p. 1



# OAR Box 1778 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



# Document

Number: 

# 25 ) ll-A- 9 Docket Number: 

# A-90-0 6

Printed 10/28/2008 9:50:52 AM Sheet 25of 276

### P. 2



# ^ fp)^ 

# na w tzj , 

# II-A- 9

StationarySourc e Complianc e Division' s Summaryo f PS D an d NSP S applicabilit ydeterminations , fro m197 2 t o 198 3

## 7 . 1

ca * KUtHliNCb ; Olb^TIO N WHJLTt D WOIIATK N 

### nerm M1NATIO N DISCUSSIO N

A l Uhite d .Illuminatin g OD. . Me w I l a ven . Conn . (Ha y 9 , 197 2 Hojonnell ) Di d th e Lhite d .1 1 lianinatin g Co . aawietic e aunstructlo n prio rt o Augus t17 , 1971 ? 60.2(1 ) Ye s Base d upo n Contxistic n Engineering' s Augus t13 , 1971 , purchas e orde rforai rpreheate requip men tfo rUilte d .Illuminating' s toiler - asuf ficien totmnltjnen to f resource s t o Indicat e - tha tC tconsidere d Itsel f t o b e i n a"bindin g agreemen to rcontractua l obligation " wa s nad e prio rt o Augus t17 , 1971 . A 2 Interna l memorandum (Mik e

Janie s t o Jac kFanne r- Feb . 14 , 1973 ) Woul d asourc e b e subjec tt o NSI> S i f i tbecan e inoperativ e prio rt o Auguu t17 , 1971 , ar» l Uve n resinne d operatio n afte rAugus t17 , 1971 7 60.2(g ) It o Hi e sourc e woul d no tb e "new " sinc e th e sourc e merel y take s thos e step s necessar y t o retur n th e plan tt o it s formeroperatin g condition . Thi s coul d no tb e characterize d a s ctmctruction . 60.2(h ) Hi e sourc e woul d no tb e "nod i tied " sinc e neithe r physica l change s no rachang al n th e matte d c f operatio n take s place .

A 3 lette rt o .Ind . Stat e Bd .

Healt h (.Jul y 3 . 197 3 - Suzuki ) o f Woul d tli e replacemen to f nechanlca l dus tcollector s wit h mor e efficien t electrostati cprecipitator s brin g asourc e withi n th e applicabilit y O f NSJ-S ? 60.2(h ) (t o Thi s oaul dnot b a considere da nod i fle a tionsinc e

ther e i s n o increaa a i nemissions .

A 4 Slauffe r Chem . a>. , (Jul y 31 . 197 3 - Wilson ) Woul d anincreas e i nproduction ' rat e o f a facility

be considereda chang e i nth e iiteUio

d o f operation ? 60.14(e)(2 ) Oondl - A nincreas e inproductio nrat e I f th e designcapa tiona l city

o f the facility

i s no t exceededwoul dno t b a conside r o l a chang e lnthe metho do f operation . However , a nincreas e l ntraductionrat e abov e the desig ncapacity

woul db e a chang e i nthe method o f operation . 

### I



## ___ m


## _i



## _ m 

## _\

## ca* . RtitRUJCt ; QUESTIO N AFFECTE D WJGUIATIO

N tJKTUtMINAT1C N DISCUSSION
A 5 Cit y o f

ai d id . Oli o (5-16-74 , Pratt . R-V ) Di d con s tru e tio n o f th e municipa l sewag e sludg e incinerato reminenc e prio rt o .Tune 11 , 1973 ? 60.2(1 ) (t o Base d c n informatio n submitte d to th e EPA , i t appear s a s i f

alegall y bindin g oontractua l obli gatio n wa s entere d int o o n Jul y 12 , 1973 .

A 6 Interna l Memorandu m (Steven s t o Wright , Buyio n Vll , 1-30-75 ) Doe s 60.14(e ) appl y t o jus tSubpar tPar t6 0 o r D o ral l sourc e categorie s Bar t6 0 Sub cove ro d unie rNSPS ? par tD th e exceptio n applie s t o al l sourc e categorie s covere d unde rNSrSyiio tJus tfossil fuel-fire d stea m generators .

A 7 Combustio n Engineerin g

(beals . Regio n IV , 4-18-75) . Ma y aboile rcontinu e t o operat e shoul d an y majo runavoidabl e mal functio n occu ri n a n FG D system ? 60.11(d ) Ibwever , i tI s clearl y no tth e inten to f 60.11(d ) t o allo wsource s t o continu e operatin g foran y appreciabl e lengt h o f tim e afte rmalfunction s ar e detected .

A S Sant aMarin aRefiner y

(6-18-7 5 O'Connell-R . IX ) I f modification s t o anexisting facility

cause t (1 ) anIncreas e i n emission s o f a pollutant ; an d(2 ) a noveral l decreas e inenissiono f tha t pollutan t a t 'th e source , i s the facility

subjec t t o NSI'S ? 60.1 4 Ito An overal l decreas e I n mission s from th e sourc e i s no toonsidere d amodificatio n unde r60.14(d) . Updat e - Thi s determinatio n MI S baae d o n th e EP A definitio n o f

stationar y sourc e a s acombinatio n o f facilities . Usin g thi s definition . (EP S di d no tappl y whe n a n existin g facilit y wa s modifie d suc h tha tne temission s o f an y pollutan t(ran th e entir e plan t(combinatio n o f facilities ) decreased . Th e U.S . Cour to f J^peal s for Washington , D.C . i n ASARC O v . EP A (Januar y 27 . 1978) , rule d th e EP A definitio n mus tb e rejecte d a s inconsisten twit h th e languag e o f th e Clea n Ai r Act . I f

modification s t o a n existin g facilit y caus e a n Increas e i n pollutan temissions , th e facilit y i s subjec tt o NSPS , eve n i f ne temission s a tth e plan tdecrease .

x : K-v.-a-*fc.r* v *y.«ttMwr|V"-"'? r-T T H --•"*••"•-':" - •• - - y



# "IL' '-••/ • t.H * .,'.—•'. , ••'!- » '.;. f **•.*

. 

# 1 i.af l >| K• I , ( f '"" • • 

## M i I..H . 

## J 

# [

# r

a**: RErUUNCF . QHE&IUO N AFt'-EX.TH )

RUGULATJO N DtTER MINATIO

N DISCLBSIO N

A- 9 tscanab aPape rMil l

(8-5-75 , McUxiald , R-V) Doe s installatio n o f nozzle s allowin g existin g toiler s t o bur n No . 6 fue l oi l consti tut e amodification ? 60.14(e)(4 ) N o The facilit y i s exemp tunde r60.14(e)(4 ) becaus e

thi s uni twa s alread y turnin g | 2 oil .

A-1 0 tftviromventa l Product s

(11-7-75 , Wilso n to CoJien ) Doe s a n opacit y monito rwhic h average s we ra5 minut e perio d mee t§60.1 1 requ i raneiits 7 60.1 1 COndi - Sinc e regulation s stipulat e a6 minut e averagin g tiona l period , user s o f th e 5 minut e averagin g apparatu s mus tagre e l n writin g t o EPA' s us e o f exces s emissio n report s (base d o n 5 minutes ) t o initiat e enforcemen to f

60.11(d) .

A-l l Gleason , OOC , t o Carroll , USSli , 9-26-7 5 Doe s nodula rcontro l o f source s wit h installatio n phase d ove ra n extende d tim e perio d nte tNSP S req u i remen ts ? Sec . Ill , tt o "EP A lack s affirmativ e authorit y t o permi tcpera CAA . tio n o f asourc e no ti n tota l complianc e wit h NSPS , unles s non-ocmplianc e is...beyon d th e sourc e owner' s control- "

A-1 2 Oli n Corp . Sulfuri cAci d

Pliui t(10-8-75 . Harrison , (R-Vl ) Calculation s indicat e tlia tapro ces s notificatio n wil l |robal>l y no tresul ti n a n increas e i n emissions , l>utUii s i s no tcertain . Ar e performanc e test s necessary ? 60.2(h ) Ve alest s mus tI Kmad e befor e an d afte rth e modifi catio n foremission s o f SO j an d aci d mist .

1 3 0 1CODE : REPEICE-NCE .

A-1 3 Memo, Steven s t o Ptat f

11-17-7 5 pUKSTU W AFFhSCItl ) liFxajfAI'lON MlNATIO N DISCUSSIO N

A use drefiner

y proces s heale r i s bein g convertedfro

m natura l ga s t o naptli

a fue l to

r installation i nanothe r refinery . Ar c emis sion s i nU> e previou s installation o r Ira ntin ; replacu

d uni t at th

o ne w installatio

nconsidere di

n determinin

g Oi e an>licabilit y o f Par t 60V 60.2(h ) Relocatio n o rownershi p chang e doc s no tconstitut e amodification . Cliangin g th e uni tt o bur n naptli a doe s constitut e amodificatio n i f a> ; emission s increas e relati\* e bo ti e sam e uni ti n it s previou s installation .

A-1 4 lette rt o Michiga n Dept .

o f Natura l Resource s (R . Wilso n t o D . Carlson ) 6 Januar y 7 6 I s a n incinerato rwhic h wa s partiall y constructe d prio r t o Augus t17 , 1971 , ai d wa s recentl y ormplete d unle tane w constructio n permi tsubjec tt o NSPS ? 60.2(i ) Ve s Sinc e tir e constructio n wa s no tcontinuous , th e facilit y i s subjec tt o NSPS .

A-1 5 lette rt o Pliotanatio n Inc .

(K . Wilso n t o R . Iloiiiisoth ) 1 9 Januar y 7 6 I s i tpossibl e t o inle<jilatel y ca l i - 60.1 3 brat e adoubl e ende d transinissxanete r(d)(3 ) c n aroutin e basi s b y ii«le|»_-mleiitl y checkin g eac h emi ? N o Th e ligh tprojection , ligh tdetection , an d instrumen telectronic s shoul d b e calibrate d a s a uni tt o provid e ti e systt m chec krequired .

A-1 6 Mon

o (E . Idiicl i t o Dav e Kee ) 1 5 Oct . 7 6 D o NSP S appl y t o source s recon structe d alte rUie- |«o[0.sa l dat e fo rlli- > applicabl e standard ? 60.1 5 Ye s Reconstructe d source s ar e boun l b y th e sam e applicabilit y dat aa s ne wsources .uui* : RM-'LVI-IMCI . 

### otifLsrio N AFTEX-TEI D RE-GIIIATIO N ItTll.R M1NAT10 N DISCUSSION

A-1 7 lette rt o thvirorinenta l

rat aCorp . (R . Wilso n to II . lord ) 1 9 Jan . 7 6 I to w mu d i tim e ca n li e use d fo r dail y calibratio n cheek s o n opacit y monitors , an d le w slioul d dat a(-rese n ta tion s liandl e thi s check ? 60.13(e ) 1 2 minute s shoul d b e sufficien ttin e for adail y calibratio n check . Thi s woul d resul ti n th e emissio n o f

tw o 6 minut e averages . Ih e dat akep t o n fil e a tth e sourc e shoul d reflec tthes e cali - bratio n checks , whic h shoul d b e exclude d Ira n an y exces s anissio n calculations .

A-1 8 lette rt o Relianc e

Instrumen tManufacturin g Corp . (R . Aja x t o W . I byes ) 2 4 Fe b 7 6 I s atransinissanete rvjiic h doc s no tinclud e ame tlie d fo rpro ducin g asimulate d zer o opacit y conditio n acceptabl e a s a continuou s nonitorin g ilevice ? 60.1 3 No Significan tnegativ e error s coul d g o undetected . (d) , (e ) Also , th e us e o f effluen topacit y measuremen ta s a par to f acalibratio n procedur e may b e unworkabl e di e t o inabilit y t o obtai n stabl e stac keffluen t opacity .

A - l 9 Mon o (J . Verne tto K . Ibaly ) 2 Marc h 7 6 Wa s constructio n o f

Chevron' s planne d refiner y facilitie s begu n lefor e Jun e 11 , 1973 ? 60.2(g ) N o Eve n thoug h th e constructio n o f th e storag e facilitie s fo rthi s refiner y wa s contracte d befor e Jun e 11 , 1973 , refinerie s an d storag e facilitie s ar e separat e affecte d facilitie s unde rNSPS , e o th e dat e o f

storag e facilit y constructio n i s irrelevant .

A-2 0 lette r (I) . Go o twi n t o

G . McCowan ) 2 4 Marc h 7 6 I s aspecifi c<tit areductio n nonitorin g teclmiipi e whic h involve s we tI a s i s measure men tacceptabl e iiitlc rl^'I'C ? 60.13(a ) "Alternativ e Rat aReductio n Procedure s Usin g We t Basi s Qcyge n Stac kMeasurements " wa s publlsha i i n th e Cctote r12 , 197 6 Federa l Registe r (4 1 m 44838) .

