STEVEN

L, BESHEAR GOVERNOR

LKP:mrl Enclosures

c: Dick Schutt,

EPA Region

4

KentuckyflnbridledSpirit.com I-ECF{ARD K FSIERS SECRETARY



### ENf,RGY AND ENVIRONMENT CABINET

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 5OO MERO STREET I2TH FLOOR, CAPITAL PLAZA, TowER FRANKFORT,KY 40601 TELEPHONE:

502-564-3350 FACSIMILE: 502-56+3354

Mav 28.2010

Mr. A. Stanley

Meiburg Acting Regional

Administrator U.S. EPA, Region

4 SamNunn Atlanta Federal Center 6l Forsy.th

Street, SW Atlanta, Georgia

30303

RE: Formal SIP Revision To Amend Kentucky's

June 25, 2008 Regional

Haze SIP

Dear Mr. Melburg:

The Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet hereby submits to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval a formal revision to Kentucky's State Implementation Plan (SIP). This SIP revision addresses the following issues

that amend Kentucky's June 25,2008, Regional Haze SIP: (1) E.ON U.S. Mill Creek Units 3 and 4, a change to indicate

the proper BART Title V permit emission limits of 64.3 lb/hr and 76.5 lblhr respectively for H2SOa

in place of a 0.015 lb/mmBtu limit and (2) East Kentucky Power Cooperative (EKPC) Cooper

Units I arrd

2, based on March 18,2009, revised EKPC BART determination modeling a substitution of dry flue gas desulfurization @FGD) and fabric filtration (FF) emission controls for the wet FGD (WFGD) and wet electrostatic

precipitator

(WESP) conhols.

A public hearing

regarding

this SIP revision

was conducted

on November

23,2009, at the Division's main office in Frankfort, Kentucky. Documentation regarding

this public hearing and the Cabinet's Statement of Consideration,

which contains Cabinet responses

to comments

received during the public comment period, is proyided in Appendix N of this SIP revision.

This SIP package includes a hard copy of the regional haze SIP narrative and appendices where changes

have been made. In addition,

a DVD containing

all SIP narrative

and appendix

changes is included. The SIP revision is also available at the following Division website: h@://www.air.ky.gov/regs/Stateflmplementation+Plan+Revisions.htm.

Your prompt consideration of this SIP revision is appreciated. If you have any questions regarding

this matter, please contact Martin Luther at the Division for Air Quality at 502-564-3999.



# "'i''nrcr#,W.5

t&J 

# b Lebnard

K. Peters



# K.mffifr

An Equal Opportunity f,mployer M/F/D

# Regional Haze State Implementation Plan

For Kentucky’s Class I Area

Prepared by Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet Kentucky Division for Air Quality

Final

June 2008 Amended May 2010

Kentucky Regional Haze SIP

### Table 7.5.3-1 Kentucky BART De termination Modeling Results for BART-Subject Sources

Source Class I Areas BART Controls to Be Installed* 98 th
Percentile

Impact Before BART Controls (Change in dv) 98 th
Percentile Impact with BART Controls (Change in dv) BART Determination Control Visibility Improvement

From 98 th
Percentile value (Change in dv)

East Kentucky Power Cooperative (EKPC) Spurlock Station Mammoth Cave (251 km) EKPC per a consent decree and for BART will install a wet FGD and wet ESP at EKPC Spurlock Units 1 and

2 that will address condensible particulate emissions

and other visibility impairing pollutants. 1.834 0.213 1.621

East Kentucky Power Cooperative

(EKPC) Cooper Station Mammoth Cave (130) km EKPC per a consent decree and for BART will install a dry FGD and fabric filtration at EKPC Cooper Units 1 and 2 that will address condensible particulate emissions

and other visibility impairing pollutants. 7.376 0.201 7.175

Great Smoky Mountains National Park (162 km) 6.763 0.192 6.571
Joyce Kilmer-Slickrock Wilderness (178 km) 4.974 0.119 4.855

Cohutta Wilderness Area (221 km) 3.363 0.080 3.283 Shinning Rock (233 km) 2.022 0.047 1.975 Linville Gorge Wilderness Area (267 km) 1.885 0.047 1.838

TVA Paradise Fossil Steam Plant* Mammoth Cave (63 km) 

### *Although not for BART, TVA previously indicated to KYDAQ its plans to install hydrated lime injection controls on TVA Paradise Units 1-3 to mitigate opacity due

to SO3 emissions. U1- 1.285 U2- 1.285 U3- 1.842 4.412

3.930 0.606 0.606 0.836 2.048

2.048 0.679 0.679 1.006 2.364

1.882

Mingo (283 km) U1- 0.251 U2- 0.251 U3- 0.381 0.883

0.865 0.116 0.116 0.166 0.398

0.398 0.135 0.135 0.215 0.485

0.467

Kentucky Regional Haze SIP 63

### Table 7.5.3-1 Kentucky BART De termination Modeling Results for BART-Subject Sources

Source Class I Areas BART Controls to Be Installed* 98 th
Percentile

Impact Before BART Controls (Change in dv) 98 th
Percentile Impact with BART Controls (Change in dv) BART Determination Control Visibility Improvement

From 98 th
Percentile value (Change in dv)

American Electric Power Big Sandy Plant (AEP) Dolly Sods (291 km) Per a consent decree and BART, AEP will install ammonia injection on Unit 1 and a FGD scrubber on Unit 2 to address condensible particulate emissions

and other visibility impairing pollutants. 1.027 0.496 0.531

James River Face (279 km) 1.052 0.457 0.595

Linville Gorge (256 km) 0.835 0.364 0.471

Otter Creek (266 km) 1.285 0.558 0.697

E.ON U.S Mill**

Creek Station 

### Mammoth Cave (90 km) **E.ON U.S. for BART will install sorbent injection controls on the larger Units 3-4 to mitigate condensable particulate emissions. 2.265 1.440 0.825

*Since TVA had previously indica ted to the KYDAQ its plans to inst all hydrated lime injection co ntrols on TVA Pa radise Units 1-3 to mitigate opacity due to SO3 emissions and that additi onal controls ar e not cost-effective at this time, the KYDAQ has determined BART to be no control for TVA Pa radise Units 1-3. **Given the extra cost for the lesser additional dv improvement for Units 1 and 2, the Cabinet agreed that BART for Mill Creek is the installation of sorbent injection controls on the larger Units 3 and 4.

Kentucky Regional Haze SIP 64

### Table 7.5.3-2 Kentucky BART Controls, Emission Limits, and Compliance Timeframes for BARTSubject Sources

Kentucky BART

Subject Source BART Controls To Be Installed BART Emission Limits Inclusion in Title V Permit Timeframe for Compliance with BART Emission Limits\Controls East Kentucky Power Cooperative (EKPC)

Spurlock Units 1 and 2 and Cooper Units 1 and 2 Install wet FGD and wet ESP on Spurlock Units 1 and 2 and a dry FGD and fabric filtration on Cooper Units 1 and 2. A 07/02/07 EKPC consent decree provides a filterable PM emission rate of 0.030 lb/MMBTU, which was utilized to demonstrate modeled visibility improvement. Emission limits and controls will be included in the source’s Title V Permit as appropriate or on renewal. Expeditiously as practicable, but no later than 5 years after EPA
approves Kentucky’s Regional Haze SIP.

AEP Big Sandy

Unit 1 Unit 2 Install ammonia injection controls on Unit 1 and a FGD on Unit 2. Inorganic Condensible Particulate Limits (modeled as sulfates):

101.0 lb/hr (H2SO4) 127.0 lb/hr (H2SO4) Emission limits and controls will be included in the source’s Title V Permit as appropriate or on renewal. Expeditiously as practicable, but no later than 5 years after EPA
approves Kentucky’s Regional Haze SIP.

KYDAQ will work with AEP to install the FGD scrubber on AEP Big Sandy Unit 2 as expeditiously as practicable. TVA Paradise* Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 *Although not for BART, TVA previously indicated to KYDAQ its plans to install hydrated lime injection controls on TVA Paradise Units 1-3 to mitigate opacity due to SO3 emissions. *NA *Although not for BART, TVA has indicated that its planned SO3 controls for Paradise Units 1-3 will be included in its Title V Permit as appropriate or on renewal. *Although not for BART, TVA in its BART Determination has indicated the SO3 controls will be in place on Paradise Units 1- 3 well before BART controls are required.

Specifically, TVA has related to

Kentucky Regional Haze SIP 65

### Table 7.5.3-2 Kentucky BART Controls, Emission Limits, and Compliance Timeframes for BARTSubject Sources

Kentucky BART

Subject Source BART Controls To Be Installed BART Emission Limits Inclusion in Title V Permit Timeframe for Compliance with BART Emission Limits\Controls KYDAQ its proposed plan to have hydrated lime injection controls operating on all three TVA Paradise units possibly by the fall of 2010. E.ON U.S.** Mill Creek

Unit 3 Unit 4 **Install sorbent injection controls on larger Units 3 and 4 to control SO3 emissions and continue to utilize existing ESPs to control PM emissions for Units 1 through 4. Inorganic Condensible Particulate Limits (modeled as sulfates):

64.3 lb/hr (H2SO4) 76.5 lb/hr (H2SO4) **Emission limits and controls will be included in the source’s Title V Permit as appropriate or on renewal. **Expeditiously as practicable, but no later than 5 years after EPA
approves Kentucky’s Regional Haze SIP.

*Since TVA had previously indica ted to the KYDAQ its plans to inst all hydrated lime injection co ntrols on TVA Pa radise Units 1-3 to mitigate opacity due to SO3 emissions and that additi onal controls ar e not cost-effective at this time, the KYDAQ has determined BART to be no control for TVA Pa radise Units 1-3. **Given the extra cost for the lesser additional dv improvement for Units 1 and 2, the Cabinet agreed that BART for Mill Creek is the installation of sorbent injection controls on the larger Units 3 and 4.



### 7.6 Relative Contributions to Visibility Im pairment: Geographic A reas of Influence for Kentucky’s Class I Area

Once it was determined that SO2 emission reduc tions from EGU and non- EGU point sources in the VISTAS states would be the most effective sources to control to improve visibility at Kentucky’s Class I area, the next step was to identify the specific geographic areas that most likely influence visibility in each Class I area, and then to identify the major SO2 point sources located in those geographic areas. An SO2 Area of Influence was defined for each Class I area to represent the geographic area containing sources that would likely have the greatest impact on visibility at that Class I area. All SO2 point sources within these Areas of Influence were identified and ranked by their 2018 emissions. Th e following sections contain a broad overview of the steps in the Area of Influence analyses. See Appendix H for a more detailed discussion of these analyses and plots for Kentucky’s Class I area. The plots that follow are only for Kentucky’s Class I area since KYDAQ’s Q/d times RTMax area of influence analysis identified no Kentucky sources that contribut ed one percent or more to visi bility impairment for any other Class I area examined by VISTAS.

