =0.45
P = 118
Vehicle 24‐Hour Annual 24‐Hour Annual 24‐hour Annual Uncontrolled Controlled Uncontrolled Controlled Uncontrolled Controlled Uncontrolled Controlled
Source Description PM10 PM2.5 Silt Content Weight Mean Speed PM10 EF PM10 EF PM2.5 EF PM2.5 EF 24‐hour PM10 24‐hour PM10 24‐hour PM10 24‐hour PM10 24‐hour PM2.5 24‐hour PM2.5 24‐hour PM2.5 24‐hour PM2.5 
k k (%) (ton) (mph) (lb/VMT) (lb/VMT) (lb/VMT) (lb/VMT) VMT/hr VMT/yr lb/hr lb/hr tn/yr tn/yr lb/hr lb/hr tn/yr tn/yr
Dust Mill Loadout 1.5 0.15 4.80 40.5 10 2.12 1.44 0.212 0.144 0.14 344.8 0.29 0.03 0.37 0.037 0.03 0.003 0.037 0.004
Dust Mill Pallet 1.5 0.15 4.80 40.5 10 2.12 1.44 0.212 0.144 0.12 344.8 0.25 0.03 0.37 0.037 0.03 0.003 0.037 0.004
0.05 0.073 0.005 0.007
Vehicle 24‐Hour Annual 24‐Hour Annual 24‐hour Annual Uncontrolled Controlled Uncontrolled Controlled
Source Description PM10 PM2.5 Silt Content Weight Mean Speed PM10 EF PM10 EF PM2.5 EF PM2.5 EF Annual PM10 Annual PM10 Annual PM2.5 Annual PM2.5 
k k (%) (ton) (mph) (lb/VMT) (lb/VMT) (lb/VMT) (lb/VMT) VMT/hr VMT/yr tn/yr tn/yr tn/yr tn/yr
Dust Mill Loadout 1.5 0.15 4.80 40.5 10 2.12 1.44 0.212 0.144 0.14 344.8 0.247 0.025 0.025 0.002
Dust Mill Pallet 1.5 0.15 4.80 40.5 10 2.12 1.44 0.212 0.144 0.12 344.8 0.247 0.025 0.025 0.002
0.495 0.049 0.049 0.005
Assumptions:
90% control ‐ Paved Vacuum Sweeping and Watering
Dust Mill Loadout 0.1 miles round trip
Dust Mill Pallet 0.1 miles round trip
Vehicle weights Empty Capacity
Average 
Weight Throughput Trips/yr Trips/Day Trips/hr
Dust Mill Loadout 26 29 40.5 100,000 3,448.3 16.6 1.38
Dust Mill Pallet 26 29 40.5 100,000 3,448.3 18.9 1.18
Source:Fuel Storage
Company:Staker Parson
Site:Keigley
Date:5/26/2023
Detail Fuel Type Standing Losses (lb/yr) Working losses (lb/yr) Total Routine Losses (lb/yr) Total Routine Losses (ton/yr)
10,000 Gallon Tank 1 Diesel 0.5859 2.4701 3.056 0.001528
4,000 Gallon Tank 2 Diesel 0.2332 2.4132 2.6464 0.0013232
1,000 Gallon Tank 3 Gasoline 146.2036 507.5629 653.7665 0.32688325
Total 0.32973445
VRU 0.016486723
Difference 0.313247728
Notes: Annualized Cost 8603.128743
Oklahoma Tank Tool on SlEIS was Utlized for calculation Cost Effectiveness 27464.29738
BACT: Economic Analysis
Keigley
Furnace
5/26/2023
Capital Investments
Parameter Costs (U.S. $)
Schematic Flow Diagrams/Plan Layout 
Drawings/Set of Operating Instructions 160,000
Total Capital Investment 160,000
NOx Emission Rate (Existing) 1.4129
NOx Emission Rate (W/LNB) 1.19
Amount of NOx removed 0.23
Capital Investment 160,000
i 0.05
n20
CRF 0.080242587
Annual Investments
Parameter Proposed
Annualized Capital Cost 12838.81395
Total Annual Investment 12,839
Annual $/Ton of NOx Removed 56794.5511
Assumptions: 
1. Numbers are altered in a conservative manner due to manufacturers request to not reproduce, copy, or furnish information from proposal
80‐90 PPM
BACT: Economic Analysis
Keigley
Furnace
5/26/2023
Capital Investments
Parameter Costs (U.S. $)
Schematic Flow Diagrams/Plan Layout 
Drawings/Set of Operating Instructions 85,000
Total Capital Investment 85,000
NOx Emission Rate (Existing) 1.4129
NOx Emission Rate (W/LNB) 1.67
Amount of NOx removed ‐0.26
Capital Investment 85,000
i 0.05
n20
CRF 0.080242587
Annual Investments
Parameter Proposed
Annualized Capital Cost 6820.619911
Total Annual Investment 6,821
Annual $/Ton of NOx Removed ‐26379.98275
Assumptions: 
1. Numbers are altered in a conservative manner due to manufacturers request to not reproduce, copy, or furnish information from proposal
120‐140 PPM
BACT: Economic Analysis
Keigley
Haul Roads
5/26/2023
Capital Investments
Parameter Costs (U.S. $)
Schematic Flow Diagrams/Plan Layout 
Drawings/Set of Operating Instructions 203,915
Total Capital Investment 203,915
PM10 Existing Emissions 0.2433
PM10 Emissions with Paving 0.08
Amount of NOx removed 0.16
Capital Investment 203,915
i 0.05
n20
CRF 0.080242587
Annual Investments
Parameter Proposed
Annualized Capital Cost 16362.66717
Total Annual Investment 16,363
Annual $/Ton of NOx Removed 100831.1685
Assumptions: 
1. Numbers are altered in a conservative manner due to manufacturers request to not reproduce, copy, or furnish information from proposal
Paving