A-2 1 Mem

o (R . Wilso n t o I) . Ikmsen ) 1 8 Ma

y 7 6 Ma

y on e se to f

monitorin j system s l e place ! o n aoriuno n st.ic kt o measui e emission s fro m 3 fossi l fuel-fire d stea m generators ? 60.1 3 Ye s I f tir e affects ! facilitie s liavirr j thei reffluent s combine d ar e al l subjec tt o th e sam e emission s standards , thi s i s permissible .

T J ^ 1C U * RIl-'LRhaNCt : QUESTIO N AFVULTtX ) RtXaJIATlO

N laflKR MiNATIC

N DISCUSSIO N

A-2 2 Men o (It . Wilso n to

1 . Ilickstein ) 1 Apri l 7 6 .I s ane w toile rinsta l lo ! a s a n auxiliar y t o a n existin g boile r amollificatio n o f

a n existin g source , bringin g lot h tli e ne w an d ol d toiler s unde rNSPS ? 60. 5 N o Onl y Ur e ne w boile rwoul d b e subjec tt o NSP S

A-2 3 letter t o Plateau , Inc .

(T . Harriso n to W . Ifagler ) 1 9 aXil y 7 6 Sam e a s A-l 3 Se e A-l 3

A-2 4 Mem

o (T . Harriso n t o E. Reich ) 1 2 Augus t7 6 Revise d 2 4 Novemtae r76 . I s aga s fire d generato rwhic h ha s tee n mndifia l to tur n fue l o i l require d t o mee tNSI' S onl y whe n turnin g fue l oil ? 60.2(h ) N o NSP S appl y t o an y stationar y sourc e whic h contain s 60. 1 a n affecte d facility , th e constructio n o rmodifi catio n o f

whic h i s coninenca i afte rth e dat e o f publicatio n o f

th e standar d applicabl e to tha t

. facility .

A-2 5 lette rt o Iynatro n

(R . Aja x t o R. Molly ) 2 0 Augus t7 6 Doe s tli e lynatro n Mode l 110 0 on - stac kcalibratio n techniqu e confor m t o tli e zer o sp;iri syste m diec k requirement s fo rcn«icit y moni torin g devices ? 60.13(d ) Ye s However , tli e performanc e specification s ar e to b e (3 ) me tb y eac h affects ! instrument . A s ouch , confonnaiic e to NSP S ca n onl y b e determine d o n a n iristruiuent-by-instrumen tbasi s an d an y premarke t approva l o rcertificatio n o f aparticula rinstru men tmode l o rproduc tlin e i s inappropriate .

T J b oCU* . REFEHI-INCE : U.EiTH* . AFFECTE D REKUIAT10 N DfcTtR M1NAT10N DISC I BSIO N

A-2 6 lette rt o Clar k Oil & Refinin g Corp . (T . Voltaggi o to K . Bruggink ) 27 Augus

t7 6 Doe s tli e Tutwile rnetlic d (IXJi * Metlo d 9-59 ) adequatel y denon strat e onnp

l ianc e with SO

2 rei' S fo rti e Woo

d Rive r Refinery ? 60.8(b ) Yfe s Ihi s determinatio n doe s no tmea n tha tth e Tutwile r (4 ) metho d i s a n approved equivalen to ralternativ e metlo d forNSP

S compliance . '

A-2 7 lette rt o Bake rf. Eeniel s (T . Voltaggi o to J . Carney) 26 Augus

t7 6 a ) Wil l constructio n o f apro pose d sulfu rrecover y facilit y constitut e modificatio n o f a refinery ? b ) Wi l 1 constructio n o f

airo pose d sulfu rrecovery facilit y a ta n existin g refiner y constitut e constructio n o f

ane w sulfu r recover y plan tunde rNSPS ? 60.2(h ) N o

Condi tiona l Th

e sulfu rrecover y facilit y wil l no tincreas e emission s fro

m an y affecte d facility .
Proposed NSP

S forsulfu rrecover y plant s wer e publishe d i n 4 1 F

R4386 6 o n Octobe r4 , 1976 . Shoul d constructio n eminence afte rthi s proposa l dat e th e facilit y would b e subjec tt o NSPS .

A-2 8 lette rt o Nuber tII . Wayne

r Co . (R. Aja

x t o W . Irespasz ) 3 0 Augus

t7 6 a ) Doc s th e leed s am ! Northru p singl e pas s opacit y transmisso nete rmee

ttli e continuou s noiii torin g requiremen

to f NSl"S ? b ) I s as|a n so l a t100 % opacit y acceptable ? 60.13(d ) (3 ) N o

N o Th

e leed s fc Northru

p instrumen tdoe s no tprovid e a syste m check necessar y foracceptabl e perfonnance .
Spa n valu e shoul d b e limite d t o provid e a n exiiande d scal e acros s tli e range o f ti e emissio n standard . c ) Ma y ti e requi i unen

tfo rtli e iieasutenien to f

(jmcit y l e satis fiu l l y averagin g ove i discree t 6-mirnit

e [cricals ? 60.2(x ) Ye s Si x minute periol s ar e define d a s bein g discreet .


# L

### cu* ; REyi-aHENCI- : QtillSTIU , AI-FELTU ) REXAJIATION rt.TE.R MINAT1C N DISCISSIO N

A-2 9 lette rl o Qtark-Mahonin g

(O . livel y to G . VJialey ) I Cutole r7 6 Doe s ti e dismant l iiT j an ) rein - stallatio n o f

par to f

afacilit y constitute ; ne wconstructio n o r modificatio n whic h woul d brin g i t unde rNSPS ? 60.14(a ) N o I ti s no tamodificatio n sinc e ther e i s n o 60.15(b ) increas e i n a n i a s ions . I ti s no tne wconstruc - tio n (reconstruction ) sinc e thes e change s woul d no tcos tnor e tha n 50 % o f ti e cos to f

a n entir e ne wfacility .

A-3 0 lette rt o PP G Industrie s Inc . (O . livel y t o T . Taylor ) 5 Octobe r7 6 Di d PI G Industrie s coniienc e constructio n o n it s I I am i 1 2 wast e heate rprio rt o Augus t17 , 1971 ? 60.2(i ) N o A purchas e orde rshowe d tha tti e uni twa s ordere d o n Octobe r14 , 1974 .

A-3 1 lette rt o Jo y Manufacturin g

Co . (R . Aja x t o G . Bercovitz ) 8 Octobe r7 6 Doe s th e Jo y Manufacturin g Opacit y Monito ron-slac kcali bratio n teelmicju e confor m t o tlie ' zer o spa n syste m diec k requirement s fo ropacit y moni torin g <levices ? 60.13(d ) Ye s Ibwever , th e performanc e specification s ar e to b e (3 ) ne tb y eac h affecte d instrument . A s such , conformanc e t o NSP S ca n onl y b e detennine d o n a n instrument-by-lnstrumen tbasi s ani l an y premarke t approva l o rcertificatio n o f aparticula rinstru - men tn o le i o rproduc tlin e i s inappropriate . Se e A-25 . A-3 2 lutte rto Gian tRefiner y

(T . Harriso n t o A . Morris ) 1 3 May 7 6 Di d Gian tRefiner y c\jiinejie e constructio n prio rt o Jun e 11 , 1973 ? 60.2(i ) Mr > Constructio n bega n i n Octobe ro f 1973 .

A-3 3 lette rt o Souther n

Unio n Ga s (Jo . (T . Harriso n t o II . Knox ) 2 1 Apri l 7 6 Di d Souther n Unio n Gi s (.U . eminenc e <x«is f

me tio n <

m it t letrolei m liquiil s stoi.i'i e vessel s a tlovii»|stou , N.M. , prio rl o Jun e II , 1973 ? 60.2(i ) N o 

### 'li e constructio n contrac twit h Foste rWheele rwa s datea l 9/10/73 .

oP.1 1

'Ji



## S 2 c. — z


## a 5 

# 1 1 a ;

i s 5

'i

•a 2 5 o

i i l 

### 3 ( 0 fl


### • 8 XJgges 

## 3 

# I

> • 

## . C Vrang
c 3 1 0 1 

## > 

# 2a
a 9 

## F 3



# 1 = • « 0 1 X o •- . - i


# ° f

s i .. . O 01 w a . — 1 ) i l ' J •aa " 4 ^ $

—fl o c fl u _— •a . . V . >aa J ( N 

# 1 *

0 a 9 w X P I D U f l a 3 < > O J s

—— • m

i 0 s i 6 fl e 

# 8 s« a 

# •t s 

# s , 

# *.« s s H i fl - < —g u A aI

I a j «a aE h • j 0 O 9- H 0 C 1 0 S 0 1 t J — ' 0 ) i* J 

## * 8 u 

## ^ £ 3
H <9> < D g • 2 fl fl •

D C fl xi . U S Q .S J —>.• * fl 0 Q , a — > B c a v . fl O - " C fl C — O ~* 0 XJ

Q . " J 0 .f l 0 fl a

0 

# i l = >.j * a • u w ^ a

. w u « i S i 4 ) O la0 fl J l l

a 

## • a S = ffiaS? BllKI»;« ;

to

O i 

## J i 8 2 i n . J 

### 2 

### 2Z

. fi s 

# i i 

# g 3 < A o i - u a o ^ 2 fl u 2 a j 

### B =
c . c — > m 

# oi l 2 £ "u



## • o

u I S

.a . v £

5 • 

### z u 

# 4 

# I s

£XJ 3-a * 3 S 5 £ a 0 w

• k l C S J 0 *" " 

### ^ 5 y 

### ? 

### « • L aJ 

### a' s
a . 3 

# I

I S e e 

# a_ . fl s a | ( N 

### : * 

# l i
9 XJ


### z - u

U ( N 

### a - ; £ ; 0



### . 3i 2 10 - J c a - J •- . = 3 0 a a = ~ O O 1 >J a. J ~ * fl "

3 1 a 

## \xl fl U

—91 a a(7 1 t l — £ U • J - 5 

## 2
. 

# 2*1

i 

# 1

U l



### u v 

## i i 01 L i fl 0 0 a J C 

# a , t l xt 

# f l

C O u f M 0 3 

# ; §

Z

i i
•^ m 

### 3 ^ ? 2 5 " " 1 0 V 

## e l C J
0 C ^ a fl — • a£ a 5 * J « . O a -a a 01 

# "5 3 I Si S o i S a . aaa 3 U Z X J 

### O g C fl c 

# L e

• a

fl o i ^

fl • —: 

## ir . « J

' 3 a 3 " "

• - 1 0 3 fl i* . 0 y

• c 

## i !

M 

## "* ^ X a i 0

• u 3 

# 1 7
TM 

## " ; ,f l c j 0 aa l r » r- > a S fl 

## " 8 X) C 

# g < U 

## S 3 0

— a 

## 1 8 0 a -aa l 

## > , a J



## — . IZ ' u a S
< o ! 2 Q J . 

## S i 0 

## ** • 6
XJ 0 • H a U 

## a c 

## 3 b L

. 

## ~ " 3 > V 

## S
1 0 ( 0 ' C 

## 5 < 

## a

a j

a 

## 1 : a xj 

## 2
X. 0 • a . W 

## >
o fl Hi 9 3 

## % 0 1 ) fl c 0

c 0 0 1 - c c

0 1 

## " 3

a . 

## ^ c a


## " E

A XJ 0 1 C C O

• 

## " S 3 1 • 

## 3 S i ( J s 2 1



## - m 

## 3 H

w-JI fl — c j i — : i S T j 3 5 " 3 3 -

•J - J L

a- Z

«:••:•• »



## « s '- S aI

i S w- _>

- a 3 S. C ~ T

I icun t mi'mtaNL E (Alliu m I N AFKHCTKI )

IttXJIIIATlCI M ULTL'R M1NAT10 N DISCUSSIO N

A-3 8 Men o t o R-I V (E . Heid i

t o II . Uercjnan ) 5 Jul y 7 7 I n detenninin g wliethe r a modifi - 60.1 4 catio n lia s occurred , doe s L'l' A (b)(1) . o r th e sourc e hav e tli e Imnle n o f(b)(2) , provin g whettie r o r no t unission s (d ) fra n a n existin g facilit y hav e increased ? Althoug h $60.14(b)(1 ) indicate s tha t tlier e i s a n initia l burde n o n tb e Agenc y t o conside r th e a n lesio n factor s i n AP-4 2 t o detennin e i f tlier e i s a n increas e i n o n lesions , tli e burde n shift s t o th e sourc e i fAP-4 2 (o r anothe r superio r alter - nativ e unissio n factor ) fail s t o clearl y indicat e a n increas e o r decreas e l n an i ssions . I n th e situatio n vher e th e emissio n leve l canno t ti e establishe d clearly , bot h th e provision s o f §60.14(d ) an ! §60.14(b)(2 ) Indicat e tha t th e burde n i e c n th e sourc e t o demonstrat e t o th e Administrator' s satisfactio n tha t th e change d condition s d o no t resul t i n a n increas e i n emis sions . YD U na y procee d o n th e assumptio n that , sinc e aniasion s canno t b e determine d clearly , ther e lia s lee n a n Increas e i n emissions , an d permi t sourc e documentatio n that ther e lia s bee n n o increas e sloul d th e -assumptio n b e disputed .