Kentucky Regional Haze SIP 66

## Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet Kentucky Division for Air Quality



# -------------------------------------------

Appendix H.4 Kentucky Electric Generating Units (EGUs) Existing and Expected Emission Controls

### [This page intentionally left blank.]Kentucky EGU Existing and Expected Emission Control Information11/30/2007(See Kentucky BART EGUs Identified in Blue and Kentucky EGUs on the MANE-VU 167 List Identified in Purple)(Future Kentucky EGU Emission Controls Highlighted in Red)MANE-VUKY BART167 ListMWeNOx CONTROLS Year NOx Control Online SO2 CONTROLS Year SO2 Control Online PM10 CONTROLS Year PM10 Control OnlineOwner Plant Plant_ID Unit IDEGUKY SourcesSize* County(In Operation)**(In Operation)**(In Operation)**Duke Energy EAST BEND 21-015-00029 2BART167648BooneLNB/Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)SCR-2002Flue Gas Desulfurization Unit (FGD) - ScrubberPre-2002ESPPre-2002EKPC COOPER21-199-00005 1BART167100Pulaski Low NOx Burner (LNB)1993DFGD***For BART Before 2012Cold side ESP/Fabric Filtration for BART***1973/For BART on before 2012EKPC COOPER 21-199-00005 2BART167220Pulaski LNB 1994DFGD*** For BART Before 2012Cold side ESP/Fabric Filtration for BART***1973/For BART on before 2012EKPC DALE 21-049-00003 379Clark LNB1997NONECold side ESP1987EKPC DALE21-049-00003 479Clark LNB1996NONECold side ESP1987EKPC DALE21-049-00003 1Clark LNB2007NONECold side ESP1979EKPC DALE21-049-00003 2Clark LNB2007NONECold side ESP1979EKPC H L SPURLOCK 21-161-00009 1BART167340Mason Modified Burner/SCR1977/2003WFGD***Per Consent Decree\ for BART 2009Cold side ESP/WESP For BART***2003/2009***EKPC H L SPURLOCK 21-161-00009 2BART167585Mason LNB/SCR1981/2002WFGD***Per Consent Decree\for BART 2008Hot side ESP/WESP For BART***1981/2008***EKPC J K SMITH 21-049-00027 SCT1110Clark Water Injection1999NONENONEEKPC J K SMITH 21-049-00027 SCT2110Clark Water Injection1999NONENONEEKPC J K SMITH 21-049-00027 SCT3110Clark Water Injection1999NONENONEEKPC J K SMITH 21-049-00027 SCT475Clark Dry low NOX2001NONENONEEKPC J K SMITH 21-049-00027 SCT575Clark Dry low NOX2001NONENONEEKPC J K SMITH 21-049-00027 SCT675Clark Dry low NOX2004NONENONEEKPC J K SMITH 21-049-00027 SCT775Clark Dry low NOX2004NONENONEEKPC GilbertCFB268Clark SNCR/CFB2004Flash dry absorber2004Bag House2004HMPL HENDERSON I 21-101-00012 6BARTHendersonnonenoneMulticlone/ESPAEP BIG SANDY 21-127-00003 BSU1BART167260Lawrence Over Fire Air (OFA), LNB1970'sConsent decree coal sulfur limit 1.75 lb/mmBTUESP/ammonia injection per BART  On or before2012** **AEP BIG SANDY 21-127-00003 BSU2BART167800Lawrence SCR, LNB1960'sFGD-Scrubber - Per consent decree & BART On or before Dec. 31, 2015 ESPE.ON U.S. E W BROWN 21-167-00001 1114Mercer LNB1993Wet Flue Gas Desulfurization (WFGD) Being Constructed - online 2009 per CAIRElectrostatic Precipitator (ESP)1973E.ON U.S. E W BROWN 21-167-00001 2BART167180MercerLow Nox Concentric Firing System (LNCFS) I1994Wet Flue Gas Desulfurization (WFGD) Being Constructed - online 2009 per CAIRElectrostatic Precipitator (ESP)1975E.ON U.S. E W BROWN 21-167-00001 3BART167446Mercer LNCFS III1992Wet Flue Gas Desulfurization (WFGD) Being Constructed - online 2009 per CAIRElectrostatic Precipitator (ESP)1970sE.ON U.S. E W BROWN 21-167-00001 CT5123Mercer Water Injection2001E.ON U.S. E W BROWN 21-167-00001 CT6170 Mercer Water Injection (when burning fuel oil)1999E.ON U.S. E W BROWN 21-167-00001 CT7170 Mercer Water Injection (when burning fuel oil)1999E.ON U.S. E W BROWN 21-167-00001 CT8126Mercer Water Injection1996E.ON U.S. E W BROWN 21-167-00001 CT9126Mercer Water Injection1995E.ON U.S. E W BROWN 21-167-00001 CT10126Mercer Water Injection1995E.ON U.S. E W BROWN 21-167-00001 CT11126Mercer Water Injection1996E.ON U.S. DIX DAM19Mercer This is a Hydro StationE.ON U.S. DIX DAM29MercerE.ON U.S. DIX DAM39MercerE.ON U.S. GHENT21-041-00010 1BART557Carroll LNCFS II/SCR1994/2004FGD-Scrubber1994ESP1974E.ON U.S. GHENT21-041-00010 2BART556Carroll LNCFS III2000WFGDBeing Constructed - online 2009 Per CAIRESP1977E.ON U.S. GHENT21-041-00010 3167557Carroll LNB & OFA/SCR1998/2004WFGDBeing Constructed - online 2007 Per CAIRESP1981E.ON U.S. GHENT21-041-00010 4167556Carroll LNB & OFA/SCR1999/2004WFGDBeing Constructed - online 2008 Per CAIRESP1984E.ON U.S. GREEN RIVER 21-177-00001 176MuhlenburgFGD (Lime Venturi Scrubber)E.ON U.S. GREEN RIVER 21-177-00001 2MuhlenburgFGD (Lime Venturi Scrubber)E.ON U.S. GREEN RIVER 21-177-00001 3MuhlenburgFGD (Lime Venturi Scrubber)E.ON U.S. GREEN RIVER 21-177-00001 475Muhlenburg LNB2002ESP1973E.ON U.S. GREEN RIVER 21-177-00001 5114Muhlenburg LNB1995ESP1975E.ON U.S. HAEFLING 21-067-00067 CT121FayetteE.ON U.S. HAEFLING 21-067-00067 CT221FayetteE.ON U.S. HAEFLING 21-067-00067 CT321FayetteE.ON U.S. LOCK 711Mercer This is a Hydro StationE.ON U.S. LOCK 721MercerE.ON U.S. LOCK 731MercerE.ONU.S. PINEVILLE 21-013-00001338BellRetiredUnitESP 1975Green River Boilers 1, 2 and 3 producedsteam to run Unit 1 and Unit 2. They wereretired on 12/31/2003.E.ONU.S.PINEVILLE21 013 00001338BellRetiredUnitESP1975E.ON U.S. TYRONE21-239-00001 131WoodfordTyrone Boiler 1 and 2 produce steam to run Unit 1E.ON U.S. TYRONE21-239-00001 2WoodfordE.ON U.S. TYRONE21-239-00001 331WoodfordTyrone Boiler 3 and 4 produce steam to run Unit 2E.ON U.S. TYRONE21-239-00001 4WoodfordE.ON U.S. TYRONE21-239-00001 575 Woodford LNB2001ESP1974E.ON U.S. CANE RUN 21-111-0126 4164 Jefferson SLNB1996FGD-Scrubber1976ESP1960sE.ON U.S. CANE RUN 21-111-0126 5BART209Jefferson CCVDAZ (LNB)2003FGD-Scrubber1977ESP1960sE.ON U.S. CANE RUN 21-111-0126 6BART272Jefferson LNCFS II1995FGD-Scrubber1978ESP1960sE.ON U.S. CANE RUN 21-111-0126 CT1116JeffersonE.ON U.S. MILL CREEK 21-111-0127 1BART356Jefferson LNCFS II1996FGD-Scrubber1981** **ESP1970sE.ON U.S. MILL CREEK 21-111-0127 2BART356Jefferson LNCFS II1996FGD-Scrubber1982 ESP1970sE.ON U.S. MILL CREEK 21-111-0127 3BART463Jefferson DRB-XCL (LNB)/SCR2002/2003FGD-Scrubber1978** **ESP/Sorbent injection per BART*****1978/on orbefore 2012*****E.ON U.S. MILL CREEK 21-111-0127 4BART167544Jefferson DRB-XCL (LNB)/SCR2001/2003FGD-Scrubber1982 ESP/Sorbent injection per BART** ***1982/on or before 2012*****E.ON U.S. OHIO FALLS21-111 110Jefferson This is a Hydro StationE.ON U.S. OHIO FALLS21-111 210JeffersonE.ON U.S. OHIO FALLS21-111 310JeffersonE.ON U.S. OHIO FALLS21-111 410JeffersonE.ON U.S. OHIO FALLS21-111 510JeffersonE.ON U.S. OHIO FALLS21-111 610JeffersonE.ON U.S. OHIO FALLS21-111 710JeffersonE.ON U.S. OHIO FALLS21-111 810JeffersonE.ON U.S. PADDYS RUN 21-111 CT1116JeffersonE.ON U.S. PADDYS RUN 21-111 CT1233JeffersonE.ON U.S. PADDYS RUN 21-111 CT13178JeffersonE.ON U.S. TRIMBLE21-223-00002 1566 Trimble ALNB & SCR2002/2002FGD-Scrubber1990ESP1990E.ON U.S. TRIMBLE21-223-00002 CT5234Trimble DLNB2002E.ON U.S. TRIMBLE21-223-00002 CT6234Trimble DLNB2002E.ON U.S. TRIMBLE21-223-00002 CT7234Trimble DLNB2004E.ON U.S. TRIMBLE21-223-00002 CT8234Trimble DLNB2004E.ON U.S. TRIMBLE21-223-00002 CT9234Trimble DLNB2004E.ON U.S. TRIMBLE21-223-00002 CT10234Trimble DLNB2004E.ON U.S. WATERSIDE 21-111 CT720JeffersonRetired UnitE.ON U.S. WATERSIDE 21-111 CT825JeffersonRetired UnitE.ON U.S. ZORN21-111 CT118JeffersonOMU ELMER SMITH 21-059-00027 1BART150Daviess OFA/SCRFGD-ScrubberESPKentucky EGU Existing and Expected Emission Control Information11/30/2007(See Kentucky BART EGUs Identified in Blue and Kentucky EGUs on the MANE-VU 167 List Identified in Purple)(Future Kentucky EGU Emission Controls Highlighted in Red)MANE-VUKY BART167 ListMWeNOx CONTROLS Year NOx Control Online SO2 CONTROLS Year SO2 Control Online PM10 CONTROLS Year PM10 Control OnlineOwner Plant Plant_ID Unit IDEGUKY SourcesSize* County(In Operation)**(In Operation)**(In Operation)**OMU ELMER SMITH 21-059-00027 2BART280Daviess SNCR/LNB\OFAFGD-ScrubberESPTVA PARADISE 21-177-00006 1BART700Muhlenberg OFA/SCR SCR - 2001 FGD-(Venturi Scrubber) 1982Venturi Scrubber /Lime Injection******1982 /Lime Injection Before 2012TVA PARADISE 21-177-00006 2BART167700Muhlenberg OFA/SCRSCR - 2001FGD-(Venturi Scrubber)1982Venturi Scrubber /Lime Injection******1982 /Lime Injection Before 2012TVA PARADISE 21-177-00006 3BART1671,150Muhlenberg OFA/SCRSCR - 2003FGD-Scrubber2006ESP/Lime Injection******1970's /Lime Injection Before 2012TVA SHAWNEE 21-145-00006 1175McCracken LNBBaghouse1970'sTVA SHAWNEE 21-145-00006 2175McCracken LNBBaghouse1970'sTVA SHAWNEE 21-145-00006 3175McCracken LNBBaghouse1970'sTVA SHAWNEE 21-145-00006 4175McCracken LNBBaghouse1970'sTVA SHAWNEE 21-145-00006 5175McCracken LNBBaghouse1970'sTVA SHAWNEE 21-145-00006 6175McCracken LNBBaghouse1970'sTVA SHAWNEE 21-145-00006 7175McCracken LNBBaghouse1970'sTVA SHAWNEE 21-145-00006 8175McCracken LNBBaghouse1970'sTVA SHAWNEE 21-145-00006 9175McCracken LNBBaghouse1970'sTVA SHAWNEE 21-145-00006 10175McCracken AFBC UnitBubbling limestone bedBaghouse1980'sWKE COLEMAN 21-091-00003 C1BART150HancockLNB/Rotating Over-Fire Air (ROFA)LNB-1990s, ROFA-2004FGD-Scrubber2006ESP1970sWKE COLEMAN 21-091-00003 C2BART150HancockLNB/Advanced Over-Fire Air (AOFA)LNB-1990s, AOFA-2004FGD-Scrubber2006ESP1970sWKE COLEMAN 21-091-00003 C3BART150Hancock LNB/AOFALNB-1990s, AOFA-2004FGD-Scrubber2006ESP1970sWKE D B WILSON 21-183-00069 W1420Ohio LNB/SCRLNB-1985, SCR-2003FGD-Scrubber1985 - 'Initial Start-upESP1985 - Initial Start-upWKE HMP&L STATION21-233-00001 H1BART150Webster LNB/SCR LNB-1990s, SCR on 2004 FGD-Scrubber 1990s ESP 1970sWKE HMP&L STATION21-233-00001 H2BART160Webster LNB/SCR LNB-1990s, SCR on 2004 FGD-Scrubber 1990s ESP 1970sWKE R D GREEN 21-233-00052 G1BART230Webster LNB/Coal ReburnLNB-1980s, Coal Re-burn in 2004FGD-Scrubber1980sESP1980sWKE R D GREEN 21-233-00052 G2BART220Webster LNB/Coal ReburnLNB-1980s, Coal Re-burn in 2004FGD-Scrubber1980sESP1980sWKE ROBERT REID 21-233-00001 R1BART65Webster Fuel Oil, pellitized coal fines or petroleum coke2004noneCyclone / ESP1960sWKE ROBERT REID 21-233-00001 RT*******65Webster Dual burners (fuel oil or gas)nonePercent of Kentucky BART EGUs With or To Have Emission Controls to Date:97%90%100%Percent of Kentucky EGUs on MANE-VU 167 List With or To Have Emission Controls to Date:100%93%100%* 1.Note: "Size" column is for comparison purposes only. Companies used varying sources for reporting - gross, nameplate, etc.** 2.Note: For emission controls brought online before 2000, if the online date is not readily available then the decade that the control became operational may be entered (such as 1990s, 1980s).In addition, if known, please indicate future NOx, SO2, and PM10 unit controls that are currently being constructed orplanned and their projected online (in operation) date.*** 3. Note: EKPC, per its BART Determination, plans to install for BART WFGDs and WESPs for Spurlock Units 1 & 2 and DFGDs andfabric filtration for Cooper Units 1 & 2. Some of these controls are related to a recent EKPC consent decree.For information, an EPA link to a EKPC consent decree is at:www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/cases/civil/caa/eastkentuckypower.html  4.Note: Per a BART Determination and consent decree for AEP's Big Sandy Units 1 and 2, AEP plans to install ammonia injection on Unit 1 and a FGD Scrubber on Unit 2 to address condensible particulates for BART.Per the AEP consent decree, the FGD scrubber for Big Sandy Unit 2 is required by December 31, 2015.For information, an EPA link to a AEP consent decree is at:www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/cases/civil/caa/americanelectricpower1007.html.** *** 5.Note: Per a BART Determination, E.ON U.S. plans to install sorbent injection on Mill Creek Units 3 and 4 to address condensible particulates for BART.****** 6.Note: TVA will install hydrated lime injection on Units 1-3 to address TVA Paradise stack condensibles per its TVA BART Determination.******* 7.Note: WKE Reid Turbine is a Non-EGU auxiliary boiler only used during start-up that was exempted from BART modeling per EPA guidance.

## Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet Kentucky Division for Air Quality



# -------------------------------------------

Appendix L Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Related Documentation

Appendix L Kentucky Regional Haze SIP

### Table 9-1 Kentucky BART Determination Mo deling Results for BART-Subject Sources*

Source Class I Areas BART Controls to Be Installed* 98 th
Percentile

Impact Before BART Controls (Change in dv) 98 th
Percentile Impact with BART Controls (Change in dv) BART Determination Control Visibility Improvement

From 98 th
Percentile value (Change in dv)

East Kentucky Power Cooperative (EKPC) Spurlock Station Mammoth Cave (251 km) EKPC per a consent decree and for BART will install a wet FGD and wet ESP at EKPC Spurlock Units 1 and

2 that will address condensible particulate emissions

and other visibility impairing pollutants. 1.834 0.213 1.621

East Kentucky Power Cooperative

(EKPC) Cooper Station Mammoth Cave (130) km EKPC per a consent decree and for BART will install a dry FGD and fabric filtration at EKPC Cooper Units 1 and 2 that will address condensible particulate emissions

and other visibility impairing pollutants. 7.376 0.201 7.175

Great Smoky Mountains National Park (162 km) 6.763 0.192 6.571
Joyce Kilmer-Slickrock Wilderness (178 km) 4.974 0.119 4.855

Cohutta Wilderness Area (221 km) 3.363 0.080 3.283 Shinning Rock (233 km) 2.022 0.047 1.975 Linville Gorge Wilderness Area (267 km) 1.885 0.047 1.838

TVA Paradise Fossil Steam Plant** Mammoth Cave (63 km) 

### **Although not for BART, TVA previously indicated to KYDAQ its plans to install hydrated lime injection controls on TVA Paradise Units 1-3 to mitigate opacity due

to SO3 emissions. U1- 1.285 U2- 1.285 U3- 1.842 4.412

3.930 0.606 0.606 0.836 2.048

2.048 0.679 0.679 1.006 2.364

1.882

Mingo (283 km) U1- 0.251 U2- 0.251 U3- 0.381 0.883

0.865 0.116 0.116 0.166 0.398

0.398 0.135 0.135 0.215 0.485

0.467



### Appendix L Kentucky Regional Haze SIP 23

### Table 9-1 Kentucky BART Determination Mo deling Results for BART-Subject Sources*

Source Class I Areas BART Controls to Be Installed* 98 th
Percentile

Impact Before BART Controls (Change in dv) 98 th
Percentile Impact with BART Controls (Change in dv) BART Determination Control Visibility Improvement

From 98 th
Percentile value (Change in dv)

American Electric Power Big Sandy Plant (AEP) Dolly Sods (291 km) Per a consent decree and BART, AEP will install ammonia injection on Unit 1 and a FGD scrubber on Unit 2 to address condensible particulate emissions

and other visibility impairing pollutants. 1.027 0.496 0.531

James River Face (279 km) 1.052 0.457 0.595

Linville Gorge (256 km) 0.835 0.364 0.471

Otter Creek (266 km) 1.285 0.558 0.697

E.ON U.S Mill*** Creek Station 

### Mammoth Cave (90 km) ***E.ON U.S. for BART will install sorbent injection controls on the larger Units 3-4 to mitigate condensable particulate emissions. 2.265 1.440 0.825

*Existing and expected EGU controls and EPA web links to EKPC and AEP consent d ecrees are available in Appendix L.8. **Since TVA had previously indicat ed to the KYDAQ its plans to inst all hydrated lim e injection controls on TVA Paradise Units 1-3 to mitigate opacity due to SO3 emissions and that additional controls are not cost-effective at this time, the KYDAQ has determined BART to be no control for TVA Paradise Units 1-3. ***Given the extra cost for the lesser additional dv improvement for Units 1 and 2, the Cabinet agreed that BART for Mill Creek is the installation of sorbent injection controls on the larger Units 3 and 4.



### Appendix L Kentucky Regional Haze SIP 24

### Table 9-2 Kentucky BART Controls, Emission Limits, and Compliance Timeframes for BARTSubject Sources

Kentucky BART

Subject Source BART Controls To Be Installed BART Emission Limits Inclusion in Title V Permit Timeframe for Compliance with BART Emission Limits\Controls East Kentucky Power Cooperative (EKPC)

Spurlock Units 1 and 2 and Cooper Units 1 and 2 Install wet FGD and wet ESP on Spurlock Units 1 and 2 and a dry FGD and fabric filtration on Cooper Units 1 and 2. A 07/02/07 EKPC consent decree provides a filterable PM emission rate of 0.030 lb/MMBTU, which was utilized to demonstrate modeled visibility improvement. Emission limits and controls will be included in the source’s Title V Permit as appropriate or on renewal. Expeditiously as practicable, but no later than 5 years after EPA
approves Kentucky’s Regional Haze SIP.

AEP Big Sandy

Unit 1 Unit 2 Install ammonia injection controls on Unit 1 and a FGD on Unit 2. Inorganic Condensible Particulate Limits (modeled as sulfates):

101.0 lb/hr (H2SO4) 127.0 lb/hr (H2SO4) Emission limits and controls will be included in the source’s Title V Permit as appropriate or on renewal. Expeditiously as practicable, but no later than 5 years after EPA
approves Kentucky’s Regional Haze SIP.

KYDAQ will work with AEP to install the FGD scrubber on AEP Big Sandy Unit 2 as expeditiously as practicable. TVA Paradise* Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 *Although not for BART, TVA previously indicated to KYDAQ its plans to install hydrated lime injection controls on TVA Paradise Units 1-3 to mitigate opacity due to SO3 emissions. *NA *Although not for BART, TVA has indicated that its planned SO3 controls for Paradise Units 1-3 will be included in its Title V Permit as appropriate or on renewal. *Although not for BART, TVA in its BART Determination has indicated the SO3 controls will be in place on Paradise Units 1- 3 well before BART controls are required.

Specifically, TVA has related to

Appendix L Kentucky Regional Haze SIP 25

### Table 9-2 Kentucky BART Controls, Emission Limits, and Compliance Timeframes for BARTSubject Sources

Kentucky BART

Subject Source BART Controls To Be Installed BART Emission Limits Inclusion in Title V Permit Timeframe for Compliance with BART Emission Limits\Controls KYDAQ its proposed plan to have hydrated lime injection controls operating on all three TVA Paradise units possibly by the fall of 2010. E.ON U.S.** Mill Creek

Unit 3 Unit 4 **Install sorbent injection controls on larger Units 3 and 4 to control SO3 emissions and continue to utilize existing ESPs to control PM emissions for Units 1 through 4. Inorganic Condensible Particulate Limits (modeled as sulfates):

64.3 lb/hr (H2SO4) 76.5 lb/hr (H2SO4) **Emission limits and controls will be included in the source’s Title V Permit as appropriate or on renewal. **Expeditiously as practicable, but no later than 5 years after EPA
approves Kentucky’s Regional Haze SIP.

*Since TVA had previously indica ted to the KYDAQ its plans to inst all hydrated lime injection co ntrols on TVA Pa radise Units 1-3 to mitigate opacity due to SO3 emissions and that additi onal controls ar e not cost-effective at this time, the KYDAQ has determined BART to be no control for TVA Pa radise Units 1-3. **Given the extra cost for the lesser additional dv improvement for Units 1 and 2, the Cabinet agreed that BART for Mill Creek is the installation of sorbent injection controls on the larger Units 3 and 4.



### 9.2 Final BART Determinations

After reviewing the sources’ BA RT modeling determinations a nd considering the statutory factors, KYDAQ staff has conclude d that the controls proposed by all the five Kentucky EGU BART-Subject sources are reasona ble and appropriate for addres sing condensible particulates and their impacts on nearby Class I areas.

9.3 BART Subject Sources in Other States Wi thin 300 km of Kentucky’s Class I Area

The authority and responsibility for conducting BA RT analyses under the regional haze rule lies with the state in which the BART eligible source is located. Sources must conduct an analysis of their impact on any Class I area wi thin 300 km of the source. At this time the VISTAS states are at various points in their processes for addr essing BART. For information regarding BART sources outside of Kentucky with in 300 km of Kentucky’s Class I area, please refer to the governing state’s regional haze SIP submittal as it becomes available.

