P. 1



# OAR Box 

# 1787 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 72 ) ll-C-3 0 Docket Number: 

# A-90-3 7

Printed 11/4/200810:22:19 AM

Sheet 72 of 147

# •f'u: UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENCY P. 2 

# n < -J O

NO V0 6 

## 198 7

Mr . John M . Daniel , Jr. , P . E . Asst . Executiv e Director , Operation s Virgini a Stat e Ai r Pollutio n Contro l Board Roo m301 , Nint hStree t Offic e Building P . 0 . Bo x 1008 9 Richmond , V

A2324 0 Dea r Mr . Daniel : SA^-S-'S-- .:. ' 

## w«y 

# L 

# — - J

Than k Chester f mak e th e n

k yo u fo r submitting tho propose d permi t fo r VEPCO' s iol d project . W e have reviewe d the materia l an d wis ht o following comment s par t o f the officia l record . 1 . Th e propose d limitatio n o f 102. 4 ppm vtTOx , a s define d i n th e VSAPC 3 Augus t 6 , 198 7 memorandum , i s equivalen t t o th e USP S Subpar t GG limitatio n an d i s substantiall yles s stringen t than BAC T limitation s fo r othe r muc hsmalle r facilitie s in thi s sourc e category . I n tho absenc e o f a n acceptabl e technica l an d economi c justification , a vali d 3AC T determinatio n fo r thi s typ e 'an dsiz e o f sourc e require s stea m injectio n wit hselectiv e . catalyti c reductio n (SRC ) fo r NOx control . Thi s leve l o f contro l shoul d reduc e MOx c-aissionc j t o 2 5 ppm vo r les s a t 15 % 0 2 . LAE R require s eithe r a n oxidising catalys t fo r unburne d hydrocarbo n (i.e . VOC ) contro l o r a design standar d whic hwil l achiev e a VO C emissio n limitatio n n o groate r than 0.00 6 lbs/MBtu . Economic s o r cos t o f contro l i s no t an appropriat e facto r fo r determining LAER . Bot hVEPCO* s Apri l 5 , 198 7 lette r t o th e VSAPC B an

d the VSAPCB' s Augus t 6 , 19G 7 BACT/LAE R analysi s discus s an appropriat e LAE R emissio n rat e (.00 6 Ibs/MBtu) . Hov/ever , the propose d permi t reflect s GE' Gguarante e (0.02 2 lbs/HBtu ) an

d provide s fo r a

n adjustmen t afte r a n initia l sourc e test . Thi a i s unacceptabl e a s LAER . Fro mVEPCO* s Apri l 15 , 198 7 lette r an

d frominformatio n receive d fro mth e Californi a Ai r Resource s Board , 3ACT/LAE R fo r the 49. 3 IV.1 Unio n Oi l facilit yin Californi a i s define d a s follows :P. 3 UNITE DSTATE S ENVIRONMENTA

L PROTECTIO

N AGENC Y

NOx - 2 5 ppm

va t 15 % 0 0 VO C - 0.00 6 lbs/MMBt u Becaus e th

e approximatel y

110 0 M

W (547. 5 ea ) facility , a s proposed , i s 2 2 time s large r i n rate d capacit ythan th e Unio n Oi l facility , i t appear s th e economie s o f scal e woul d mea n a substantia l reductio n i n incrementa l pollutio n contro l cost s (i.e . $/ton o f pollutan t removed) . 2 . I n Par t 1 , Conditio n 5 o f tho propose d permit , the emissio n limitatio n fo r NOx i s specifie d in lbs/hr ye t thes e unit s ar e no t consisten t wit hthos e specifie d in the performanc e test . Ho war c ppm

vlimit s converte d t o lbs/hr ? Thi s mus t be clarifie d an

d clearl yspecifie d i n the permit . 3 . I n Par t 1 , Conditio n 1 3 o f the propose d permit , i t i s unclea r howth

e dat a obtaine d pursuan t t o thi s conditio n wil l bo use d t o determin e complianc e wit hth e NO x emissio n limitatio n whic hi s specifie d in lbs/hr . I s i t t o be use d t o determin e complianc e wit hsome othe r condition ? O r i s i t t o be use d t o determin e a "factor " tha t wil l be use d t o calculat e compliance ? Th e us e o f thi s dat a shoul d b e clearl yspecifie d in th e permit . c c 4 . Th e permi t shoul d cloarl ydefin e the appropriat e sou ] tes t method s fo r determinin g complianc e wit heachemissio n limitatio n specifie d i n Par t 1 , Conditio n 5 . 5 . Aconditio n shoul d b e added whic hcloarl ystate s tha t thi s facilit yi s subjec t t o al l NSP S Subpar t G G requirement s in additio n t o the 3ACT/LAE R emissio n limitations . 6 . I t appear s tha t th e VSAPC D ha s performe d a quit e comprehensiv e modeling analysi s whic hconform s t o EPA' s modelin g policie s an

d procedures . However , althoughthe VSAPC B appear s t o have ver

ythoroughl yevaluate d th a possibl e operating configuration s in orde r t o arriv e a t a wors t cas e emissio n scenario , ther e i s n o indicatio n tha t the omissio n rate s modele d ar c th e sam

e a s the emissio n limitation s containe d i n the propose d permit . I n fact , a cursor yrevie wo f the modele d SO-> an d NOx rate s appear s t o indicat e tha t the modele d emissio n rat e i s lowe r than the allowabl e rat e containe d in the propose d permi t Pleas e clarif ythi s poin t fo r u s befor e a fina l permi t i s issued .

CONCURRENCE S SYMBO L k SURNAM E k DAT E k EPA Form 1320- 1 (12-70 ) OFFICIA L FIL E COP Y •U.S . GP O : 1986-159-31 9' ' I;*."" ! ZV*,TM**" ' P. 4

•A' UNITE DSTATE S ENVIRONMENTA

L PROTECTIO

N AGENC Y

7 . Ther e i s n o indicatio n tha t VEPC O ha s obtaine d th e require d VO C offset s fo r the propose d nowsourc e Vie understand tha t th e "accommodative " SIP' s growthallowanc e i s virtuall y depletedan

dar e concerne

dthat adequat e emissio noffset s ar

e no t bein

g obtaine d fo r thi s source . Pleas e addres s thi s issue befor e the fina l permi t i s issued . Again , than

k yo u fo r providing a n opportunit yfo r EP At o commen t o n th

e propose d permit . I f yo u o r you r staf f have an y question s regarding ou r comments , pleas e contac t Hr . Serni e Turlinsk i a t (215 ) 597-393 9 o r Ms . Eilee n Gle n a t (215 ) 597-9379 . Sincerely , Thoma s J . Maslany , Directo r Ai r Managemen t Divisio n

bcc : Ji mTopsal e A l Cimorell i Stev e Copelan

d

cc : Mr . A . W . Madder , Manage r Ai r Quality , VEPC O

CONCURRENCE S SYMBO L k SURNAM E k OAT E k EPA Form 1320- 1 (12-70 ) OFFICIA L FIL E COP Y • i l C R W•1 Q o