A-3 9 lette r t o Hawaiia n lilec .

Cb . (li . teich t o K . Hell ) 1 8 Jul y 7 2 Doe s a lette r o finten t t o pur chas e component s fo r a promise d facilit y constitut e omuencin g construction ? G0.2(i ) Con - (lic e a lette r o finten t t o purchas e i s issued , ditjoua l ther e i s usuall y a perio d durin g whic h th e orde r

ca n b e cancelle d a t n o cos t t o th e purchaser . Afte r ti e dat e upo n whic h th e onle r canno t b e cancelle d withou t incurrin g a cancellatio n charge , t i e purchase r lta s entere d int o a contractua l obligatio n t o construct .

A-4 0 Mon o t o K-V l (li . Utic h

l o II . Dersinaii ) 1 9 Jul y 7 7 a ) Mus t lil" A o r th e auiie e [lov e tha t a malfunctio n lia s i-n.vurrud ? !• ) I fa ma l fiinc t ioniiv j :j)in>- e doe s i«' l expul i t ionsl y wov e hac k int o cxiiip l iatH-e , i s i t stil l 0.11 - siilela l t o l e i n a slat e o final fuuclion ? GO . I I 6(1.1 1 (d ) n-> lli e sourc e lia s th e lurde n o fprovin g tha t a mal functio n hat ) occu r raj . SlKi i a sourc e woul d l « considere d t o hav e nove d fra n a stat e o fma l functio n t o a stat e o fnon coii|) l iance .

## am ; RI-MiMiNLl i (AHisrio N AKHX.TH ) RUGUIAT10

N 

### rcrERM1NATI0

N DISCtSSIO N

A-4 1 Mui o t o R-1 V (li . Heid i t o

T . GiM»s ) 2 3 Augus t7 7 .I s tli e la s i s o f th e existin g facilit y o rth e lasi s o f tli e entir e stationar y sourc e use d i n tli e calculatio n o f th e annua l asse tguidelin e repai rallowance , whic h i s referre d t o i n th e definitio n o f

capita l expenditur e i n Sectio n 60.2(U>) ? 60. 2 (UJ) 'I D determin e whethe ro rno tamodificatio n ha s occurre d du e t o a n increas e i n productio n rate , compar e th e amoun to f mone y spen tfo rphysica l o roperationa l chang e t o tli e existin g facilit y t o th e produc to f

th e existin g facility' s basi s am i tli e annua l asse tguidelin e repai rallowanc e for tli e existin g facility . I f mor e tha n on e existin g facilit y i s locate d l n th e sam e stationar y sourc e an d tlier e i s a n increas e i n emission s fra n bot h facilities , us e th e basi s an d repai rallowanc e o f ead i separat e existin g facilit y fordeterminin g whethe ro rno tamodificatio n ha s occurred .

A-4 2 Mem

o U i R-I V (E . Raic h t o J . Wu ) 2 9 Sept . 7 7 Mia tprocedur e shoul d li e fi>l lowu d whe n a n a f

foeta l facilit y ha s no t bee n performanc e teste d i n tli e 18 0 da y perio d followin g startu p du e t o shutdown s cause* ! li y equip men tmalfunction ?

A-4 3 Mem

o t o K-1 V (li . Reic h Sam e a s A-3 9 t o K . Iii i Hips ) 3 0 Seiit . 7 7 60.8(a ) Conside rissuin g a113(a ) orde rrequirin g th e owne ro roperato rt o notif y tli e Administrato r upo n restartu p (b y telephone ; t o li e followed b y confirmatio n i n writing ) an d als o requirin g aper - fomiance tes ta s soo n a s practicabl e tliereafte r bu tn o late rtha n 3 0 day s afte rrestartup . .I f th e facilit y i s unabl e t o operat e a tthe'maximu m pro ductio n rat e fo rtli e initia l performanc e test , a sul>sequen tpurfonnanc e tes tma y b e require d whe n th e facilit y achieve s maximu m productio n l n orde r t o assur e eunplianc e wit h tli e standard .
Se e A-3 9

A-4 4 Mai o t o It-VI l (li . Reid i

t o li . Ste|4ienson ) 2 0 iJecemlxs r7 7 I s astea m generato rwlios e capita l cos to f reconstructio n i s onl y 43 % o f th e cos to f

a«xiup>i.i l >l cne w stea m generato rsubjec tl o NS'.'ii du e t o reconstruction ? 60.I S No I f th e fixe d capita l cos t(Includin g al l lalxi r costs ) o f

reconstructin g th e affecte d facilit y ( a s defina i i n th e applicabl e subpart ) i s les s tlia n 50% o f

th e onu to f

a n entirel y ne waffecte d facility , the n th e affecte d facilit y I s no tsub jec tt o NSPS .UJ* : RIl'liRLNLI i QMiSTK M

A-4 5 Men o t o R- l (li .

t o C . K. ftnos) 5 Januar y 7 8 Reic h AtVlaCTI-J ) M-XJUIATKJ

N DfcTKR M J NATIO N DISCUSSIO N

Doe s a n as|Jial tconcret e plan twlios e "dryers ; system s fu rscreening , handling , storing , an i weighin g lo t aggregate ; system s fo rmixin g asplial tconcrete ; an d tli e loailing , transfer , ari l storag e system s associate d wit h emissio n contro l systems " liav e I ec u replaced , subjec tt o NSI' S du e t o reconstruction ? 60.1 5 60.9 0 Ye s Al l o f tli e component s o f th e affecte d facilit y wer e replace d excep tforth e system s forloading , transfering , an d storin g minera l filler . Tb e fixe d capita l cos t(includin g al l lalo rcoats ) o f reconstructin g tli e affecte d facilit y (a s define d i n 60.90 ) exceed s 50 % o f th e oos to f

a n entirel y ne waffecte d facility . 1 ) th e estimate d lif e o f th e affecte d facilit y afte rreplacement s i s substantiall y th e sam e a s th e lif e o f

acomparabl e ne wfacility ; 2 ) tli e ccinponent s bein g replace d contribut e t o nce to f th e emission s fro m tli e facility ; am i 3 ) ther e appea rt o h e n o unreasonabl e economi co r technica l limitation s o n complianc e inheren ti n th e propose d replacements . (Pleas e not e tha t tlies e othe rcriteri aar e onl y considere d afte rtli e 50 % capita l cos tcriteri ai s satisfied. )

A-4 6 lette rt o Texa s Ai r

Umtro l hoar d (li . Reic h t o J . Key ) 0 l-'eb . 7 8 Use s HiviiXHUipenta l Uit a(tjrp' s 60.1 3 zer o ji g proculur e mee tth e (d ) requirement s o f

§60.13(d) ? N s Ihi s teduiiqu e ma y b e a n acceptabl e alternativ e procedur e fo rthei rspecifi cinstrument .

A-4 7 Meii o t o K-i V (li . Reic h

t o V. Traina ) 1 3 Feb . 7 0 r o th e reconstruc ticm regulation s appl y fro m th e .til e o l |ni|>>s.i l o f an y stand,m l whic h no y apply ? 60.1 5 Ve s 'Hit ; reconstructio n regulation s wer e promulgate ! lon g afte rmany rfc'I' S ha d alread y lee n promulgatal . Hefor e tli e reoonstnictio n regulation s wer e pro posed , i tWHS ru rtollc y t o nuk e a n existin g sourc e whic h wu s reconstruct s subjec tt o t\EI S i f i twa s dctunnine d tha tth e sourc e wu s "reliuil tt o sud i a n exten ttha ti twa s essentiall y ane w source" . 'Ili e reconstructio n regulation s wer e iro - niil.jjtu l t o clarif y tli e metliol s tlia tU A woul d us e l o <le termin e whethe rareconstructe d sourc e woul d qualif y a s aiie w sourc e an i l e subjec tt o IMSI-S .

### P.1 5

C O 

## 3



# s i
s i

2 3 4 1 I U O 

## g * —" 8 8



## • 8 til* | 

# fill *

" 8 0 > m 0 )



### • 5 2 j j 

## S B O - 

# RSM *

y a < u ( N C M 

# I I
5 ^ p £ = |
fi 

### g^ 5 

### - ^

•C t J C 8 c » n 3 V - S —r - 

### 5T g a 

### "
" 3 C n b i | < u

t O 0 a W « « * 

## ss;~8 3 w 2 • « p oi" " 

### o

i 3

• o o a o XJ



### 8 s

—.0 1 

# g -

, 1 a O S 0 1 

## 1 3 £ 5 i 

### < 3 O j . 0 

### o 2S" B 

### B < 2 < 

## alS|g& S

5 3 3 * *

•

•j g o g g - g J

=, £ 35 s o i < wi wg o a 

## 6 —*

« H 2 . 

# r

_* * £.U4 J T J « j ) q 

## r-sfa 2 3 

## i Q , C w<

o Z • " 

### o i o a M 

## 8 " n S 

### xjS^^ B xJ V c x i x i u J ; * . S ? -J 

## »^^ o S 8 2 

# S I

j §
• 2
n B S m 

## a a 3


## • 8 

# ii

0 1 - i

• c 5 o

•• < l a H I xJ Q 1 0 J

C O ^ fl a fl - C S 

### u o - a

—< u 

# Ha g 0 1 (f l fl If l 

## •1 8 3

• 3 ® - S a x i



# souni i HUdNliMCa i CJ I I I -S TIO N AKFHLTE D K1UUIAT1C

N IJiTERMJNATIO N DISCUSSION

A-5 0 Meiii ) l o K-V I (E . Iteic h t o

II . lierymaii ) 9 May 7 8 Doe s conversio n fru n ga s l o coal , ga s t o oil , o roi l t o coal i n a we tproces s portlair

J cemen

tkil n constitut e inolifica tio n iixle r ICFS ? 60.1 4 N D A wetproces s portlair l cemen tkil n wliid i switche s (e)(4 ) frci n ga s io oil , ga s t o coal , o roi l t o coal , qualifie s fo rtli e exemptio n ureter4 0 CF R60.14(e ) (4 ) becaus e i tha s th e capabilit y bo tur n thes e alternativ e fuels .

A-5 1 lette rt o Irivirospher e

(W . Stevenso n t o T . Oirney ) 2

2 Ma y 7 8 Ma

y source-specifi c opacit y standard s t e establishe d unde r NSI'S ? 60.1 1 (e ) Ye s

A-5 2 lette rt o lixxo n (!•' . lorte rto . T . Rioads ) 13 Sept . 78 a ) Doe s aphysica l o r(jperationa l 60.1 4 change t o a

n existin g stationar y ga s turbin e constitut e iirnlifica tio n i f emission s o f

NU X d o it.it increas e i n tenni

s o f pnu.l s pa

r liour ? b ) Woul

d L I tn l ai s l . io n o f a n alter - 60.1 4 nativ e fue

l whici i reiiull s i n (e)(4 ) increase d emission s of t*J K cons titul e iimd

i f ica ti m i f

th e existin g ga s turbin e vti s originall y designt« 1 wit h tli e cajti ) i i I i t y t o I ur

n thi s alterna tiv e fuel ? IN C

N o As lon g a s emission s o f tf\ i n tenn s o f

pounds perhou rd o no tincrease , th e stationar y ga s turbin e wil l notb e considere d t o he nodified .

I f an i ssion s o f

NC), . increase , the n dat aan d infonnatio n outlinin g th e desig n capabilit y o f th e existin g ga s turbin e t o tur n th e alternativ e fue l shoul d b e evaluated .

T J 0 1

### a * n i KH'l-WNirii Qtii-yi:n- N AFFULTE D RBGIJIATIO

N DETER

MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N

A-5 3 Moi o t o H-V1I I (E . Reic h

t o U Vinson ) 2/27/7 9 Ar e Montan aDowe rCompany' s Golstri p Unit s 3 ant i 4 subjec t t o NSI'S , sul>|vir tD , rathe rtlia n sul i ar tlia ? 60.2(i ) Ye s Oonstructio n c n unit s 3 an d 4 coninence d prio rt o th e proposa l dat e o f tli e 161 % fu relectri cutilit y stea m generatin g units . Th e tw o unit s wil l b e subjec tt o th e requirement s o f 4 0 CF R6 0 subpar t D . However , Montan aDowe rmus tmaintai n acon tinuou s progra m o f

oonstructio n an d th e facilitie s mus tb e conplete d withi n areasonabl e time ; stcul d Montan aPowe rexperienc e an y sel f impose d treak a i n thei roonstructio n schedul e whic h woul d b e counte rt o tli e requirement s tha tacontinuou s pro gra n b e maintained , thes e unit s ma y becon e subjec t t o sulipar tta.