Appendix L Kentucky Regional Haze SIP 26

## Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet Kentucky Division for Air Quality



# -------------------------------------------

Appendix L.8 Kentucky Electric Generating Units (EGUs) Existing and Expected Emission Controls

### [This page intentionally left blank.]Kentucky EGU Existing and Expected Emission Control Information11/30/2007(See Kentucky BART EGUs Identified in Blue and Kentucky EGUs on the MANE-VU 167 List Identified in Purple)(Future Kentucky EGU Emission Controls Highlighted in Red)MANE-VUKY BART167 ListMWeNOx CONTROLS Year NOx Control Online SO2 CONTROLS Year SO2 Control Online PM10 CONTROLS Year PM10 Control OnlineOwner Plant Plant_ID Unit IDEGUKY SourcesSize* County(In Operation)**(In Operation)**(In Operation)**Duke Energy EAST BEND 21-015-00029 2BART167648BooneLNB/Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)SCR-2002Flue Gas Desulfurization Unit (FGD) - ScrubberPre-2002ESPPre-2002EKPC COOPER21-199-00005 1BART167100Pulaski Low NOx Burner (LNB)1993DFGD***For BART Before 2012Cold side ESP/Fabric Filtration for BART***1973/For BART on before 2012EKPC COOPER 21-199-00005 2BART167220Pulaski LNB 1994DFGD*** For BART Before 2012Cold side ESP/Fabric Filtration for BART***1973/For BART on before 2012EKPC DALE 21-049-00003 379Clark LNB1997NONECold side ESP1987EKPC DALE21-049-00003 479Clark LNB1996NONECold side ESP1987EKPC DALE21-049-00003 1Clark LNB2007NONECold side ESP1979EKPC DALE21-049-00003 2Clark LNB2007NONECold side ESP1979EKPC H L SPURLOCK 21-161-00009 1BART167340Mason Modified Burner/SCR1977/2003WFGD***Per Consent Decree\ for BART 2009Cold side ESP/WESP For BART***2003/2009***EKPC H L SPURLOCK 21-161-00009 2BART167585Mason LNB/SCR1981/2002WFGD***Per Consent Decree\for BART 2008Hot side ESP/WESP For BART***1981/2008***EKPC J K SMITH 21-049-00027 SCT1110Clark Water Injection1999NONENONEEKPC J K SMITH 21-049-00027 SCT2110Clark Water Injection1999NONENONEEKPC J K SMITH 21-049-00027 SCT3110Clark Water Injection1999NONENONEEKPC J K SMITH 21-049-00027 SCT475Clark Dry low NOX2001NONENONEEKPC J K SMITH 21-049-00027 SCT575Clark Dry low NOX2001NONENONEEKPC J K SMITH 21-049-00027 SCT675Clark Dry low NOX2004NONENONEEKPC J K SMITH 21-049-00027 SCT775Clark Dry low NOX2004NONENONEEKPC GilbertCFB268Clark SNCR/CFB2004Flash dry absorber2004Bag House2004HMPL HENDERSON I 21-101-00012 6BARTHendersonnonenoneMulticlone/ESPAEP BIG SANDY 21-127-00003 BSU1BART167260Lawrence Over Fire Air (OFA), LNB1970'sConsent decree coal sulfur limit 1.75 lb/mmBTUESP/ammonia injection per BART  On or before2012** **AEP BIG SANDY 21-127-00003 BSU2BART167800Lawrence SCR, LNB1960'sFGD-Scrubber - Per consent decree & BART On or before Dec. 31, 2015 ESPE.ON U.S. E W BROWN 21-167-00001 1114Mercer LNB1993Wet Flue Gas Desulfurization (WFGD) Being Constructed - online 2009 per CAIRElectrostatic Precipitator (ESP)1973E.ON U.S. E W BROWN 21-167-00001 2BART167180MercerLow Nox Concentric Firing System (LNCFS) I1994Wet Flue Gas Desulfurization (WFGD) Being Constructed - online 2009 per CAIRElectrostatic Precipitator (ESP)1975E.ON U.S. E W BROWN 21-167-00001 3BART167446Mercer LNCFS III1992Wet Flue Gas Desulfurization (WFGD) Being Constructed - online 2009 per CAIRElectrostatic Precipitator (ESP)1970sE.ON U.S. E W BROWN 21-167-00001 CT5123Mercer Water Injection2001E.ON U.S. E W BROWN 21-167-00001 CT6170 Mercer Water Injection (when burning fuel oil)1999E.ON U.S. E W BROWN 21-167-00001 CT7170 Mercer Water Injection (when burning fuel oil)1999E.ON U.S. E W BROWN 21-167-00001 CT8126Mercer Water Injection1996E.ON U.S. E W BROWN 21-167-00001 CT9126Mercer Water Injection1995E.ON U.S. E W BROWN 21-167-00001 CT10126Mercer Water Injection1995E.ON U.S. E W BROWN 21-167-00001 CT11126Mercer Water Injection1996E.ON U.S. DIX DAM19Mercer This is a Hydro StationE.ON U.S. DIX DAM29MercerE.ON U.S. DIX DAM39MercerE.ON U.S. GHENT21-041-00010 1BART557Carroll LNCFS II/SCR1994/2004FGD-Scrubber1994ESP1974E.ON U.S. GHENT21-041-00010 2BART556Carroll LNCFS III2000WFGDBeing Constructed - online 2009 Per CAIRESP1977E.ON U.S. GHENT21-041-00010 3167557Carroll LNB & OFA/SCR1998/2004WFGDBeing Constructed - online 2007 Per CAIRESP1981E.ON U.S. GHENT21-041-00010 4167556Carroll LNB & OFA/SCR1999/2004WFGDBeing Constructed - online 2008 Per CAIRESP1984E.ON U.S. GREEN RIVER 21-177-00001 176MuhlenburgFGD (Lime Venturi Scrubber)E.ON U.S. GREEN RIVER 21-177-00001 2MuhlenburgFGD (Lime Venturi Scrubber)E.ON U.S. GREEN RIVER 21-177-00001 3MuhlenburgFGD (Lime Venturi Scrubber)E.ON U.S. GREEN RIVER 21-177-00001 475Muhlenburg LNB2002ESP1973E.ON U.S. GREEN RIVER 21-177-00001 5114Muhlenburg LNB1995ESP1975E.ON U.S. HAEFLING 21-067-00067 CT121FayetteE.ON U.S. HAEFLING 21-067-00067 CT221FayetteE.ON U.S. HAEFLING 21-067-00067 CT321FayetteE.ON U.S. LOCK 711Mercer This is a Hydro StationE.ON U.S. LOCK 721MercerE.ON U.S. LOCK 731MercerE.ONU.S. PINEVILLE 21-013-00001338BellRetiredUnitESP 1975Green River Boilers 1, 2 and 3 producedsteam to run Unit 1 and Unit 2. They wereretired on 12/31/2003.E.ONU.S.PINEVILLE21 013 00001338BellRetiredUnitESP1975E.ON U.S. TYRONE21-239-00001 131WoodfordTyrone Boiler 1 and 2 produce steam to run Unit 1E.ON U.S. TYRONE21-239-00001 2WoodfordE.ON U.S. TYRONE21-239-00001 331WoodfordTyrone Boiler 3 and 4 produce steam to run Unit 2E.ON U.S. TYRONE21-239-00001 4WoodfordE.ON U.S. TYRONE21-239-00001 575 Woodford LNB2001ESP1974E.ON U.S. CANE RUN 21-111-0126 4164 Jefferson SLNB1996FGD-Scrubber1976ESP1960sE.ON U.S. CANE RUN 21-111-0126 5BART209Jefferson CCVDAZ (LNB)2003FGD-Scrubber1977ESP1960sE.ON U.S. CANE RUN 21-111-0126 6BART272Jefferson LNCFS II1995FGD-Scrubber1978ESP1960sE.ON U.S. CANE RUN 21-111-0126 CT1116JeffersonE.ON U.S. MILL CREEK 21-111-0127 1BART356Jefferson LNCFS II1996FGD-Scrubber1981** **ESP1970sE.ON U.S. MILL CREEK 21-111-0127 2BART356Jefferson LNCFS II1996FGD-Scrubber1982 ESP1970sE.ON U.S. MILL CREEK 21-111-0127 3BART463Jefferson DRB-XCL (LNB)/SCR2002/2003FGD-Scrubber1978** **ESP/Sorbent injection per BART*****1978/on orbefore 2012*****E.ON U.S. MILL CREEK 21-111-0127 4BART167544Jefferson DRB-XCL (LNB)/SCR2001/2003FGD-Scrubber1982 ESP/Sorbent injection per BART** ***1982/on or before 2012*****E.ON U.S. OHIO FALLS21-111 110Jefferson This is a Hydro StationE.ON U.S. OHIO FALLS21-111 210JeffersonE.ON U.S. OHIO FALLS21-111 310JeffersonE.ON U.S. OHIO FALLS21-111 410JeffersonE.ON U.S. OHIO FALLS21-111 510JeffersonE.ON U.S. OHIO FALLS21-111 610JeffersonE.ON U.S. OHIO FALLS21-111 710JeffersonE.ON U.S. OHIO FALLS21-111 810JeffersonE.ON U.S. PADDYS RUN 21-111 CT1116JeffersonE.ON U.S. PADDYS RUN 21-111 CT1233JeffersonE.ON U.S. PADDYS RUN 21-111 CT13178JeffersonE.ON U.S. TRIMBLE21-223-00002 1566 Trimble ALNB & SCR2002/2002FGD-Scrubber1990ESP1990E.ON U.S. TRIMBLE21-223-00002 CT5234Trimble DLNB2002E.ON U.S. TRIMBLE21-223-00002 CT6234Trimble DLNB2002E.ON U.S. TRIMBLE21-223-00002 CT7234Trimble DLNB2004E.ON U.S. TRIMBLE21-223-00002 CT8234Trimble DLNB2004E.ON U.S. TRIMBLE21-223-00002 CT9234Trimble DLNB2004E.ON U.S. TRIMBLE21-223-00002 CT10234Trimble DLNB2004E.ON U.S. WATERSIDE 21-111 CT720JeffersonRetired UnitE.ON U.S. WATERSIDE 21-111 CT825JeffersonRetired UnitE.ON U.S. ZORN21-111 CT118JeffersonOMU ELMER SMITH 21-059-00027 1BART150Daviess OFA/SCRFGD-ScrubberESPKentucky EGU Existing and Expected Emission Control Information11/30/2007(See Kentucky BART EGUs Identified in Blue and Kentucky EGUs on the MANE-VU 167 List Identified in Purple)(Future Kentucky EGU Emission Controls Highlighted in Red)MANE-VUKY BART167 ListMWeNOx CONTROLS Year NOx Control Online SO2 CONTROLS Year SO2 Control Online PM10 CONTROLS Year PM10 Control OnlineOwner Plant Plant_ID Unit IDEGUKY SourcesSize* County(In Operation)**(In Operation)**(In Operation)**OMU ELMER SMITH 21-059-00027 2BART280Daviess SNCR/LNB\OFAFGD-ScrubberESPTVA PARADISE 21-177-00006 1BART700Muhlenberg OFA/SCR SCR - 2001 FGD-(Venturi Scrubber) 1982Venturi Scrubber /Lime Injection******1982 /Lime Injection Before 2012TVA PARADISE 21-177-00006 2BART167700Muhlenberg OFA/SCRSCR - 2001FGD-(Venturi Scrubber)1982Venturi Scrubber /Lime Injection******1982 /Lime Injection Before 2012TVA PARADISE 21-177-00006 3BART1671,150Muhlenberg OFA/SCRSCR - 2003FGD-Scrubber2006ESP/Lime Injection******1970's /Lime Injection Before 2012TVA SHAWNEE 21-145-00006 1175McCracken LNBBaghouse1970'sTVA SHAWNEE 21-145-00006 2175McCracken LNBBaghouse1970'sTVA SHAWNEE 21-145-00006 3175McCracken LNBBaghouse1970'sTVA SHAWNEE 21-145-00006 4175McCracken LNBBaghouse1970'sTVA SHAWNEE 21-145-00006 5175McCracken LNBBaghouse1970'sTVA SHAWNEE 21-145-00006 6175McCracken LNBBaghouse1970'sTVA SHAWNEE 21-145-00006 7175McCracken LNBBaghouse1970'sTVA SHAWNEE 21-145-00006 8175McCracken LNBBaghouse1970'sTVA SHAWNEE 21-145-00006 9175McCracken LNBBaghouse1970'sTVA SHAWNEE 21-145-00006 10175McCracken AFBC UnitBubbling limestone bedBaghouse1980'sWKE COLEMAN 21-091-00003 C1BART150HancockLNB/Rotating Over-Fire Air (ROFA)LNB-1990s, ROFA-2004FGD-Scrubber2006ESP1970sWKE COLEMAN 21-091-00003 C2BART150HancockLNB/Advanced Over-Fire Air (AOFA)LNB-1990s, AOFA-2004FGD-Scrubber2006ESP1970sWKE COLEMAN 21-091-00003 C3BART150Hancock LNB/AOFALNB-1990s, AOFA-2004FGD-Scrubber2006ESP1970sWKE D B WILSON 21-183-00069 W1420Ohio LNB/SCRLNB-1985, SCR-2003FGD-Scrubber1985 - 'Initial Start-upESP1985 - Initial Start-upWKE HMP&L STATION21-233-00001 H1BART150Webster LNB/SCR LNB-1990s, SCR on 2004 FGD-Scrubber 1990s ESP 1970sWKE HMP&L STATION21-233-00001 H2BART160Webster LNB/SCR LNB-1990s, SCR on 2004 FGD-Scrubber 1990s ESP 1970sWKE R D GREEN 21-233-00052 G1BART230Webster LNB/Coal ReburnLNB-1980s, Coal Re-burn in 2004FGD-Scrubber1980sESP1980sWKE R D GREEN 21-233-00052 G2BART220Webster LNB/Coal ReburnLNB-1980s, Coal Re-burn in 2004FGD-Scrubber1980sESP1980sWKE ROBERT REID 21-233-00001 R1BART65Webster Fuel Oil, pellitized coal fines or petroleum coke2004noneCyclone / ESP1960sWKE ROBERT REID 21-233-00001 RT*******65Webster Dual burners (fuel oil or gas)nonePercent of Kentucky BART EGUs With or To Have Emission Controls to Date:97%90%100%Percent of Kentucky EGUs on MANE-VU 167 List With or To Have Emission Controls to Date:100%93%100%* 1.Note: "Size" column is for comparison purposes only. Companies used varying sources for reporting - gross, nameplate, etc.** 2.Note: For emission controls brought online before 2000, if the online date is not readily available then the decade that the control became operational may be entered (such as 1990s, 1980s).In addition, if known, please indicate future NOx, SO2, and PM10 unit controls that are currently being constructed orplanned and their projected online (in operation) date.*** 3. Note: EKPC, per its BART Determination, plans to install for BART WFGDs and WESPs for Spurlock Units 1 & 2 and DFGDs andfabric filtration for Cooper Units 1 & 2. Some of these controls are related to a recent EKPC consent decree.For information, an EPA link to a EKPC consent decree is at:www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/cases/civil/caa/eastkentuckypower.html  4.Note: Per a BART Determination and consent decree for AEP's Big Sandy Units 1 and 2, AEP plans to install ammonia injection on Unit 1 and a FGD Scrubber on Unit 2 to address condensible particulates for BART.Per the AEP consent decree, the FGD scrubber for Big Sandy Unit 2 is required by December 31, 2015.For information, an EPA link to a AEP consent decree is at:www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/cases/civil/caa/americanelectricpower1007.html.** *** 5.Note: Per a BART Determination, E.ON U.S. plans to install sorbent injection on Mill Creek Units 3 and 4 to address condensible particulates for BART.****** 6.Note: TVA will install hydrated lime injection on Units 1-3 to address TVA Paradise stack condensibles per its TVA BART Determination.******* 7.Note: WKE Reid Turbine is a Non-EGU auxiliary boiler only used during start-up that was exempted from BART modeling per EPA guidance.

## Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet Kentucky Division for Air Quality



# -------------------------------------------

Appendix L.11 BART Determination Modeling Submittals

### [This page intentionally left blank.]

### Amended May 2010

BART Determination Modeling Submittals

# e,on| ut.

CERTIFIED MAIL CERTIFICATION NUMBER 7006 2760 OOO5 5303

9375 RETURN RECEIPT REOUESTEI)

November

18, 2008

John Lyons, Director Kentucky

Division for Air Quality 200 Fair Oaks

Lane Frankfort,

KY 40601

Re: Agreed

Order entered into on October 20,2008 File No. DAQ-29458-039

Dear Mr. Lyons: K\feroF- 

# D]$ q E LVG

t';au I l i,l,JS

_." otnrf,trcn's ci-FicE * gglgi i:c[ lliR

QUALTTY

Louisville Gas and Electric (LG&E) and the Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet entered into an Agreed Order on Octob er 20,2008 (File No. DAQ-29458-039). As specified in paragraph I of the order, LG&E is herein providing the Kentucky Division for Air Quality with information identiffing emission rates utilized for the modeling conducted in conjunction with LG&E's Septembet

24,2007 submittal of Mill Creek Station's Best Available Retrofit Technology analysis. Additionally, this correspondence provides written explanation of the infeasibility of incorporating a sulfur trioxide (SO:) emission limitation of 0.015 lb/mmBtu into the Mill Creek Station Title V permit.

As described

in the submitted analysis, for the purpose of SO: emission determination, all HzSO+ particles determined

from the CALPUFF modeling were assumed to be SO: emissions. As shown in "TableT-l CALPUFF Modeling Parameters" of the report, the baseline HzSO+ primary particle information are in units of grams per second (g/s), 25.39 g/s and 27 .67 g/s for Mill Creek Units 3 and 4, respectively. When input into the CALPUFF model, they were converted to pounds per hour (lb/hr) values of 20L5 lb/hr and2l9.6lblhr for Mill Creek Units 3 and4, respectively. In determining the effectiveness

of sorbent injection technology, a stack exit concentration

of five (5) parts per million (ppm) SO: was used to evaluate the technology's effect on visibility impacts. For input into the CALPUFF model, five (5) ppm SO3 eeuates to HzSO+ emission

rates of 64.3|blhr and76.5lblhr for Mill Creek Units 3 and 4, respectively. These values are displayed in Appendix D on pages D-4 and D-5 of the previously submitted analysis. The lb/hr values were the primary model input values utilized in our CALPUFF modeling. As such, these are the values that are appropriate for incorporation into Mill Creek Station's Title V permit.

For illustrative purposes only, the lbftr values were converted to lb/mmBtu values in TableT-4 of the Septemb

er 24, 2007 submittal. While we apolo gize for the confusion which resulted fromincluding the value in our submittal, we wish to clarify that we never intended to suggest that it

is appropriate

for inclusion as an emission limit in our permit.

The 0.015 lb/mmBtu value provided in Table 7-4 is based on the design heat input (i.e., maximum) value for the two units. However, in the course of normal utility operations, the units operate at a wide range of heat inputs, some of which are substantially lower than the design heat input value. Although the SO: mitigation system proposed by LG&E can meet the specified lb/hr emissions

values necessary

to achieve BART, it is not capable of controlling HzSO+ emission

to 0.015 lb/mmBtu at all heat input levels. Indeed, the measurement accuracy of HzSO+ emissions is questionable when operating at the level of lower heat inputs that would be encountered

in the course of normal operations.

Consequently,

adding a 0.015 lb/mmBtu limit to the permit would place severe constraints

on our operational flexibility which could effectively preclude us from operating the unit at certain heat inputs. This would have major financial implications for us. In conclusion, it is not technically feasible

for our proposed

SO3 mitigation system to meet the 0.015 lb/mmBtu HzSO+ target at all operating loads and we do not believe that the value reflects BART for our units.

Therefore,

if the Division desires to incorporate specific BART emission limits into the Title V permit for Mill Creek, the appropriate values would be 64.3 and 7 6.5 lb/hr HzSO+ for Units 3 and 4 respectively. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me at (502) 627-4621

or Jason Wilkerson at (502) 627-4043.



### Respectfully, 

# rh,{

Environmental Affairs E.ON U.S.

Cc: Robin Thomerson, KDAQ

### [This page intentionally left blank.]March 18, 2009

Martin Luther Program Planning & Administration Kentucky Division for Air Quality 200 Fair Oaks Lane, First Floor Frankfort, Kentuclqy 4060 1

RE: John Sherman Cooper Generating StationRevised BART Analvsis

Dear Mr. Luther:

As you know, Units I and 2 atthe East Kentuclcy Power Cooperative, Inc. (EKPC) John Sherman Cooper Station (Cooper Station) are subject to the Best Available Rekofit Technology (BART) determination guidelines under 40 CFR Part 51 . EKPC submitted its BART determination modeling and control strategy to the Division in a report dated July 23,2007. The July 2007 submittal identified wet flue gas desulfurization (WFGD) and wet electrostatic precipitators (WESP) as BART for Cooper Units 1 and 2 and those controls were specified in Kentucky's June 2008 Regional Haze SIP. Since its July 2007 submittal and the submittal of the Regional Haze SIP, EKPC has determined, with the assistance of Burns & McDonnell Engineering Company, Inc., that Dry FGD and Fabric Filtration (DFGD/FF) will be at least as effective as WFGDATVESP for the Cooper Units. Therefore, EKPC is requesting that KDAQ amend the 2008 Regional Haze SIP to allow substitution of DFGDIFF at Cooper Station for the previously approved WFGDAMESP. Based upon our discussions with you and other representatives

of KDAQ last fall, EKPC has prepared the enclosed

analysis, including modeling, in support of this request.

After you have reviewed the enclosed submrttal, EKPC looks forward to addressing any questions you may have. In order to comply with the obligations under the Consent Decree in the case styled,United States v. East Kentuclry Power Cooperative, Inc., Civ. ActionNo.04-34-KSP (E.D. Ky.) (entered

Sept. 27 ,2007), EKPC must complete the retrofit of Unit 2 completed and operational

by June 30,2012. Sincerely,

A Touchstone Energy Cooperative XJl-)1 

## [,|AR 1 B 2OO9



# /4X, /4 6"/r.2,4.e

Jerry Purvis, Manager Environmental Affairs

JP:MBjkr

Enclosure

John Lyons Sean Alteri Mike Binkley

4775 Lexington

Rood 40391 PO. Box 7O7,

Winchester, Kentucky 40392-0707 Jacqueline Quarles Chris Wathen. Kenvirons

Tel. (859)

744-4812 Fqx: (859) 744-60A8 http://www.ekpc.coopI. INTRODUCTION

East Kentucky Power Cooperative, Inc. (EKPC) is a power generation and transmission utility that owns and operates several electric generating units (EGUs) in Kentucky. Some of the EGUs owned and operated by EKPC consist

of coal-fired units that are subject to the Regional Haze rule and Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) determination guidelines promulgated

under 40 CFR Part 51. In response to EPA rulemaking and at the request of the Kentucky Division for Air Quality (KDAQ), EKPC previously evaluated BART for its subject EGUs and conducted modeling in accordance with the protocol approved by KDAQ. This work culminated in the submittal to KDAQ of the report entitled, Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Source Specific Modeling - East Kentucky Power Cooperative Hugh L. Spurlock Generating Station and, John Sherman

Cooper Generating

Station, dated July 23,2007 (2007 BART Submittal). '

As set out in the2007 BART Submiffal, Cooper Units 1 and 2 are BART-eligible sources and are subject to BART since the 98th percentile visibility impacts predicted for both BART-eligible sources were above the exemption threshold of 0.5 deciviews (dv). At the time the 2007 BART Submittal was prepared, EKPC was in the midst of negotiating a Consent Decree

with EPA to resolve certain allegations of noncompliance with Clean Air Act requirements,

ffid it was anticipated that the negotiated resolution would require retrofitting the Cooper BART-eligible units with wet flue gas desulfurization systems (WFGDs) for SOz

control and wet electrostatic precipitators (WESPs) for PM control. 2007 BART Submittal

, at 4-3. Taking into consideration the anticipated Consent Decree, EKPC determined at the time that WFGD and WESP were BART for Cooper Units 1 and 2. KDAQ accepted

EKPC's demonstration of BART and the associated regionalhaze modeling and utilized that information as a component of Kentucky's RegionalHaze SP, dated June 2008. SIP, Section

7 .5.3 and Table 7 .5.3-1.

As subsequently

discussed

with KDAQ, the Consent Decree as ultimately entered did not mandate WFGD and WESPs. Consent Decree, Paragraphs 64,82. EKPC retained Burns & McDonnell Engineering Compffiy, Inc. to assist with the retrofit project for Cooper Units I and 2, including evaluation of available control methodologies to satisfy the Consent Decree. As a result of this evaluation, EKPC has determined that the use of a dry flue gas desulfurization system (DFGD) combined with a pulse jet fabric filter (FF) for Cooper Units 1 and 2 meets or exceeds the performance of the WFGD/WESP previously proposed

as BART.