A-5 4 Men o t o R- I I I (E . Iteic h t o

II . Ileim) ' 2/22/7 9 a ) lia s asourc e whic h runove s a i rpollutio n ecjuipnent , a s a resul to f

aSI Prelaxation , undertake n anol i f ica tion ?

b ) Moul d suc h amod i f ica tio n subjec ttli e sourc e t o NSI' S retpiiiuiients , i f

tli e sourc e wa s wt subjec t|irio rl o tli e ncali f ication ? 60.14(a) , Ye s A modificatio n i s define d a s "an y physica l o r 60.14(e)(5 ) operationa l chang e t o a n existin g facilit y whic h result s i n a n increas e i n th e unissio n rat e o f an y pollutan tt o whic h astandan l applies" . On e exemptio n t o till s definitio n i s "th e additio n o r us e o f an y devic e whos e primar y functio n i s tli e reductio n o f

ai rpollutants , excep twher e a n emissio n contro l syste m i s removed" . I n thi s cas e wher e a n anissio n contro l ay s ta n i s bein g runoved , th e operatio n i s no texenlpte l an d i s considere d amodification . 60.14(a ) \e s "l)ic n nodificatlon , a n existin g facilit y shal l becom e a n affecte d facilit y foreac h pollutan tt o whid i astandan l app l ie s an d fo rwhic h tlier e i s a n increas e i n tli e anissio n rat e t o th e atmosphere. "tXJU i REFERENC E QUESTIO N AFFBLTE D RfcXJUlATlON DETER MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N



### A-5 5 Mai o t o K-II I (E . Reid i

t o S . Wassersug ) 4/12/7 9 Ha s I'EICO' s uni t1 4 a tth e Dickerso n generatin g statio n coninenced constructio n fo rth e purpose s o f

NSI'S ? 60.2(i ) Conditiona l Ih e ter m "commenced " states , "wit h respec tt o th e definitio n o f

"ne wsource " l n $lll(a)(2 ) o f th e Act , tha tan owne ro roperato rlia s undertake n a oontinou s program o f

oonstructio n o rnodificatio n o rtha ta n owne ro roperato rha s entere d int o a contractua l obligatio n t o wdertak e and oanplete , withi n areasonabl e time , acontinuou s progra m o f constructio n o rnodification" . PETC O ha s entere d int o acontractua l obligatio n fo rth e oonstructio n o f mi t14 . Ther e is , how ever , 6<ai

e questio n a s t o whethe rPU'O O ha s (1 ) complete d oonstructio n o f th e boile ro r(2 ) under take n acontinuou s progra m o f oonstruction . Th e issu e i s no tonl y whethe rPEPO O ca n satisf y thes e criteria , bu tals o th e timin g o f it s activities . Whil e PEPC

O ma y no thav e undertake n acontinuou s progra m t o complet e uni t1 4 a s earl y a s 11/14/72 , whe n tli e origina l contractua l ooiinitmen twa s entere d into , i tma

y i n fac thav e ccmnence d acon tinuou s progra

m prio rt o th e proposa l dat e o f tli e revise d NSP

S forfossi l fuel-fire d utilit y stea m generators . Ih e statu s o f

oonstructio n o f

uni t| 4 mus tb e ascertaine d befor e adeterminatio n ca n b e made ; liowever , i f

PEPO O ha s interrupte d it s constructio n progra m for aperio d i n exces s o f 2 years , throug h tli e (resen ttime , tlie n tli e ini twoul d b e 6<*>jec t t o tli e revise d standard . Hxlate i (Se e nex tpage )

0 0OOU E REFERENCE tHH-i.TI.i N AFFELTE D RfcTJUIATIO

N DETER

MINATIO N DISCISSIO N

A-5 5 lette rfro m R-IL I t o PEPC O (Scliran m t o Kirk ) 7/23/7 9 N D Tli e PEPO O progra n o f

constructio n doe s no tsatis - f y tli e definitio n o f "caunence d oonstruction " becaus e constructio n ha s no tbee n continuou s an d wil l no tb e complete d withi n areasonabl e time . Ther e wil l b e a6 1/ 2 t o 7 1/ 2 yea rga p i n con structio n fro m th e tim e th e preliminar y sit e activitie s wer e complete d an d al l boile rcompon ent s receive d t o th e tim e o f th e earlies tpro jecte d dat e o f

actua l oonstruction . Thi s i s no t acontinuou s progra m withi n th e meanin g o f th e Act . A reasonabl e tim e fram e for aplan tsuc h a s Dickerso n 4 woul d b e fra n 5 t o 7 years . Completio n i s no wexpecte d i n 198 7 - a n 11-1 3 yea rperio d an d no twithi n anonna l tim e frame . Ti e reason s presente d b y PEPO O forthi s 11-1 3 yea rperio d d o no tjustif y th e delay . A-5 6 Mem

o t o R-Vll l (E . Ifcic h t o L . Vinson ) 2 0 Au g 7 9 May asourc e remov e contin uou s Monitor s duriu j perfor manc e testing ? 60.1 3 N o Unde rsectio n 60.13(e) , continuou s nonitorin g (b) , (e ) systai e mus tb e i n continuou s operatio n excep t forsyste m breakdowns , repairs , calibration ' cliecks , an d zer o an d spa n adjustments . Thes e exception s d o no tinclud e parfonnano e testing .

C O

### twe

a RirU<b.C E (JUI-ST10 N AlVU.-lt D RU3JLATIO M ULTEH MINATIO N P1SCU&10 N



### A-b 7 Utte r(I4.1J I t o til 11) 

### 1/9/BO . <J i wluhct ; U

i U|«tit e ce tt.iJ u «ju

u 

### turbine s t o improv

e efficienc y an d out|*it . UxJc

rthi s fiogra m there.wil l probabl y b e a n increas e i n NQ „ emission s Uicn firin g distillat e fuel , an

d agreate r decreas e whe

n firin g natura l gas . a ) If , afte rth e qpdate , th e turbine s at e fire d par to f th e tim e o n natura l ga s an d th e remaindero f

th e tim e o n distillat e fuel , such tha tth e yearl y averag e N0 X

### an d SO 2 emission s d o no t increase , woul

d thi s b e a modification ? b ) Doc s EP A conside ro n eithe r ad e minimu

s o radministrativ e necessit y basi s that'certai n smal l increase s i n th e .leve l o f emission s woul d no trequir e tha tth e change s b e classifie d a s modifications ? 60.14(a ) Ye s B/e n thoug h th e turbine s wil l emi tles s ove rth e 60.14(b ) cours e o f ayear , ther e wil l b e increase s uf.c n distillat e fue l i s used . Sinc e modificatio n i s base d on . increase d emissio n rate , art ! emissio n rat e i s expresse d i n terms o f Kg/hr , an y increas e i n anissio n rat e durin g th e period s uhe n distillat e fue l i s burned , wil l requir e th e sourc e b e considere d modifie d forNSI' S purposes . 60.14(b ) N

o There i s no specifi cd e minimus leve l o rpercen t

thereb y increase s belo wtha tleve l would no tb e considere d modifications . I f anissio n level s increase , amodificatio n wil l b e deeme d to hav e occurred , Emission s rate s ca n h e determine d fron t eithe rCompilatio n o f

Ai rPollutan tEmissio n Factor s (AP-42) o rothe remissio n factor s i f the y demonstrat e aclea rincreas e o rdecrease . I f th e anissio n rat e i s base d on result s fra n manua l anissio n test s o rcontinuou s nonitoring . Appendi x C (Student' s ttest ) shal l b e use d t o determin e i f a n increas e o rdecrease , ha s occurred . I n thi s instance , amodificatio n occur s onl y i f th e emissio n rat e afte rth e change i s statisticall y significantl y highe rthan th e rat e befor e th e Change .

c ) Ar e befor e an

d afte r emission s based o

n actua l emissions , unde

rhSPS ? 60.1 4 Yes Unde rNSPS, emissio n rate s befor e an d afte ra chang e ar cbased on actua l source * emissions . Citin j fra n th e preamble t o th e proposa l provi sion s forNSP

S modification s (3 9 F

H 36946) : " Jb r a n existin g facilit y t o undergo amodificatio n ther e mus

tbe a n increas e i n actua l emission s " .

## ar e REFBtQC E 

## amsnou AFFHCTH > RBaULATIC M LETEH MUMTIO H 

# v rB - 

# La. . DISCUSSIO

N

A-5 8 Mem

o (Reic h t o Snith ) 4/15/80 . A twhatpoin ti n tim e wil l 60.2(1 ) NSP S regulation s appl y t o 60.14(e)(6 ) source s suc h a s prefabricate d propose d interna l combustio n engines . Subpar tF F wher e th e source , afte rbein g manufactured , ma

y li e o n th e shel f befor e bein g bough tan d used ? Unde rth o propose d I C engin e standard , th e initia l owner/operato ri s considere d t o h e th e origina l manufacturer , sinc e i ti s th e manufacture rrathe r tht/ i th e ultimat e use rwh o i s responsibl e fo r oonstructio n o f

th e engines . Ih e regulation s wil l appl y t o J C engine s fo rwhic h construction , b y tii e manufacturer , ccmsence s o n o rafte rtii e effectiv e dat e o f th e regulations . The purchas e o f er . I C engin e vhic h i s con s tru e to d prio rt o th e effectiv e dat e i s equivalen tt o achang e i n ownershi p ar O no tconsidere d amodification . Th e owner/operato r i s ultimatel y responsibl e fo rcanpllanc e wit.* , th e standards .

"• ) Wher

e th aperformanc e 160. 8 standar d l astate d i n tw o significan tdigit * (e.g. , 0.0 4 gr/dscf) , wha tprocedtar* * *r s t o b aapp l la d b y th aregio n i n determinin g complianc e wha n th ates tresult s ar aatata d I n tens * o f

thra asignifican tdigit* ? b ) Mut tdiacratio n d o th aregfcn * |60.8(b ) an d dalagata d atats ahav aI n halvin g testin g requirement* ? Can taat * bawaive d base ) a n an agree mm tt y th aaouro at o oenduc t annua l lea kcheck * o rotlie rOI M pr*cticee 7
c ) Doe * th aregio n hava . th a|60.8(b ) authorit y t o allo wth aetat * t o waiv e th aepsclfl o stac ktaa tfor th aasphal tplan tl n Oaneve , VO Legally , anythin g greate rtha n 0.0 4 1 * aviole - tlo n (a.g. , 0.0401) . Ibwever , moa tengineer s ten d t o roun d of f

result s an i therefor * 0.04 4 woul d b areporte d a * .0 4 an d .04 5 woul d b a reporte d a a.05 . A bette rguid awoul d b * tha t anythin g Blowin g greate rtha n a10 % exces s l a wort h aonalderln g forenforcemen taction . Region * hov e authorit y t o telv * parfcrmanc e teat * o r(i n thi * ceaa ) • retes tprovidin g the y obtai n •aaurance * flroraD6S

E tha tth awaive ri s can s la - ten twit h nationa l policy * Delegate d atate * oonno tinllaterall y waiv aparfotmano e testa .
Ye» , *e * 59(b ) above . A * • polic y matter , stac k test e shoul d onl y b * waive ] i n compellin g cir - cumstance* , m thl aans ath aqjaatio n l avhethe r th astac kteat , alread y performed , couple d wit h certai n othe ractions , ca n suppor tafindin g th a standar d wil l b e met , thu s obviatin g th anee d Box areteat , Thee e othe raction * uhoul d includ e documentatio n b y aocmpeUn tenginee rtha tth e caus e foran y exces s trole aIon s ha s bee n uliml nated , ar d I too n reasonabl y b e sai l tha ta ratea twoul d de wcanpllance . T E H fceno (Reic h toMteocb* T



## e/20/ao

Y* a

T lCOC K RER8BC 8 CMESTIOt l APFHCTE D REGULATIC

N DETERMLNATIC M DISCISSIO N 

### A-6 0 Mon

o (Reic h t o Qanlebring ) 6/18/8 0 "* 1 Wbul d oonstructio n o f

a n experimenta l du e ga s douul furlratlo n an d resourc e reoover y prooaa * b * aubjec tt o NSPS ? b ) Afte rremova l o f th e experimenta l facility , •e y Souther n Illlnol * rever t bad e t n th apresen tapplicabl e e m la s I o n standards ? 160.2(h ) N o



### 160.14(e)(5 ) lt > Constructio n o f thi s demonstratio n facilit y doe s no tconstitut e amodificatio n sinc e ther e wil l no tb e c n Increaa ain euiasiona . Ht m th e demonstratio n facilit y 1 * removed , Souther n Illinoi s woul d b e considere d modifie d and woul d nee d t o mee tth e applicabl e NSFS . Ihi s i s becatis aasourc e 1 * considere d modifie d i f an enisalon acontro l syste m i s rtmoved . ESS E i s awar e {60.14(e)(5 ) ma y t e inconsisten twit h othe r Agenc y policy , an d la currentl y workin g wit h OVQP S t o men d thl aprovision .
A-e l Meeo (Mid i t o Sawyer )