As explained in detail herein, the anticipated total PM emission control achieved by the DFGD/FF control train is better than the previously approved WFGDAMESP, and the predicted

visibility impacts are comparable.

t This request

relates only to the BART-eligible sources at the John Sherman Cooper Generating

Station. The 2007 BART Submittal is still applicable to the sources

at the Spurlock Station.

### Accordingly, EKPC is submitting

this revised

BART analysis in support of its request that KDAQ amend

the June 2008 RegionalHaze

SIP to allow for the substitution of the DFGD/FF

control train in place

of the WFGD/IYESP.II. ANALYSIS

A. Control Technology Comparison

In the 2007 BART Submittal, EKPC determined that a WFGD/WESP control train capable of achieving 0.030 lb/mmBtu filterable PM and 0.052lblmmBtu total PM was BART for Cooper Units I and 2. EKPC is requesting that it be allowed to substitute a DFGD/FF control train capable of achieving 0.030 lblmmBtu filterable PM and 0.045 lbimmBtu total PM for the WFGD/WESP control train previously approved.

The previously approved WFGD/WESP technolo gy utllizes a lime or limestone slurrybased scrubbing medium for SOz removal in the absorber, followed by a wet ESP, which provides removal of scrubber-generated PM as well as sulfuric acid mist. As discussed in the 2007 BART Submittal, WFGD/WESP can provide control of filterable PM to levels of 0.030 lbimmBtu. Total PM emissions from the WFGD/WESP control train were estimated

using the National Park Service G.IPS) PM speciation

spreadsheets

(see Attachment A). At a filterable PM emission rate of 0.030 lb/mmBtu, the NPS speciation spreadsheet

for PC boilers with WFGD/WESP estimates total PM emissions to be 0.052 lb/mmBtu. These values were used in the previous BART submittal.

The proposed DFGD/FF control train utilizes a pebble lime-based dry scrubber system in combination with a fabric filter for control of SOz, PM, and sulfuric acid mist. The DFGDIFF can also attain filterable PM levels meeting the previously accepted 0.030 lb/mmBtu filterable PM emission rate. Condensable PM emissions from the DFGD/FF as specified by Burns & McDonnell Engineering Company, Inc. equate to 50To of the filterable emissions, providing a condensable PM emission

rate of 0.015 lb/mmBtu for a total PM rate of 0.045 lb/mmBtu. Based upon this information, at equal filterable PM emission levels, the DFGD/FF actually provides better overall control for total PM than the approved

WFGD/WESP, primatily due to lower sulfuric acid emissions. The NPS spreadsheet

for WFGDiWESP determines sulfuric acid emissions (listed as inorganic condensable

PM) to be 0.018 lblmmBtu, while the NPS spreadsheet for DFGD/FF (Attachment

A) determines

sulfuric acid emissions to be 0.012lblmmBtu.

Table 1 provides a summary of PM emission rates for the two control options. Based on these rates, the proposed DFGD/FF is more effective at controlling PM emissions than the WFGD/WESP control train identified in the SIP.

Table I Summary of PM Performance Levels

Control Option Filterable PM Emissionso lb/mmBtu Total PM Emissions, lb/mmBtu 

### WFGD/WESP 0.030 0.052 DFGD/FF 0.030 

### 0.04s

### B. BART Modeling

In order to confirm and to demonstrate the equivalence of the DFGDIFF control train to the previously accepted WFGD/WESP control train, EKPC performed additional CALPUFF modeling to evaluate the visibility impacts in Class I areas from Cooper Units I arrd2. PM emissions were speciated

in the same manner as described in the2007 BART Submittal, except that a maximum filterable PM limit of 0.030 and a total PM limit of 0.045 were input into the NPS speciation spreadsheets for dry-botttom PC boilers employing FGD and fabric filtration. Emissions were then calculated using the spreadsheets

and a maximum continuous rate (heat input) (MCR) of 1,350 mmBtu/hr for Unit 1 and 2,400 mmBtu/hr for Unit 2.2 The completed NPS spreadsheets for Cooper Units I and 2 are included in Attachment A. Table 2 summarizes the speciated emissions after retrofit.

Table 2 

### Speciated

PM Emission

Rates for Modeling to Evaluate BART Gontrols

Stack parameters

for the two Cooper units subject to the BART analysis are presented below in Table 3. The exit velocity and temperature parameters

are different than those used in the previous modeling and reflect the use of the DFGD/FF control train.



### Table 3 Stack Parameters for Gooper Sources

Unit lD UTM East, km UTM North, km Stack

Height,

m Base Elevation,

m Stack Diameter,

m Exit Velocity, m/s Stack Temp., K Cooper Unit 1 714.228 4097.212 78.9 244 5.5 21 344.26 Cooper Unit 2 714.228 4097.212 78.9 244 5.5 21 344.26

Having specified exhaust parameters and calculated the speciated emission rates, the CALPUFF model was run as described previously for Units 1 and 2 at Cooper for each

'The maximum continuous rating (MCR) for Cooper Units 1 and 2 used in the prior BART modeling were 1,080 mmBtu/hr and 2,089 mmBh/hr, respectively. (These are the MCR ratings included in the description of these units in the Title V permit.) EKPC decided to use potential MCR values for Unit I of 1,350 mmBtuihr and 2,400 mmBtu/hr for Unit 2 in calculating emissions for the BART modeling to ensure that the BART modeling will be valid at all operating conditions. Source lD PM Species Emission Rates, lb/hr

SOa SOA PMC PMF EC Cooper Unit 1 16.0 4.0 34.3 6.0 0.2 Cooper Unit 2 28.4 7.1 60.9 10.7 0.4Class I areawithin 300 km. Table 4 shows the top eight 24-hour changes in light extinction (deciviews, dv) from the 20 o/obest days for each of the Class I areas subject to analysis after application of retrofit control for PM. Table 5 presents a summary of the results of the revised BART modeling for the Cooper sources and each Class I area, with the number of days and receptors in each Class I areawhere dv > 0.5. These tables demonstrate

compliance with the Regional Haze Rule since the 98th percentile modeled values (8tn

highest) or the 22"d

highest predictions over the three y"ui. modeled, whichever are higher, are below the exemption threshold of 0.5 dv in each Class I area. In fact, no days in any of the modeled Class I areas out of the three years modeled was predicted where the change in light extinction was greater than 0.5 dv. Table 6 shows a comparison of the 2007 BART Submittal to this submittal for the 98th percentile and marimum 24-hour change in light extinction in deciviews. As shown, with the exception of Linville Gorge, where the 98th percentile change in light extinction goes up slightly from 0.046 to 0.047, the visibility impacts decrease for both the 98th percentile and the maximum Z$-hottr.

Therefore, application of DFGDIFF controls to Cooper Units 1 and 2, with a filterable PM limit of 0.030 lblmmBtu, mitigates any adverse visibilityimpact in Class I areas within 300 km of each source and fulfills the BART requirements.

### Table 4 Results of CALPUFF Modeling for BART Control Assessment

Visibility Impact Rankings

EKPC BART-Eligible Sources Glass lArea zoolDeltaDeciview Ranks 1-8 2002

DeltaDeciview Ranks 1-8 2003

DeltaDeciview Ranks 1{

Cooper Station Units 1 & 2 Mammoth Cave NP 0.226 0.254 o.412 0.183 0.249 0.345 0.181 0.231 0.253 0.163 0.220 o.241 0.148 0.215 0.201 o.144 0.211 0.20c 0.142 0.209 0.188 o.141 0.201 0.170

Cooper Station Units 1 & 2 Great Smoky Mountains

NP 0.262 0.389 0.385

o.243 0.346 0.280 0.241 o.237 0.252 0.236 0.213 0.252 0.225 0.199 0.190 0.223 0.165 0.183 0.219 0.155 0.178 o.192 0.150 0.171

Cooper Station Units 1 & 2 Joyce Kilmer-Slickrock 0.154 0.254 0.319 0.148 0.236 0.223 0.146 0.216 0.181 o.145 0.148 0.151 0.133 0.1 36 0.'112 0.126 0.135 0.112 0.119 0.121 o.111 0 . 1 1 5 0 . 1 1 9 0.102

Cooper Station Units 1 & 2 Cohutta 0.094 U.148 0.122 0.093 0.1 38 0.119 0.091 0.129 0.111 0.090 0.107 0.109 0.087 0.096 0.103 0.082 0.090 0.096 0.075 0.086 0.084 0.068 0.080 0.079

Cooper Station Units 1 & 2 Shining Rock 0.064 0.070 0.127 0.053 0.070 0.084 0.049 0.064 0.072 0.049 0.053 0.060 0.048 0.049 0.054 0.046 0.o42 0.051 0.046 0.o42 0.05c 0.045 0.039 0.047

3ooper Station Units 1 & 2 Linville Gorge 0.098 0.094 0.074 0.088 0.071 0.06i 0.073 0.064 0.058 0.065 0.062 0.057 0.051 0.045 0.054 0.050 o.044 0.051 0.046 0.041 0.04€ 0.046 0.041 0.047S L trLO =frF=Tt E9E U.9 '-f E G + +"i d =mtr - : c\



### n o o)

@ c?
o O) c?
o o !t

o (\

o @ o, q o

Irg Eolt:
: Eu? E E gllct*.9 

# Afl+ET Fb EA F 

# €$5sf

=E=? 

## 22'='= g

o
o o o o E o O o O o o

o

.E o o o o o O o

rrg Eott 

# [ fiE E F E *:8 

# E i gs F

EE5.= 

# 2 z '= o
o ct o o o 

### u O O o o o o

o
G o o O O o o o

rrg 

# [f,E E fl E * + s 

# E; g$ F 

# EE E = g

o
o o t, o 

### u, o o o o O o

o
G o o O o o O o

trg Eolt 

# [ fiB E 

# fl Et + + E 

# E; g$ F

EE5.= 22'; g,

o
o o o o t O O o o o o

o nt o O o o o O O

A 

# s g; $ g E $ E fr Es $

orFA o
(f) N (o @ (\

c\t (f)

(f) C\ (o

N +. I E q)

- F E o a c)
a a

- o L +)
a -l A, v (J
t'l rV.



### FE
L

1-l 

### ci q0 

### rn .! g6

-a 1l c! .e El Fr 

### tr

Fr '.] 

## U

+r o

a +,

- -l

- o q)

frtl.

-

L €g
rri F

- ?1

- H

-

- 

### a

### Table 6 Comparison of the 2007 BART Submittal Results using WFGD/WESP to Results

using DFGD/FF

MODEL INPUT AI\D OUTPUT FILES

All input and output files from the additional CALPUFF modeling system BART analysis for Cooper Units 1 and

2 are provided on CD-ROM. All model input files have a file extension

of .irp, while all model

output files have

an extension of .lst. An example set of file names,

these representing

the modeling

for the Cooper

Station sources for Mammoth

Cave National Park (MACA), are listed below for the 200I modeling:

CALPUFF

Input - PUFF-COOPER-MACA-200 1 .INP CALPUFF

Output - PUFF-COOPER-MACA-200 1 .LST POSTUTIL Input - PU-COOPER-MACA -200L.INP POSTUTIL

Output - PU-COOPER-MACA-2001.LST CALPOST Input

- POST-COOPER-MACA-200 1 .INP CALPOST

Output - POST-COOPER-MACA-2001.INP Class I Area 98th Percentile Impact with BART Controls (change in dv) Maximum 24-hour Impact for 3-year period (change in dv)

WFGD/WESP DFGD/FF

(proposed) WFGD/WESP DF'GD/FF (proposed)

Mammoth Cave NP 0.252 

### 0.201 0.648 0.412

Great Smokey Mtns NP 

### 0.2t9 0.192 0.323 0.389

Joyce Kilmer-Slickrock 0.122 

### 0.1r9 0.269 0.319

Cohutta 0.087 0.080 0.t73 0.148

Shining Rock 

### 0.049 0.047 0.075 

### 0.t27

Linville Gorge 0.046 0.047 0.104 0.098CONCLUSION

As explained above, EKPC has determined that use of a DFGD/FF for Cooper Units 1 and 2 is at least as effective as the WFGD/WESP previously accepted by KDAQ as BART. EKPC has performed additional CALPUFF modeling to evaluate the visibility impacts of its BART-eligible units taking into account the alternative control train for Cooper Units I andZ. The predicted visibility impacts are comparable to impacts noted in EKPC's 2007 BART Submittal. Accordingly, EKPC requests that KDAQ amend the June 2008 RegionalHaze SIP to allow EKPC to substitute the DFGDFF control train for the previously accepted WFGDiIVESP control train for Cooper Units 1 and 2.