9/16/8 0 A n existin g sourc e wa s shu t dow n l n 1975 , an d no

w wishe s t o reopen . Would suc h are openin g subjec tth e sourc e t o NSPS , Subpar tE ? Slll(*)(2 ) o f th e CAA j S60. 2 (g),(h);S60.14(e ) (3) | 560.15(b ) N

o Se e determinatio n A-2 . Thi s sourc e i n existenc e

prio rt o th e effectiv e dat e o f S-ibpar tE woul d no tb e subjec tt o tha tNSP S whe n i tresume s opera tion s afte rth e effectiv e date . Unde r$lll(a)(2 ) o f

th e Clea n Ai rAct , ane w sourc e i s "an y stationar y source , th e construc tio n o rmodificatio n o f whic h i s commence

d afte r th e publicatio n o f

regulation s (or , if'earlier , propose d regulations ) prescribin g astandar d o f performanc e unde rthi s sectio n whic h wil l b e applicabl e t o suc h source" . Resumptio n o f opera tion s i n thi s cas e i s no tamodificatio n becaus e emission s wil l no tincreas e ove rth e source' s previou s operatin g emissions . Additionally , a n increas e l n th e hour s o f operatio n o f

asourc e i s exemp tfra n modificatio n provisions . Resorptio n o f operation s i s no tareconstructio n becaus e th e change s require d i n thi s cas e ar e no textensiv e enoug h t o mee tth e requirement s o f 4 0 CF R60.15(b) . No rca n thi s re-startu p b e considere d construc tio n o f ane wsource . Th e sourc e owne ri s merel y takin g thos e step s necessar y t o retur n th e plan t t o it s forme roperatin g condition . Thi s coul d no t legitimatel y b o characterize d a s construction , define d a s th e "fabrication , erectio n o rinstalla tio n o f a n affecte d facility" .

ro roCOD E REFERENC E QUESTION



### A-6 2 Nem

o (Reic ht o Leplc ) 11/26/8 0 AFFECTE D REGULATIO

N rETER

HINATIO N DISCUSSIO N

ASARCO's converte r No
. 4 

### currentl y operate s partl y o naone-converte r

mode an dpartl y o natwo-converte r mode
. Durin g two-oonverte r operation , san e converte r off-gase s ar e bypasse dt o th e ESP s an demitte db o th e atmospher e withou t recover y o f

S0 2 

### . I n one-converte r

operation , al l o f th e off-gase s ca nb e pro cesse dan dther e i s n o bypas s o f t n treate dgases . ASARC O plan s t o make physica l change s to converte r No
. 4 , bu t feel s tha t

woul dno t

b e a modificatio ninde r

NSPS becaus e th e off-gase s fra n a nenlarge d No
. 4 converte r

operate dmor e frequentl y a n aone-converte r mod e wil l no t

Increas e ove r curren t emissions
. Wha

t pro cedur e shoul db e followe db o determin e i f

amodificatio n wil l occur ? 60.14(a) , (b ) I notde r t o determin e emission s to th e atmospher e prio r t o th e change , ASARC O mus t determine , ove r som e previou s period , th e total emissions , i nkg , t o th e contro l devic e befor e th e bypass
. Tli e percen t contributio no f

converte r

No. 4 t o thi s tota l mus t

b e danonstrated
. Next , ASARC O mjs t determin e th e tota l amoun t emitted , i nkg, t o th e atmospher e fro mth e bypas s an dcontro l equipment
. Assumin g th e san e percentag e contri

butio nto atmospheri c emission s a s converte r No
. 4 make s t o emission s t o th e contro l devic e befor e th e bypass , converte r No
. 4 emission s t o th e atmospher e ca nb e determined
. Afte r th e change , atmospheri c enissions , i nk g pe r hour , attribute dto converte r No
. 4 ca nb e determine dusin g th e sam e procedure
. Th e tw o rate s ca nthe nb e compare dt o determin e i f a modificatio nha s occurred
.



## _ >REGULATION l/l . 1 L-l i — 

### MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N A-6 3 Mem

o (Reic hto Wil l th

e repai r o f a

n60.15(f) ; Unde r $60.15 , th e determinationfo r reconstructio

nI s basedonsevera l factors i (1 ) th e fixe dcapita l cos t o f th e ne w component s comparedto th e fixe d capita l cos t requiredto construc t a comparabl e ne w facility ; (2 ) th e estimatedlif e o f th e repaire dfacility

comparedto th

e lif e of a comparabl e ne w facility ; (3 ) th e extent t o whic hth e replace

d component s contribut e t o th e emission s fro

m th e facility ; (4 ) th e economi c en

dtechnologi c feasibility

o f meeting th

e applicabl e standard . I nthi s cas e th

e cos t o f repair s exceed s 50 1 of th

e cos t o f a ne

w facility , th

e estimatedlif e o f th e facilit

y i s th e sam e repaire do r new , th e component s bein g replace

d ar e a majo r contributo r to emission s fro m th e facility , an

dcontro l ha s bee nshow nto b e technologicall y feasible . i nconsiderin

g economi c feasibility , EP A mus t asses s whethe r th e cost s o f th

e contro l option s whic hwoul db e employed t o achiev

e complianc e ar e clearl y disproportionat e t o th e quantit y

o f emissio nreductio

ntha t woul dresul t fro m suc hcontrol . I

nthi s cas e th

e onl y contro l option , a

namin e treater , ha s contro l cost s clearl y disproportionat e t o th e resultin

g emissionreduction . Sinc e meetin g th e NSP S i s no t economicall y feasible , th

e repair s woul dnot b e considereda reconstruction , an dth e sourc e woul dnot b

e coveredunde r NSPS . EP A wil l continue t o explor e th e economi c feasibility

of complianc e if a nadditiona l furnace(s ) is rebuilt . No Edlund ) 2/5/8 1 existin g gas-fire d furnac e b

e a recon struction , thereb

y triggerin

g NSP S coverag e unde r Sub par t J fo r petroleu m refineries ? Subpar t J

r o

### COD E REFERENC E QUESTIO N AFFECTE D REGULATIO N DETER MINATIO N DISCUSSION
A-6 4 Memo (Ossia s t o Goodwin) '

9/24/8 1 D o th e reconstructio n provision s permi t replacemen t cost s t o b e aggregate dove r a nindefinit e perio d o f time ? 50.1 5 

## N o S60.1 5 permit s onl y th e limite dpolic y

o f aggregatin g replacemen t cost s stemming fro m a singl e plannin g decision . Reconstructio ni s define da s th e replacemen t o f component s o f a nexistin g facilit y t o suc ha nexten t tha t "th e fixed capita l cos t o f th e ne w component s exceed s 5 0 percen t o f the fixe dcapita l cos t tha t woul db e require dt o construc t a comparabl e entirel y

ne w facility " an

di t i s technicall y

an deconomicall y

feasibl e t o mee t the NSPS . Section s 60.15(d)-(f ) impl y tha t "ne

w components " includ e onl y thos e component s th e owne r propose s t o replace . Sinc e propose dreplacement s canno t reasonabl y

b e interprete dto includ e component s replace dpursuan t to a serie s o f distinc t pas t decisions , aggregatin g th e cos t o f severa l independen t replacemen t project s complete d ove r anindefinit e perio di s inconsisten t wit h$60.15 . Note : Thi s supersede s determinatio n AA-5(d) .

r o U lCODE 

### Dat e o f Respons e QUESTIO N AFFECTE D REGULATIO N DETIK - MINATIC N DISCUSSIO N


### A-6 4 Updat e $60.1 5 permit s onl y th e limite dpolic y o f aggregatin g replacemen t cost s stemmin g fra nwha t ma y b e viewe d objectivel y

a s a singl e planning decision . Reconstructio ni s define da s th e replacemen t o f component s o f a n existin g facilit y

to suc hanexten t tha t "th e fixe dcapita l cos t o f th e ne w component s exceed s 5 0 percen t o f th e fixe dcapita l cos t tha t woul db e require dt o construc t a comparabl e entirel y

ne w facility " an

di t i s technicall y

an deconomicall y

feasibl e t o mee t th e NSPS . Section s 60.15(d)-(f ) indicat e tha t "ne w components * includ e onl y thos e canponent s th e owne r "proposes " t o replace . Sinc e replacement s mad e pursuan t to a serie s o f distinc t decision s ove r a nindefinit e perio do f time canno t reasonabl y b e interprete dt o b e par t o f a singl e "proposal" , unlimite d aggregatio no f th e cos t o f suc h replacement s i s inconsisten t wit h $60.15 . However , ther e i s n o indication tha t EP A

Intende dto rel y

completel y o na nowner' s subjectiv e view o f whic h replacement s ar e par t o f a singl e "proposal" . T o avoi dth e anbiguitie s thi s woul dcreate , EP A

i s considerin g interpretin g "proposed " replacement s t o includ e al l tha t ar e comnence d(bu t no t necessaril y

completed ) withi na on e o r tw o yea r period . Unti l thi s i s finalized , an y question s regardin g thi s issu e shoul db e addresse dt o DSSE .



## r oCOD

E REFERENC E QUESTIO N AFFECTE D REGULATIO N DETERMINATIO N DISCUSSIO N
Lette r (Reic h t o Chavez ) 7/2/8 2 A-6 5 Performanc e testing$60. 8 (f) , o fa n asphal t plan t Par t 60 , showe d particulat e Appendi xA , emission s averagin g Metho d 1 0.03 8 gr/dscf , compare d t o th e NSPS 

### limi to f 0.0 4 gr/dscf . I n performin g th e test , 2 5 travers e points , rathe rtha n th e minimum, numbero f

4 2 require d b y 4 0 CF R 60 , Appendi x A , wer e used . Additionally , nozzle s wer e change d durin g on e o fth e runs , 

### resultin g i na ru ntha t wa s 66 * isokinetic . I s thi s performanc e tes t valid ? Th e sourc e ha s contende dtha t sinc e EP A i s considerin g reducin g the minimum

numbe r o f travers e poits , an

dsinc e th e averag e o f the thre e run s showe doompliance , th e tes t shoul db e considere dvalid . 

## N o $60.8(f ) requite s tha t a performanc e

tes t b e base do nthre e vali dtes t runs , excep t unde r certai nenumerate d condition s whic hd o n o appl y i nthi s case . Th e tes t wa s no t performe d accordin g to the Metho d1 forma t fo r determinin g th e minimum numbe r o f travers e points . .Sinc e ther e i s n o indicatio ntha t thi s provisio nwil l b e change dinthe nea r future , testing mus t b e governe dt y EPA procedure s currentl y

inplace . Th e tes t i s invalid .COD E REPERENC E QUESTIO N AFFECTE D REGULATIO N DETERMINATIO N DISCUSSIO N
A-6 6 Memo (Rasni c t o Voltaggio ) 7/23/8 2 Ca ninstrumenta l performanc e method s fo r NO- j an

d0 2 b e usedi nlie uo f EP A tes t method s 7 and3 during performanc e testing ? $60.8 ; $60 , Appendi xA Conditiona l A t leas t thre e relativ e accurac y tes t run s shoul db e mad e befor e andafte r tii

e performanc e test . Th e result s o f the relativ e accurac y

test s an

dth e measure demissio n level s relative t o the emissio nstandar d coul dthe nb e use dt o determin e the acceptabilit y

o f the instrumenta l measuremen t data . Thi s extensiv e verificatio nprocedur e i s necessar y becaus e the propose dinstrumenta l measuremen t metho drepresent s a nequivalen t metho da s provide da t $60.8 , an dit s approva l require s the sam e protoco l andtechnica l dat a suppor t a s i s require dfor an

y othe r propose dtes t method .

Ir o 

# _J° °

### cu* : wi'iwu** : UHKbTJl N Al-llLTIJ ) WJGUIATKT

N U.TEfi M I NA T KI N DISCUSSIO N

l>- l Genera l Mibli cUtilitie s

Corp . Gillxir tPlant , Ne w .Jerse y (*Y»r . 17 , 197 2 - Megmmo l I ) .I f ga s turbin e exhaus tgase s ar e consume ! i n ane wo rmodifie d fossi l fuel-firo d stea n genera t o ra s coitUititio n air , woul d th e oontritaitio u fra n tli e turbin e exhaus tgase s l e elide d t o ll« e fossi l hie l t>ji<«jetio n (toiler ) effluen ti n <k.-teniiinin g oanp l iance ? 60.4 0 N 3 Ouip l ianc e I s judge d onl y o n ti e amoun to f liea t an i oanliu&tio n effluent s aide d l y fossi l fuel . Th e performanc e tes tfordeterminin g complianc e mus tb e conducte d wit h n o interferenc e from tli e turliin e exliaus tgases .

l>- 2 General i CHittli cUtilitie s Corp .

lak e Cit y Plant , tri e County , Perm . (Jul y 3 , 197 2 - Megomiell ) Sau u a s D-l . Sam e a s D- l

U- 3 Car l E . Baile y Plant ,

Augusta , Arkansa s (Mar . 20 , 197 3 - Ytoell ) woul d ti e fue l switc h t o oi l an d tli e installatio n o f soo tMower s t o asteu m generatht j uni twhic h wa s tfesigntx ] U

> Uir u lot h natura l ga s ari l fue l oi l prio rt o Aug . 17 , 1971 , constitut e a mod i f ica tioti ? 60.14(c)(4 ) Usridi - Tlier e wil l b e a n increas e l n anissio n fra n tli e tiona l fue l switch , I»j tsinc e tli e uni tve s designe d t o

bu m fue l oi l prio rt o Aug . 17 , 1971 , th e fue l chang e woul d no tconstitut e a"chang e i n th e metlia l o f

operation. " However , th e installatio n o f ax> tblower s ma

y caus e a"physica l change " L o t i e holle rwhic h i s a"modificatio n o f th e a f fecia l facility. " Till s detenninatio n i s base d on ti«j desig n an d ti cintende d us e o f th e boiler . I f tlier e i s aclea rlnlicatlot i i n th e ifesig n tha t th e st> x blowei s wer e t o h e installa l a tsan e futur e date , tli e installatio n o f too tblower s woul d no th e a"modification, " bu tlitr e l y acon tinuatio n o f

originall y planne d oonstruction .

r o

# ax e RflPERUIC E QUESTIO N AFFECTE D REGULATION DETER MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N


### D-4 Alle n Stea aPlant , Memphis , Tenn . (Apr . 197 3 - Quarles ) hbul d th e appplicatio n o f refus e 19 , waste s a s a

n alternativ e fue l fo r a n existin g fossi l fuel-fire d steam generato rconstitut e a "modification " to such facility ? 60.4 0 N o I ti s th e interpretatio n o f thi s offic e tha tth e 60.2(h ) us e o f refus e waste a s an alternativ e fue l woul d no tbrin g a

n existin g fossi l fue l fire d steam generato rwithi n th e scop e o f applicabilit y o f NSP S sinc e refus e doe s no tconstitut e fossi l fue l a s define d by $60.41(b )



## D-5 Cit y

o f Ames , Iowa , Plan t (Ma y 2, 197 3 - Allen ) San s a s D-4 . Same s aa D-4 .