### 9

## ATTACHMENTA

NPS PARTICULATE SPECIATION SPREADSHEETS

POST-CONTROL

PM EMISSIONSa?qqqc! t(oo(oto (or(o



### sE85g 

# 5#HEE

ss*sss \o?aaqq (oo)o(o(oo lo6to



### EFH55
h o arEE 6iEii38 q,
I o L E IJ

c

=

I E g e

o v

o o

I

= L ' l s q (o

g o

F (! o /

X T x.

(?)

s U)

=

' I F
s s a (o (\

=

c

c F

c s s o (r, (r)

x ]J o o o

IJ

o I a
F

o s s !

c)

F
s s t) t)

q)

II E o F

o ;{ s a'l

-i x uJ o o

c) e o o o

s s i

q)

.o g
(t

E l! E

o 1< 

### T

(!

5 I

=

F

g

o o 1 7

-

o o IE

s o D I c) o q

x nJ v

o

F n

c

0)

+j X uJ T
I

U

F t 'n

x IJ c

c $ € (o

o

o @ a o 

# T

o

()

t !

o
iI (0 |r) o o o

x lu

n o

J. rf \l

o

o o 1.l' I o

x q o

o) I

o r() c{ oq o

o g q) =

Jc n tr

r lO lO a

0.,

! !

, l ri
I

I o g

E

o o 6

o o D

o

6 o
^rJ

E

o g 0

o o o E o o o 

### i

!)

x

= t- :

o

s t' o q
o

d o o

x uJ q)
o - t

(?, ;

a

E (9 g o

E E E F
! o c{ q
o

o) o

E N

3

o,

)

o
f ?

f

lts (t (o
o o o

x IJ (D

o

e o o \l s (r) g o

I

= ':=

o (o
o \t o c) 

### I

(o
o (0
o o

@ o o (L tl

-r x.

E

o €

E E

ct €

GI t

,:ri:l

:,::tt rtT'

.:

o o

N E tu s s

tr 3 E r ! c g O F 

### EI 6E

L 

### t: O E o o o s

i

E t,,

c o (,

o c .9
o o E b

s F ee g r* b Ft o .66 5 ao = *'l! 6 rp o o.= E

oa c E3 ( ' gE € $Q 6 

## *E E 

# Eg F

g lL :i.
0E't . : 5 c '5'E b r.3 g U)t ( l ^ o 

# FE H

EE E =E 8 !@ E 

# 5s Eol\aarA

OoO@r\F (cte (! O

F



## sFsgS 

# gE#EE

ssssss \o?aaqq @q)o(o@o |,)(\O



### HESgS
EooEE 8iEii83 E
o .5 s E .9
I 5 E rO o ? :E a, g f !

j

s

c 0 I

E o o

.i x {

2

(o O) q
o

o

F (! I

= o) 

# x

6
o :

o I

(t ; 2

v o c?

o )

g e v, c o o o @ a
o 

# T

o 

# x ;
o o

O IJJ

o
iI (o rO o
ci

x ! o c

o U)
o iI c
,c I tf ci

o it c c
! o ttl i o

o o o

o

.o o N i

o

a o 4 o

o E lf) lr) I

! o I

I o g

c e

o o
6

o
o o

o

o
o g E
IJ

=

o =

c o) o ()

x uJ t

o c
r (

.t
n

tr E rt c q
o

0) o *

x uJ

o 9

F ? Y

t ; 'n

E rt q o

o (\I g e

o

,lc)

N o o q
o

x :

o n
o
I o (o
o o
o

o

I (t) (o
o o o

X uJ q

o g G ' l rt rt

o

o E
o = 

### I

E (o
\t

ci 

### I

@ o (o

o

.9 6 (D () tl

I E

E $

(D E E

a e a fit ',1 :,:: ,i::,:
.!.: ,l!:, j'i:': a:ii l+:! f o. .s (u o)

o It c (g s :s !$ (\?

.t: ,l::'. tr

r E trg O F 

### EI 6k

L o d a ; O E o o a s
t

-;i

o
tr o o o E .9 o .9 ,Eb

ee g

Fll- : -t u !66 5 qro = ;t! 6 ;P' G o'= E oo c E5 C ' gE € (!(J x 

# fEF

co. : o crl 'Etr 3E b t.d g U)r o ^ o ;E 9 Fd * ;E 9 6 0 EE fi Eo = 

# .sF n

### [This page intentionally left blank.]

## Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet Kentucky Division for Air Quality



# -------------------------------------------

Appendix L.12 BART Determination Modeling Results for BART-Subject Sources

### [This page intentionally left blank.]

### Table 9

- 1 Kentucky BART Determination Modeling Results for BART

- Subject Sources*

Source Class I Areas BART Controls to Be Installed* 98 th

Percentile Impact Before BART Controls (Change in dv) 98 th Percentile Impact with BART Controls (Change in dv) BA RT Determination Control Visibility Improvement From 98 th Percentile value (Change in dv)

East Kentucky Power Cooperative (EKPC) Spurlock Station Mammoth Cave (251 km) EKPC per a consent decree and for BART will install a wet FGD and wet ESP at EKPC Spu rlock Units 1 and 2 that will address condensible particulate emissions and other visibility impairing pollutants. 1.834 0.213 1.621

East Kentucky Power Cooperative (EKPC) Cooper Station Mammoth Cave (130) km EKPC per a consent decree and for BART will install a dry FGD and fabric filtration at EKPC Cooper Units 1 and 2 that will address condensible particulate emissions and other visibility impairing pollutants. 7.376 0.201 7.175

Great Smoky Mountains National Park (162 km) 6.763 0.192 6.571

J oyce Kilmer

- Slickrock Wilderness (178 km) 4.974 0.119 4.855

Cohutta Wilderness Area (221 km) 3.363 0.080 3.283 Shinning Rock (233 km) 2.022 0.047 1.975 Linville Gorge Wilderness Area (267 km) 1.885 0.047 1.838

TVA Paradise Fossil Steam Plant** Mammoth Cave (63 km) 

### **Although not for BART, TVA previously indicated to KYDAQ its plans to install hydrated lime injection controls on TVA Paradise Units 1

- 3 to mitigate opacity due to SO3 emissions. U1

- 1.285

U2

- 1.285 U3

- 1.842 4.412

3.930 0.606

0.606 0.836 2.048

2.048 0.679

0.679 1.006 2.364

1.882

Mingo (283 km) U1

- 0.251 U2

- 0.251 U3

- 0.381 0.883

0.865 0.116

0.116 0.166 0.398

0.398 0.135

0.135 0.215 0.485

0.467

### Table 9

- 1 Kentucky BART Determination Modeling Results for BART

- Subject Sources*

Source Class I Areas BART Controls to Be Installed* 98 th

Percentile Impact Before BART Controls (Change in dv) 98 th Percentile Impact with BART Controls (Change in dv) BA RT Determination Control Visibility Improvement From 98 th Percentile value (Change in dv)

American Electric Power Big Sandy Plant (AEP) Do lly Sods (291 km) Per a consent decree and BART, AEP will install ammonia injection on Unit 1 and a FGD scrubber on Unit 2 to address condensible particulate emissions and other visibility impairing pollutants. 1.027 0.496 0.531

James River Face (279 km) 1.052 0.457 0.595

Linville Gorge (256 km) 0.835 0.364 0.471

Otter Creek (266 km) 1.285 0.558 0.697

E.ON U.S Mill*** Creek Station 

### Mammoth Cave (90 km) ***E.ON U.S. for BART will install sorbent injection

co ntrols on the larger Units 3

- 4 to mitigate condensable particulate emissions. 2.265 1.440 0.825

*Existing and expected EGU controls and EPA web links to EKPC and AEP consent decrees are available in Appendix L.8. **Since TVA had previously indicated to the KYDAQ its plans to install hydrated lime injection controls on TVA Paradise Units 1-3 to mitigate opacity due to SO3 emissions and that additional controls are not cost-effective at this time, the KYDAQ has determined BART to be no control for TVA Paradise Units 1-3. ***Given the extra cost for the lesser additional dv improvement for Units 1 and 2, the Cabinet agreed that BART for Mill Creek is the installation of sorbent injection controls on the larger Units 3 and 4.

### Table 9

- 2 Kentucky BA RT Controls, Emission Limits, and Compliance Timeframes for BART

Subject Sources

Kentucky BART Subject Source BART Controls To

Be Installed BART Emission Limits Inclusion in

Title V Permit Timeframe for

Compliance with BART Emission Limits \ Controls East Kentucky Power Cooperative (EKPC)

Spurlock Units 1 and 2 and Cooper Units 1 and 2 Install wet FGD and

wet ESP on Spurlock Units 1 and 2 and a dry FGD and fabric filtration on Cooper Units 1 and 2. A 07/02/07 EKPC

consent decree provides a filterable PM e mission rate of 0.030 lb/MMBTU, which was utilized to demonstrate modeled visibility improvement. Emission

limits and controls will be included in the source’s Title V Permit as appropriate or on renewal. Expeditiously as

practicable, but no later than 5 years after EPA
approves Kentucky’s Regional Haze SIP.

AEP Big Sandy

Unit 1 Unit 2 Install ammonia

injection controls on Unit 1 and a FGD on Unit 2. Inorganic

Condensible Particulate Limits (modeled as sulfates):

101.0 lb/hr (H2SO4) 127.0 lb/hr (H 2SO4) Emission

limits and controls will be included in the source’s Title V Permit as appropriate or on renewal. Expeditiously as

practicable, but no later than 5 years after EPA
approves Kentucky’s Regional Haze SIP.

KYDAQ will work with AEP to install the FGD scrubber on AEP Big Sandy Unit 2 as expeditiously as practicable. TVA Paradise* Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 *Although not for

BART, TVA previously indicated to KYDAQ its plans to install hydrated lime injection controls on TVA Paradise Units 1

- 3 to mitig ate opacity due to SO3 emissions. *NA *Although not for BART, TVA has indicated that its planned SO3 controls for Paradise Units 1

- 3 will be included in its Title V Permit as appropriate or on renewal. *Although not for

BART, TVA in its BART Determination has indicated the SO3 controls will be in place on Paradise Units 1

- 3 well before BART controls are required.

Specifically, TVA has related to

### Table 9

- 2 Kentucky BA RT Controls, Emission Limits, and Compliance Timeframes for BART

Subject Sources

Kentucky BART Subject Source BART Controls To

Be Installed BART Emission Limits Inclusion in

Title V Permit Timeframe for

Compliance with BART Emission Limits \ Controls KYDAQ its proposed plan to have hydrated lime injection controls operating on all three TVA Paradise units possi bly by the fall of 2010. E.ON U.S.** Mill Creek

Unit 3 Unit 4 **Install sorbent

injection controls on larger Units 3 and 4 to control SO3 emissions and continue to utilize existing ESPs to control PM emissions for Units 1 through 4. Inorganic

Condensi ble Particulate Limits (modeled as sulfates):

64.3 lb/hr (H2SO4) 76.5 lb/hr (H2SO4) **Emission

limits and controls will be included in the source’s Title V Permit as appropriate or on renewal. **Expeditiously

as practicable, but no later than 5
years a fter EPA
approves Kentucky’s Regional Haze SIP.

*Since TVA had previously indicated to the KYDAQ its plans to install hydrated lime injection controls on TVA Paradise Units 1-3 to mitigate opacity due to SO3 emissions and that additional controls are not cost-effective at this time, the KYDAQ has determined BART to be no control for TVA Paradise Units 1-3. **Given the extra cost for the lesser additional dv improvement for Units 1 and 2, the Cabinet agreed that BART for Mill Creek is the installation of sorbent injection controls on the larger Units 3 and 4.

## Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet Kentucky Division for Air Quality



# -------------------------------------------

Appendix L.13 Summary of Kentucky BART Exemption and BART Determination Modeling

### [This page intentionally left blank.]

## Summary of Kentucky BART Exemptio n and BART Determination Modeling Results For Kentucky BART-Eligible and BART-Subject Sources

June 2008 (Amended May 2010)

Kentucky BART Exemption Modeling:

Table 1-1. Summary of Visibility Results – for Duke Energy East Bend Station - Rabbit Hash, Kentucky – Screening Run (12-km grid) – Performed by Source Contractor

Class I Area (Est. Distance from Source) 2001 2002 2003 Annual average background b ext Maximum delta-deciview, (# days>0.5 dv, # days >1 dv) (Mm -1 ) Mammoth Cave (210 km) 0.197 (0, 0) 0. 242 (0, 0) 0.227 (0, 0) 21.58 20% Best Days background b ext (Mm -1 ) Mammoth Cave (210 km) 0.289 (0, 0) 0. 354 (0, 0) 0.331 (0, 0) 14.7

Table 1-2. Summary of Visibility Results- 98 th Percentile Value (8 th Highest) for Owensboro Municipal Utilities (OMU) – Owensboro, Kentucky – Refined Run (4-km grid, Subdomain-3)-Performed by Source Contractor

Class I Area (Est. Distance from Source) 2001 2002 2003 Annual
average background b ext Maximum delta-deciview, (# days>0.5 dv, # days >1 dv) (Mm -1 ) Mammoth Cave (93 km) 0.432 (5, 0) 0. 387 (4, 0) 0.400 (3, 0) 21.58 Mingo (289 km) 0.043 (0, 0) 0.048 (0, 0) 0.053 (0, 0) 21.03Table 1-23a. Before Controls Applied, Summary of Visibility Results for 98 th Percentile Value (8 th Highest) for the East Kentucky Power Cooperative (EKPC) Cooper Station 1 in Pulaski County, Kentucky – Refined Run (4-km grid, Subdomain-3) – Performed by Source Contractor

Class I Area (Est. Distance from Source) 2001 2002 2003 Annual
average background b ext Maximum delta-deciview, (# days>0.5 dv, # days >1 dv) (Mm -1 ) Mammoth Cave (130) km) 5.810 (58, 48) 7.376 (68, 51) 6.749 (47, 40) 21.58 Great Smokey Mt. (162 km) 6.763 (117, 89) 5.966 (103, 79) 5.662 (97, 71) 21.39 Joyce Kilmer-Slickrock (178 km) 4.974 (79, 53) 4.248 (74, 51) 2.781 (64, 44) 21.40 Cohutta (221 km) 3.192 (60, 44) 3.363 (66, 36) 2.317 (63, 45) 21.40 Shinning Rock (233 km) 2.022 (53, 35) 1.565 (39, 19) 1.804 (50, 27) 21.40 Linville Gorge (267 km) 1.778 (43, 21) 1.599 (38, 16) 1.885 (50, 24) 21.36

1 BART Determination Modeling was required since this source exceeded the 0.5 dv threshold for the 98 th Percentile Value (8 th Highest).

Table 1-23b. With BART Determination Controls Applied, Summary of Visibility Results for 98 th Percentile Value (8 th Highest) for the East Kentucky Power Cooperative (EKPC) Cooper Station 1 in Pulaski County, Kentucky – Refined Run (4-km grid, Subdomain-3) – Performed by Source Contractor

Class I Area (Est. Distance from Source) 2001 2002 2003 Annual
average background b ext Maximum delta-deciview, (# days>0.5 dv, # days >1 dv) (Mm -1 ) Mammoth Cave (130) km) 0.141 (0, 0) 0.201 (0, 0) 0.170 (0, 0) 21.58 Great Smokey Mt. (162 km) 0.192 (0, 0) 0.150 (0, 0) 0.171 (0, 0) 21.39 Joyce Kilmer-Slickrock (178 km) 0.115 (0, 0) 0.119 (0, 0) 0.102 (0, 0) 21.40 Cohutta (221 km) 0.068 (0, 0) 0.080 (0, 0) 0.079 (0, 0) 21.40 Shinning Rock (233 km) 0.045 (0, 0) 0.039 (0, 0) 0.047 (0, 0) 21.40 Linville Gorge (267 km) 0.046 (0, 0) 0.041 (0, 0) 0.047 (0, 0) 21.36

1 Per the source BART Determination, the above resu lts reflect a Dry FGD scru bber and Fabric Filtration controls to be installed on EKPC Cooper Units 1 and 2 for BART and per applicable provisions of the EKPC consent decree. These contro ls will address condensible and directly emitted visibility impairing pollutants.

## Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet Kentucky Division for Air Quality



# -------------------------------------------

Appendix N Public Hearing Notice and Summary of Comments Received and Cabinet Responses

# Public Hearing NoticeNOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING KENTUCKY DIVISION FOR AIR QUALITY TO REVISE KENTUCKY’S STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
The Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet will c onduct a public hearing on November 23, 2009, at 10:00 a.m. (local time) in Conference Room 201B of th e Division for Air Quality, 200 Fair Oaks Lane, 1 st Floor, Frankfort, Kentucky. This hearing will be held to receive comments on a proposed revision to Kentucky’s State Implementation Plan (SIP). This proposed revision addresses the following issues that will amend Kentucky’s June 25, 2008, Regional Haze SIP: (1) E.ON U.S. Mill Cr eek Units 3 and 4, a change to indicate the proper BART Title V permit emission limits of 64.3 lb/hr and 76.5 lb/hr respectively for H 2 SO 4 in place of a 0.015 lb/mmBtu limit and (2) East Kentucky Power Cooperativ e (EKPC) Cooper Units 1 and 2, based on March 18, 2009, revised EKPC BART determinati on modeling a substitution of dry flue gas desulfurization (DFGD) and fabric filtration (FF) emission controls for the wet FGD (WFGD) and wet electrostatic precipitator (WESP) controls.

This hearing is open to the public and all interested pe rsons will be given the opportunity to present testimony. To assure that all comments are accura tely recorded, the Division for Air Quality requests that oral comments presented at the hearing are also provided in written form , if possible. Written comments must be received by close of business on November 23, 2009, to be consider ed part of the hearing record. The Energy and Environment Cabinet does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age, religion, or disability and provides, upon request, reasonable acco mmodation including auxiliary aids and services necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equa l opportunity to participate in all services, programs, and activities.

The full texts of the proposed SIP revision are availa ble for public inspection and copying during regular business hours (8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., local time) at the locations listed below. Any individual requiring copies may submit a request to the Division for Air Qua lity in writing, by telephone, by FAX, or e-mail. Requests for copies should be directed to the contact person. The proposed SIP revision can be accessed online
at: http://www.air.ky.gov/homepage_repository/Public+Hearings.htm

.
CONTACT PERSON : Martin Luther, Environmental Scientis t II, Program Planning and Administration Branch, Division for Air Quality, 200 Fair Oaks Lane, 

### 1 st 

### Floor, Frankfort, Kentucky 40601. Phone number: (502) 564-3999, ext. 4412; fa x number: (502) 564-4666; e- mail: martin.luther@ky.gov.

Louisville Metro APCD 850 Barret Ave, Suite 205 Louisville, KY 40204 Ashland Regional 1550 Wolohan Dr, Suite 1 Ashland, KY 41102 Bowling Green Regional 1508 Westen Ave Bowling Green, KY 42104

Florence Regional 8020 Veterans Memorial Dr Suite 110 Florence, KY 41042 Frankfort Regional 643 Teton Trail, Suite B Frankfort, KY 40601 Hazard Regional 233 Birch St Suite 2 Hazard, KY 41701

London Regional 875 S Main St London, KY 40741 Owensboro Regional 3032 Alvey Park Dr W Suite 700 Owensboro, KY 42303 Paducah Regional 130 Eagle Nest Dr Paducah, KY 42003

Fayette County Clerk 162 E Main St Lexington, KY 40507 Hardin County Clerk Hardin Co Courthouse Elizabethtown, KY 42701 Henderson County Clerk Henderson Co Courthouse Henderson, KY 42420

# Statement of Consideration

### STATEMENT OF CONSIDERATION RELATING TO A SIP REVISION TO AMEND KENTUCKY’ S JUNE 25, 2008, REGIONAL HAZE SIP, WHICH DOCUM ENTS REASONABLE PROGRESS GOALS

FOR KENTUCKY’S CLASS I AREA MAMMOTH CAVE NATIONAL PARK AND INCLUDES BEST AVAILABLE RETROFIT TECHNOLOGY (BART) DETERMINATIONS Amended After Comments 

# Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet
Department for Environmental Protection Division for Air Quality

(1) The Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet conducted a public hearing on November 23, 2009, at 10:00 a.m. (ET) in Conference Room 201B of the Division for Air Quality, 200 Fair Oaks Lane, 1 st 

### Floor, Frankfort, Kentucky. This hearin g was held to receive comments on a proposed revision to Kentucky’s State Implementation Plan (SIP). This proposed revision addressed the following issues that amend Ke ntucky’s June 25, 2008, Regional Haze SIP: (1) E.ON U.S. Mill Creek Units 3 and 4, a change to indicate the proper BART Title V permit emission limits of 64.3 lb/hr and 76.5 lb/hr resp ectively for H2SO4 in place of a 0.015 lb/mmBtu limit and (2) East Kentucky Power Cooperative (EKPC) Cooper Units 1 and 2, based on March 18, 2009, revised EKPC BART determination m odeling a substitution of dry flue gas desulfurization (DFGD) and fabric filtration (FF) emission controls for the wet FGD (WFGD) and wet electrostatic precip itator (WESP) controls.

Written comments were received during the public comment period.

(2) The following individuals attended the public hearing and/or provided written and/or oral
comments:

Name and Title Organization John Bunyak** National Park Service (NPS) Richard A. Schutt** U.S. EPA Region 4

*Attended hearing. **Provided written co mments. ***Provide d oral comments.

(3) The following individuals from the Kent ucky Energy and Environment Cabinet attended the public hearing:

Martin Luther, Environmental Scientis t II* & ** Division for Air Quality

* Agency moderator. **Drafted responses to comments recei ved during the public comment period.

### 2 Response to Comments on a SIP revision to Amend Kentucky’s June 25, 2008, Regional Haze SIP

Comment: We are concerned that the proposed BA RT changes for East Kentucky Power Cooperative (EKPC) Cooper Units 1 and 2 may result in a perceptible change in visibility at affected Class I areas, including Mammoth Cave Na tional Park. EKPC is re questing to substitute dry flue gas desulfurization (FGD) and fabric filtration in place of the wet FGD and wet electrostatic precipitator that were determined to be BART in the original SIP. EKPC's BART modeling indicates that the change in technology should not affect visibility on the 98thpercentile days due to particulate matter em issions. Based on the modeling results presented, we agree with that conclusion. However, chan ging control technology from wet FGD to dry FGD could increase S02 emissions or its dispersi on characteristics. Since Kentucky is included in the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), we recognize that Kentucky is relying on previous guidance from the Environmental Protection Agency that sulfur dioxide (S02) and nitrogen oxide emissions controls under CAIR are better than the BART requi rements. Thus, EKPC is not required to analyze visibility impacts of S02 and NOx in the BART determination for Cooper Units I and 2. However, Kentucky and EKPC should acknowledge in the SIP revision and at the public hearing that installing dry FGD rather than wet FGD at Cooper Units I and 2 could increase S02 emissions and could impact visib ility at Class I areas. While modeling is not available to quantify the visibil ity impact due to a change in S02 emissions or dispersion characteristics, EKPC should ackno wledge the potential impact. John Bunyak, National Park Service (NPS)

Response: The Cabinet does not concur. EKPC Coope r does not have existing SO2 controls (FGD) in place. Therefore, the installation of a dry FGD for BART will result in a significant reduction in the source’s SO2 emissions.

Comment: We have completed our review of the submittal and offer no comments at this time. Richard A. Schutt, USEPA

Response: The Cabinet acknowledges EPA’s statement.