D- 6 Sout hMiss . Bowe r (Ma y 10 , 197 3 J . Perrl nQuarles ) Sam e a s D-3 

### San e aa D-3 .

D- 7 Texaco , Anaoortes , Hash .

(Hay 17 , 197 3 - Allen ) 

### (a ) I s th e carbo n monoxide 60.4 0 west s hea tboile rpropose d for th e Anaoorte s facilit y subjec tt o NSP S fo rfossi l fuel-fire d stea a generators ? (b ) i s th e 0 0 ( awast e by-produc t60.41(b ) fro m th e flui d catalyti ccrackin g unit ) whic

h i s consume

d i n thi s boile rconsidere d fossi l fuel ? (e ) Ho wwoul d th e performance 60.46(b ) tes tb e conducted for afossil fuel-fire d stea

m generato rwhic

h burn s waste by-product s a s supplemental fuel ? Ye s

N o



### Condi tiona l Th

e propose d boile rha s adesig n capacit y o f ove r 25 0 m m Btu/hr . A

ttime s th e boile rwil l b e fire d wit h 10 0 percen tfossi l fuel . Constructio n wa s commence d afte rAugus t17 , 1971 . I ti ath e interpretatio n o f thi s offic e tha t wast e by-product s such a s C O fro m FC C unit s ar e no tfossil fuel s a s define d b y $60.41(b) . Th e definitio n cover s onl y thos e fossi l fuel s which ar e no twast e materials . Suc h uni twould b e require d b o fir e 100f tfossi l fue l durin g th e performance test . Th e tes t shoul d b e conducte d a to rabove th e norma l stea m productio n rate , butpreferabl y a tdesig n capacit y i n orde rt o avoi d th e necessit y o f additiona l test s i f norma l operatin g capacit y i s increased .


# JU1) E K l *EKKNL" E CUES.' . K M AIVH.'1'KI )

KUGUIATIC N U.TER M1IMATIC

N DISCUSSIO N

D- 8 Norther n .III . Gas . CD .

Plant , Morris . 111 . (Jun e 25 , 197 3 - Wilt-on ) (a ) Woul d a n almonna l unavoida b l e slior tten n pea koperatio n o f a n existif« j uni tabov e it s desig n capacit y brin g tli e mi t withi n tli e applicaliilit y o f USPS ?

(b ) .I s vaporize d naptli awhic h i s burne d l n ane wstea m generato r subjec tt o NO

„ standard s Ai r gaseou s fossi l fuel ? ( c ) Woul d acalculate d valu e for NOxemission s lase d o n fue l ,u» l a i rrate s o f

ti e toile rli e accepta b l e t o mee ttli e performanc e tes t o rtli e monitorin g retjuirement s fo r astea m generator ? 60.4 0 N o

60.4 4

60.4 6 60.4 5 Ye s

l\t> / Yea Tli e applicabilit y i s base d c n th e maximu m desig n capacit y o f

th e affecte d facility , no tth e cpera tiu g rate . Furthermore , tli e standard s wer e no tintende d t o cove rabnonna l operation s o f an y affecte d facility . A s Indicate ! i n $60.8(c) , per - fbnnanc e test s shoul d onl y b e conducte d inde r condition s o f

representativ e perfonnanc e (i.e. , tli e condition s wide rwhic h th e facilit y woul d operat e li tanorma l manner) . Vaporize d napth ai s agaseou s fossi l fue l an d thus , auni tburnin g thi s fue l woul d b e atijec tt o standard s forNQ ^ applicabl e t o gaseou s fuels . EP A canno tpresentl y accep tacalculate d ualu e for NC^ , emissio n staiilards . Iferformanc e test s mus tl e conducted . However , thi s calculatio n approac h na y b e use d forconvertin g continuou s monito rmeasurement s fra n n m t o lb/nr n Btu .

D- 9 Uiptxi tCo. , Sabin e Rive r

Plant , Orange , 'lexa s (Jun e 28 , 197 3 - Allen ) (a ) San e a s A- 4
(b ) lv > wast e liy-iv.<jdiK:t s fru n petro-chuuica l processu s ixni stitut e fiissil fuel ? 60.2(h )
60.41(b ) No

N o San e a s A- 4

Se e D-7(b) .

T JIX11 E KEKEKI-NC E CtlESrKJ N ' AFFH.'11-.I ) ItHG I I I A T K M DETER MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N

D- 9 bupun tOo. , Sa l lin e Rive r cont'd . Plant , Orange . Texa s

(.Jun e 28 , 197 3 - Alle n (c ) Ar e ti e tw o ne wpropose d boiler s forrupont' s Sabin e Rive rplan tsubjec tt o NSI'S/" (d ) San e a s 07(c ) 60.4 0 Ye s The y liav e adesig n capacit y > • 25 0 m m Btu/h ro f fossi l fue l hea tinpu tan d constructio n bega n afte rAugus t17 , 1971 . Sam e a s 07(c )

l>-1 0 Maste rWheele rOOrp .

(Jul y 6 . 197 3 - Wilson ) (a ) Can tli e lerfonnanc e tes tfor60.4 6 particulat e matte rl e waivo l fo r gaseou s fossil fuel-fire d stea m generators ? (b ) Can tli e continuou s monitorin g 60.4 5 o f smok e opacit y l e wnive l for kerosen e an d distillat e oil-fire l steai n generatin g units ? (c ) I f identica l stea m generatin g 60.46(b ) unit s wit h acrjmr m ai rpollutio n contro l syste m an i aonnoi i sLac k ar e lurnin j ti e sank. - fuel , IK W woul d ti e perfonuanc e test s l e conducted ? Ye s

N o

Condi tiona l A waive ro f performanc e tes tmay b e grante d I f th e owne ro roperato ro f asourc e denonstrate s b y otlve rmean s t o th e Administrator' s satisfactio n tha tth aaffecte d facilit y i s bein g operate ! i n complianc e wit h th e standards . Onl y continuou s monitorin g o f smok e opacit y for gaseou s fossil fuel s i s exemp tbra n ti e regula tion . Perfonnanc e test s shoul d b e ca rria l ai twit h al l unit s firin g simultaneously . IAe rfbrnnno e test s shoul d h e aorUucte d a to rabov e ti e neximu m stea m productio n rate , (preferabl y a tdesity i capacit y i n orde rt o avoi d th e necessit y o f additiona l test s i f

norma l operatio n capacit y i s increased ) whil e fuel s representativ e o f norma l oonlltion s ar e bein g burned .



# L w to

### cunt : tttl-EKENL' E QUEbTdl N AM-WI'M ) ItUOUIATlU N UII'ER MINATK N DISCUSSIO N

O-I O luste rWlteele rCbip . cont'd . (Jul y 6 . 197 3 - Wilson ) ( d ) I f adifferen tfossi l fue l i s 60.8(c ) consulte d i n eac h o f ti e identica l Bteti n generatin g unit s wit h a cumiot i ai rpollutio n contro l syste n an d acumra i stack , lo w woul d th e perfonnanc e test s l e conducted ? ( e ) I s tt.pth aafossi l fuel ? 60.41(b ) ( f ) San e a s l»(b ) ( g ) I s hagasse e afossil fuel ? 60.41(b ) Condi tiona l

Ye s

N o Performanc e test s shoul d b e conducte d foreac h

uni teejiaratel y i n orde rt o ensur e tha tn o on e uni ti s exceedin j ti e standar d ari l als o foral l unit s togethe rl n orde rt o ensur e tha tth e contro l devio s i s equall y effectiv e unde rful l load . Wlien a l l unit s ar e teste d together , ti e fonnulae o f {60.43(b ) an d §60.44(b ) appl y forSOj an d H(\ respectively . I ti s aderivativ e o f petrolajm , derive ! forth e purpos e o f

creatin g usefu l heat . San e a s D9(b ) I ti s no taderivativ e o f coal , petroleum , o r natura l gas .
D-l l Balicoc kfcWilco x

(Aug . 2 , 197 3 - Wilson ) (a ) Woul d th e triplicatio n o f 6O.4 0 refus e wastes , wucd wastes , I .ark , 60.2(h ) vegetation , anima l o rothe rwast e by-proiuct s a s a n alternativ e fue l fo ra n existin g fossil fuel-fire d stea m generato rconstitut e a •"muditicatiun " t o suc h facility ? (b ) I s ane w stea m genera l in g 11 1 I tSulijiart s whic h I wi s adesig n capacit y o f not e D & L 1 1 kil l 2'j O n

m IHu/l u fossil fue l hea t inpu tari l i s desiguu l t o cxaismi e not e Uu u 5 0 'l'/ila y o f so l ii i wust e subjec tt o eithe ro rlot h o f li e standard s foi stea m gene talm s ait l incinerators ? Is b Se e U- 4

Itvleter - Tlii s situatio n i s presentl y unde rrevie wb y EP A mine d l>c<*lquarters . An y request s foriletermination s o n

thi s subjec tmis tb e forwarded t o n&SEforresolu - tion . Ifii s Issi e relate s t o ne wconstructio n an d i s no tamodificatio n issie , a s i n D4 . Updat e - Ti e stea m generatin g uni twoul d b e si*> - jec tt o lot h Subpar tO (o rIta , i f applicable ) an d Sulxoar tK. Se e D-4 9 an ! D-9 0 fo rsimila rsitua - tions .

c o

# n

CUl t RH-IJUWLT i OHT:ST.<J N

11-1 1 cont'd . Babouc k i Wilco x (Aug . 2 , 197 3 - Wilson ) Al-liJL'IU ) HI-MJIATIG N l*.TI.K M1NAT10 N DISCISSIO N

( c ) I s ti e a|iplicabilit y o f NSI' S 60.4 0 basei l u i ti e noiina l ({era ! in g capacit y o f a stea m generator ? ( d ) I s ti e lea t generate d b y wast e 60.4 0 by-product s considere d i n calcu - latin g th e lea t iii|»i l t o a n ajipli - cabl e stea m generator ? ( e ) Sam e a s 07(c ) ( f ) Doe s th e he.i t inpu t t o steai. i 60.4 0 generatin g mit s inclul e sensibl e hea t fru n crxuUistio n ai r o r fuels ? ( g ) San e a s 179(b ) (h ) San e a s 0 1 M a



# (3

No Th e applicabilit y i s base d o n th e maxinu n desig n

capacit y o f th e affecte d facility , no t U e qiera - tin g rate . Se e D- l

San e a s D7(c ) Oil y th e gras s heatin g valu e o f th e fossi l fue l i s use d t o determin e hea t inpu t t o stea m generatin g units . Sam e a s 09(b ) Sam e a s D l

11-1 2 anilit y o f Fairfa x

(Aug . 9 , 197 3 - Wilson ) San e a s M San e a s 1) 4

b-1 3 McClella n Plant , Camlen , Aik .

(Aug . 16 , 197 3 - Wilson ) San e a s 1) 3 San e a s 0 3



# u

## cu* :

I>-I 4 KiiuamE

J . M . Ikile rCbrp . (Aug . 16 , 197 3 - .Johnson ) 

### uumvHM AIVUL"I'M ) RIXIJIATK N ifc-ri:K M1NATI0 N DISCISSIO N
(a ) IO wast e by-product s fra n carlxx i blac kmfg . constitut e fossi l fuels ? (b ) San e a s 011(f ) ( c ) San e a s l>7(c ) 60.41(b ) IM ) Se e U7(b )

San e a s 011(f ) San e a s D7(c )

IVI 5 Virgini ai:lec . L lowe rCo .

(Jul y 25 , 197 3 - Wilson ) San e a s 1) 4 Sam e a s D 4

D-1 6 Miss . Powe r t . light . Miss .

(Oct . 4 , 197 3 - Wilson ) San e a s 1) 3 Se e 0 3

1)1 7 Rwte rWheele rCorp -

(fct . 23 , 197 3 - Wilson ) Ti e axdiustiu i o f fossi l tue l provide s necessar y hea th i a n emission s contro l devii« . I t t i e flu e ga s i s IIIOVUIK I i n t i e toiler , woul d ti e emission s fru n li e flu e ga s It ; counte d i n determinin g li e <«inpl ianc e o f t i e Uiiler ? 60.4 0 N o Tlii s i s oonsidere l th e recover y o f awast e by - product . Therefore , ti e e n lesion s fro m U e fil e ga s woul d l e excluded . Ti e perfonnano e tes t woul d hav e t o b e ooniucte d wi tI ou trecover y o f th e flu e ga s t o preven tinterference .

UjjJat e Foste rWheele r(Wilson , 4-22-75 ) (.'an U e |urfoiin.iin.- u tes tl e m i ductu l wit h th e emission s fi x in th e loile i an i s.u*llH.-.ite i liu l affeclol ) ouJlined ? 6 0 . 4 0 Vb s A s lor y a s ther e i s amean s forifeterminin g th e aiu»mt s o f

pollutant s a«l<lal t o ti e loile i emis sion s l y th e sarrlheater .CU* J kiiuttMO- : 

### ouiisnt*

. AirULTIX I RtUUIATU N ItaTfc'K M1IMAT1U

N DISCUSSIO N

D-I O Sin f lower Plan t (Nov .

197 3 - Wilso n 13 . San e a s 1) 3 Se e 0 3

b-1 9 Interna l Muiorandun i (Wilso n

t o Irwi n Dickstein , Itegio n VII I - Nov. 14 , 1973 ) Ar e NSI' S applicabl e t o a n existin g ci>al-fira l |nwe r plan twhic h wil l h e converte d t o gas ? ('Ih e ga s i s st.pplie d fru n acoa l gasi.ficatiu i plant. ) 60.4 0 No .I ti s no tamodificatio n sinc e tler e i s n o increas e i n eiiissions . Th e coa l gasificatio n plan tha s I D tearin g i n th e natte rsinc e NSP S affect s onl y th e boiler .

u-2 0 Texaco , Inc .

(Nov . 27 . 197 3 - Wilson ) (a ) IO proces s gase s fro m 60.41(b ) petroleu m refinerie s constitut e fossi l fuel ?
( b ) I f ti e primar y |niri>is e o f a60.41(a ) stea m generatin g mi l i s t o uun tro l pollutio n rathe rtha n t n produc e steam , wonh l suc h uni tl e subjec tL

o NSPS ? 

### tto

N o

( c ) Same a s 1)11(c ) (d ) San e a s l)7(c ) Proces s gases , meanin g an y gase s generate d t y a petroleu m refinery , excep tfue l gases , woul d no t constitut e fossi l fuel . Fue l gases , meanin g an y gase s generate d t y arefiner y forU e purpos e o f creatin g usefu l leat , ar e fossi l fuels . Ti e uni ti s onl y subjec twhe n ti e primar y purpos e i s t o generat e steam .

Sam e a s Dll(c ) San e a s D7(c )

T J C O 0 1tX«K a RU-tKlMC t OlkaSCKl N AFFtLTtl )

RIMJIATIC

N IJ-.TKR

M1NATIG

N DISCtbSIO N

D-2 1 Fla . Iriwe rI ligh tCo . l n

Palalka , Fla . (12-21-73 . Wilson ) I s th e stea m generato rwhic h i s apar to f

U e inoposo d oouhinu l cycl e ga s tutbit e uni tsubjec tt o NSI'S ? 60.4 0 l b Th agenerato rha s adesig n capacit y o f les s tha n 25 0 M M Btu/h ro f

fossil fue l hea tinput .

D-2 2 Georgia-Pacifi cCorp .

i n Plaquemine , la . (1-9-74 , Wilson ) Ca n IP A waiu e unti l si x munUi s afte rstartu p U e installatio n o f continuou s nonitor s forNO K c n astea u generator ? 60.4 5 N o Ti e regulation s d o no tprovid e amean s foe obtain - in g awaive rt o dela y th e installatio n o f require d continuou s monitors . However , U e reg s d o no t requir e tlta tti e monitor s b e installe d a tth e tin e o f startup . The y onl y requir e tha tth e nonitor s b e Installe d an d l n workin g orde rjus tprio rt o th e performanc e tes trequire d t y §60.8 . update ! Revised-Se e D-5 5
D-2 3 Unio n Gubld e Corp .

i n Siut h Charleston , W . Va . (2/4/74 , Wilson ) Dee s th e installatio n o f tw o o r mor e boilers , eac h ratu l a t<• ' 25 0 M M Utu/h rlu tUi e su m o f whic h ls > 25 0 M-

1 litu/hr , consti tut e oonstructio n withi n U e meanin g o f

NSI'S ? 60.4 0 N D Th e affecte d facilit y i s deflno ] a s eac h i n I t (boiler ) wit h arelate d desig n capacit y o f mor e tha n 25 0 M

M Btu/h rhea tinpu to f fossil fuel .

D-2 4 Anerlea

n Crysta l Suga

r to . I n Fargo , N.I) . (2-14-74 . Wilson ) S*i e a a1)2 3 San e u s D2 3 

# i

### uin ; itu-uuMct : 01I I iiV !<* , AFFU.*.1: »

1UUUATK M I *.TER MINATIO N DISCISSIO N

b-2 5 Uni m Carbid e Corp . i n

So . Charleston , W

. Va . 3/15/74 , Wilson ) Woul d afue l switc h trci n g a s t o oia l a tastea m generato rconstitut e a modification ? 60.2(h ) Condi - .I f th e stean i generato rwa s designe d t o accomodat e an d tiona l th e us e o f coa l a s a n alternativ e fue l prio rt o 60.4 0 6/17/71 , the n convertin g fra n ga s t o coa l woul d b e withi n th e exceptio n provide d i n 60.14(e)(4) .

l>-2 6 Ark . lowe rt vligh tOD . i n littl e Hxrk, Ark . (3-22-74 , Wilson ) Sam e a s 0 3 Sam e a s D 3

l>-2 7 Centra l Mait e lowe rCo .

i n Augusta , Me . (3/27/74 , Wilson ) San e a s 1) 4 San e a s D 4

D-2 8 H

e th i e l e m Stee l Unp . i n Uethleiein , Pa . (3/27/74 . Wilson ) I s th e IM- 4 Transmlssaiete r acceptabl e fo rnonitorin g opacit y a s re<|uiru l b y 4 0 CF H 60.45(a)(1) ? 60.4 5 Ccurii - Ti e instrumen twil l t e acceptatil e i f i tco n fam e tiona l wit h U e specification s o f 4 0 CF R60.45(b) . Ih e instrumen tmus tb e Installe d an i i n workin j orde r prio rt o th e perfonnanc e tes trequire d L y 4 0 O R 60.8 . Mor e detaile d speci f Ica tlot s ar e bein g (leve l opa l t y LP

A an d slDul d b e iropoeo i l n th e F.R . i n Apri l '74 . I ti s importan tt o note , Uta t onc e a n instrumen ti s found l o b e acceptabl e for a facility , thi s doe s no tguarante e tha tthi s typ u o f instrumen twil l l e approve d i n adifferen t a|ip l le ation. *

* Continuou s nonitorin g requiienuit s wer e revise d i n 4 0 l'l < 4l>25t)'o n 6 OjU4* r7 5

c oIMJI i HKFIKIMC K 

## itn-ar-uti AFltUTIJ ) KUJJIATKt N l*.TKR M1NATIO N DISCISSIO N

D-2 9 Burn s k

MclUtinel l fo r Ala . Ldectri c Co-op. , inc. , Artlalusia , Ala . (3-29-74 , Wilson ) Wil l ti e installatio n o f tw o ne wcoal-fire d loiter s a t t i e sit e o f

a n exlstiu j coat flrei l toile rbrin g ti e existiit j toile rwithi n ti e scci| e o f

aiplicabi l it y o f

NSI'S ? 60.4 0 N o Sectio n 60.4 0 define s th e affecte d facilit y a s eac h toiler . Th e applicabilit y i s cfetennino d lndeperklentl y foreac h boiler ; therefore , th e installatio n o f

ne wboiler s woul d in taffec tU e existin g boiler .

D-3 0 Wuyerlvaetise rCo . i n

Plymouth , N.C . (4-11-74 . Wilson ) I s ti e propose d Imggu l fue l boile rforWeyerliaeuser' s facilit y a tPlynouUi . N.C. , subjec tl o NSI'S ? 60.4 0 Ye s li e propose d boile rwil l h e fire d wit h mor e tha n 25 0 M l Btu/l rfossil fue l hea tInput . Th e logge d fue l doe s no tconstitut e fossi l fue l a s define d t y 60.41(h) . Therefore , complianc e wil l h e deter - mine d onl y o n th e amoun to f hea tan d combustio n e f f lie n t s adde d b y U e fossil fuel . lerfonnanc e test s shoul d b e conducte d wit h U e boile rcon sumin g 10 0 percen tfossil fue l a to rabov e U e norma l stea m productio n rate , bu tpreferabl y a t desig n capacity . Update s A revisio n o f NSPS subpar tD publishe d i n 4 1 F R5139 7 o n 2 2 Nov . 7 6 include s burnin g o f woo d residue s i n combinatio n wit h fossil fue l forus e a s adilutio n agen ti n complyin g wit h th e SO j standard . Al l standard s mus tl e co n filia l wit h whe n ainlxistin g Uii s aaiibinatio n o f fossil fue l ari l woo d waste .

D-3 1 Scot t Pape r Co . i n

Skowiiagen , Me . (4/11/74 , Wilson ) San e a s l)3 n Se e 03 0UJ* : Kl'aFI-aKlaNL'l . QUISTIO N AM-Hri>J ) KUUIIATKI M U.TI.K MINATIO N DISCISSIO N

l>-3 2 aiel l Oi l Co . i n WJC. 1

Rive r(6/27/74 ) Ca n IX'A gran teat exemptio n unti l May 30 , 1975 . fro m li e NSI' S fo rti e ne w Woo l Rive rKefiner y Boile r117 ? 60. 1 No .I ti s no twithi n th e authorit y o f ti e Administrato r (60.40 ) unde rSectio n 11 1 o f ti e Clea n Ai rAc tt o gran t variance s fra n complianc e wit h NSPS . 1 1 er e i s authorit y inde rSectio n 11 3 t o issu e a n enforce - men torde rrequirin g complianc e withi n aspecifie d period . This , l n effect , woul d allo w avarianc e fra n complianc e unt U suc h perio d expires . How ever , thi s sloul d b e use d onl y i n limite d circum stance s where , e.g. , th e overal l environmenta l impac twoul d b e beneficial . H i cu rjudgement , a n enforcemen torde rwa s no tjustifie d i n tlii s instance .
|)-3 3 Uetevois e fc leilerma n

fo rSa n Dieg o Ca s & Idertri cCunjian y (4/22/74 . Johnson ) Ar e NSI' S applicabl e t o acr<nl>inei l contiustio n turbir e au l stea m generatin g plant ? 60.4 0 No Ti e oanliustio n turbin e i s no ta n affecte d facilit y a s define ! b y $60.40 ; th e lea tinpu tt o U e stea m generato ri s 100 % effluen tfru n ti e oanliustio n turbin e wit h n o supplementa l fossi l fue l lea t input .

l>-3 4 mirylan d l*?werCo-op ,

Alm aWisconsi n Plan t (5/15/74 , Pratt . R-V ) ( a ) Whatilea|ro e o f sulfu rconten t60.0(c ) (maximum , minimum , iiilcnnoliate ) i n coa l woul d l e oonsiderui l representativ e cotilition s fo ra ferfotiikuic e lest ? (li ) Ca n FI'A delennin e viola tio n 60.0(f ) o f ti e SO 2 emission s u/e rli e |erio l o f

ayear ? CouJi tiona l

N o Perfonnanc e testin g vhll e turnin g ooa l wit h th e

maxiiiun exiiecto d sulfu rconten twoul d b e require d i n orde rt o assur e complianc e unde rU e wors t Possibl e conditions .

curren tregulation s dutennln e violatio n o f ti e emissio n standar d b y aperfonnane e tes tvliic h call s fo r3 consecutiv e samplin g run s o f approxl male l y 1 hou rthiratio n eai.li . lim aU e regulation s proviif e fu ran averagiir

j tim e o f

approximatel y 3 lours , lixi i samplin g run consist s o f 2 twent y minut e sample s take n a t3 0 m i nut e intervals .

T JCU* J RFFHatNC K
I)-3 4 (cont. ) (JtllaSTlO N AirO-TH ) RBGIJ1ATIO N l*.TKIt MlNATIO

N DISCUSSIO N
( c ) Can exces s emission s cause d b y variation s i n sulfu rconten t o f fue l l e considere d amalfunc tion ? 60.2(q ) N o Thi s situatio n coul d no tb e considere d a"sudde n an d unavoidabl e failure " since , unde rnoa tcir - cumstances , exces s sulfu rconten ti s foreseeabl e base d upo n fie l analyses . Ti e technolog y exist s t o blen d variou s type s o f fuel s i n orde rt o assur e conpllanc e wit h th e SO j standard .

l>-3 5 interna l Memorandum

(Wilso n l o Jot m lOyle , R-Vl , 6/12/74 ) (a ) Sam e a s D-1 0 (a )
(b ) Ho w woul d th e NO xemissio n tes tb e ccmluctu l fo rtw o stea m toiler s (fossi l fue l iru.ai tan d carbo n blac kv*»st e off-ga s input ) whic h ven tt o acciiuio n stack ? 60.4 5 

### Condi tiona l Se e O-10(a )



### Sinc e th e tw o subjec tholler s eac h hav e afossil fue l potentia l o f

greate rtha n 25 0 U

M Btu/h ran d bot h ven tt o acommo n stack , i ti s acceptabl e t o onl y tes tNC

L emission s fra n th e on e stac kwit h t i e toiler s fire d wit h 100 % fossi l fue l a tUei r desig n oapacity .
D-3 6 Interna l Menoraulu m (Wilso n t o CDnra

d Simu i 6/25/74 ) Ar e stea m generato rifiit s usin g WO-Fllttl , atxmiercia l fue l manufacture d fro

m so l i d waste , a s aprimar y fue l subjec tt o NTiP S fo rfossil fuel-firu l stea m generator s o rincinerators ? Suhiart s Condi - Sinc e HCO-Flt X doc s no tcontai n icn-canbu s tibles , H i ttiona l i tcanno th e considere d asoli d wast e an d thu s thes e unit s wil l no tfal l .ride rU e NSI' S for incinerators . Eve

n thoug h UUD-KtJI-:i

, whic h i s no t afossil fuel , i s U e primar y fie l bein g burned , thes o source s ma

y b e subjec tt o ti e fCI S fo r fossi l fuel-fire d stea m generator s i f Ue y ar e deslgne ! t o burn greate rtha n 25 0 hH Btu/hr . o f fossi l fie l lea tinput .



# Jr

### (..»* : iti.iM.KNCi- : UIKITItW

D-1 7 Souther n Illinoi s IViwe r

('ixip-'rativ e (B/lti/74 , Ouarlcs ) I s astea m generato rwhii h burn s 50 » coa l an d SO * coa l iodis e subjec tl o NSI'S ? AFI«riH ) RHtailATIO

N
60.4 2 60.4 3 60.4 4 l*rrHt MINATlO N
Yes ; Howeve r DISCISSIO N

60.4 4 wa s revise d o n Januar y 16 , 1975 , t o exemp t fra n U e N0

_

standar d an y uni twhic h burn s a soli d fossi l fue l containin g 25% , l y weight , o r mor e o f coa l refuse .

D-J 8 Shel l Oi l CcxHpai. y

(9/27/74 , McDonald , Regio n V ) (a ) Can on e sampl e lo rHO-^ l>e a s 60.46(d ) I o n j an 7( 1 minutes ? (b ) Wlkitconstitute s acomplet e 60.46(d ) samplin g ru n fo rSO2 ?

(c ) Ho wi s cctnp l ianc e determined ? 60.8(f ) Ye s 60.46(d ) require s aminimu m samplin g tim e o f 2 0 minutes . I tdoe s no tspecif y amaximu m time . A complet e samplin g ru n require s tw o sample s take n a tapproximatel y 3 0 minut e intervals . Ti e tota l elapse d tim e fo ron e rt n unde rth e condi tion s suggeste d b y th e compan y woul d b e 17 0 minute s (7000+70) . Eac h performanc e tes tfo rcomplianc e wil l requir e thre e separat e runs . Complianc e wil l Uie n L e determine d o n ti e basi s o f ti e aritluneti cmea n o f U e Uire e runs .

D-3 9 Wisconsi n Electri cPowe r

Co . (Wilson , 12/13/74 ) Sam e a s b- 4 Se e D- 4

D--4I I Interna l Mniorandi m (W i Iso n l o Doyle , Regio n VI , 4/11/75 ) (a ) Shel l (.'hemica l Company ir . installin g anatura l gas/p i tch firu l stoii n general0 1 . I s p i til l lo.ssi l fuel ? 60.41(b ) N O Pit0) 1 i s aby-produc ti n Shell' s olefin s proces s

am i i ti s no tderive d forli e purpos e o f creatin g usefu l leat . (b ) Ho w shoul d l U |c r1 10 1 malic e test s U ; coitluctt.il ? 60.1 1 60.4 6 Ih e tni tsloul d b e fire d wit h 100 % natura l gas . l i e propose d samplin g locatio n i s adequat e fo r gaseous..sampling . fml y cin e samplin g fnin ti s necessar y lo rN0 XfcOrsa tsampling . Ti e s^flipliiL ) poin t cenlroid . i n ti e duc tshal l l e a tth e



## * .

_ "

### corn : I.IJ'IJ.KNC. : OtttSTIO N

D-4 0 (coll i . ) AFFUCTO ) KUJUIATIO N DbTKR MINAT1C N DISCUSSIO N


### (c ) Ma y ti e followiu j perfonnanc e test s l e wuivel i 1 . A waive ro n U e determinatio n o f Btac kga s velocit y au J volu metri cflo wrat e (Method 2 ) ai d i n lie u calculat e U e flu e ga s flo w usir g amas s air l lea tbalanc e o n th e stea m generator . 2 . A waive ro n U e detenuinatio n o f nolsLur e i n ti e stac kga s (MeUrx l 4 ) and insteai l us e o f Orsa t (Mctlio d 3 ) plu s li e ixii|xjta l pro duct s o f cxutxistion , lese d c n e n ultimat e fue l analysi s and leatin g value , t o detemiii e iioisture . 3 . A waive ron ti e deteiminatio n o f {articulat e emission s (Method 5) . 4 . A waive ro n ti e deteiminatio n o f sulfu rdioxid e unission s (MeUiod 6) . 5 . A waive ro n U e visua l deler ininatio n o f

ti e opacit y o f

ti e emission s (Metlo d 9) . (SO.8(b ) Ye s

Ye s

Ye s

.e s


### Uuiecea - Metho

d 9 i s no taperformanc e test , sar y


# I JUO L KI:I-|]<II*I : IUKSTION AI-M-X-'IH I RiXJIIATIO

N
l»-4 l Publi cServic e Commis sion , Stat e o f

N.Y . (Wibsiin , 2/19/75 ) Ca n KP A gran tasuspensi m unde r NSI' S fo rinstallatio n o f adr y flu e ga s desulfurinatio n syste m sinc e i tha s to tbee n cilctpialcl y demonstrate d o n alul l scal e productio n mil ? 60.4 0 DM1-.U MINATIC N
N o DISCUSSIO N

KP A doe s no thav e autlorit y unde rSectio n U l t o susfen d NSP S unde ran y circumstances . Ade quatel y demonstrate d technolog y i s availabl e t o achiev e U e standards . Update : li e Clea n Ai rAc tAmendment s o f 197 7 adde d Slll(j) , whic h provide s autlorit y t o waiv e NSPS t o encourag e U e us e o f a n innovativ e techno logica l syste m o rsystem s o f continuou s emissio n reduction , li e waive rshal l no texten d beyon d eitle r1 ) seve n year s afte rti cwaive ri s grante d o r2 ) fou ryear s afte rU e dat e U e sourc e com mence s operation , whicheve ri s earlier .

D-4 2 Indianapoli s lowe rI

Ligh tCo . (McDonald , Regio n V , 5/16/75 ) Same s a s D-4 1 Se cD-4 1

D-4 3 Centra l Illinoi s Publi c

Servic e Co . (U/29/75 , Itsjro ) Can on e o rmor e modula rcontro l unit s l e installe d a tadat e Ityou l achievemen to f inaxin.in i pe tforma l ic e ? 60.4 3 N o Sinc e tler e i s n o evidenc e o f force s beyon d ti e contro l o f

th e sourc e owne rpreventin g timel y com pliance , U e entir e facilit y mus tmee tti e require - ment s o f

60.4 3 i n th e nenne rprescribe d b y 60.8 .

D-4 4 Ooonjia-Paci ti c

(7/9/7'j ) At e autianoh i l e tire s use d a s a supplemen tai y ltie l considere d a fossi l liei. ' b0.41(b ) N o Ant<mobil e tire s ar e no tproduce d Co rU e purixjs e o f creatin g usefu l leat .

D-4 5 Sliel l ClK.inica l Co .

(6/i/7!> ) I s pil<l i al.issi l fuel ? I s afacilit y luniijii j pitc h ai« i naluia l ga s subjec th i lie opacit y slaitlaid ? 60.41(b ) N o bO.42(a)(2 ) N o 

### Pi Id ) i s no tproduce d fo rti e purpos e o f creatin g usefu l leat . Clearly , ai y visibl e emission s woul d no tb e di e t o txmbustio n o f

natura l gas .CUH i RKKKNINC K (.HFSTKI N AFFK'll-3 ) KHJMIATIt* . i*:n:ia MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N

l)-4 b luste rWUrelc l (V28/75 ,

Stevens ) An. 1 Mni.ssioia S lii m <iu l ci»n Ixcitio n whic h i s mce:.:;ai y t o u|urat e atoile remission s contro l devic e subjec tt o Subpar tI) ? 60.4 2 60.4 3 No I'rovidin j nean s exis tto identit y an i measur e boile r(mission s separately , onl y U e stea m generato remission s ar e subject .

D-4 7 I . Ite rt o (Jul f Oi l Chemical s Co . ((! . Steven s l o F . lleriy ) 12/29/7 5 I s a n C>2 o rCO j nirmito rfo r flu e gase s requite d i.-ven whim r o othe rcontinuou s monitorin g system s ar e require d unle tNSPS ? 60.45(d ) N o Ti e inten to f th e o f

U e regulatio n i s t o requir e 0 3 o rCO-

> analyzer s forth e |urpos e o f convertin g pollutan temission s int o prope r writ s fo rcompariso n wit h U e {appropriat e stan dards . Ilerefore , O j an d CO j monitor s ar e no t require d vlie n continuou s monitor s forSOj an d M> > ar e no trequired .

D-4 U lette r(H . Heal s l o

D . lla/ele ) 1/12/7 6 ( a ) Shoul d ti e llt u attributio n an d subsequen tN " , H>t, an d particulatc - emission s tri m a flu e ga s relea tsyste m whic h conplemcnt s aFlu e Ca s IX;sul luriza l io n syste m lx_ - considere d i n determinin g onnp l ianc e wit h NSI'S ? Sulipai t D N o Sinc e U e fossil fue l use d forU e relea tsyste m i s no ttoe d t o generat e steam' , it s Bt u contri butio n i s no tconsidere d i n determinin g complianc e wit h NSPS .

(b ) Shoul d N

O , .JV , an d par ticu l all. - emission s fr< m suc h an-liea tsyste m l e < i >nsii.e i <x

l i n deteiininiin j Mil' S ctinp l iance ? 60.4 6 Condi - K m 1 ssion s test s na y b e conducte d eithe rl y no t 60.11(b ) tiona l heatiir j ti e fue l o ri n sem e othe rmanne raccepta - bl e t o th e Administrator .

O l

## cun ; lll-l-'UCHNC K C XIKS-HU N

b-4 9 letter , (U . Steven s t o

(Jtule s lauer ) 3/4/7 6 AFFUCTKI ) K1IJIIAT1U N I*:II:R M l NA TIO N DISCUSSIO N

a ) Iti wd o NSP S afipl y t o stea m generator s firin g a combinatio n o feithe r fossi l fuel , municipa l waste , ai« l wocx l wast e materials , o r nuniciria l wast e an . wood-wast e material s exclusively ? Sulxpart s D I E .I fa stea n generato r i s burnin g a conblnatio n o f fossi l fie l an d mnlcipa l o r woo d wast e materials , i t i s subjec t t o Subpar t D i fi t i s designe d t o bur n greate r tlia n 25 0 mUlio n Bt u pe r lou r o f fossi l fue l hea t input . Sinc e ti e wast e material s a r e in t fosBil fuels , a s define d b y 60.41(b) , th e perfbrmanc e tes t woul d liav e t o b e conducte d wit h th e ini t burnin g 100 % fossi l fuel . Stea m genera tor s designe d t o bur n municipa l wastt e o r woo d wast e material s exclusivel y ar e no t subjec t t o Subpar t D ; however , i fa municipa l wast e stea m generato r I s burnin g mor e tha n 5 0 ton s pe r da y o f soli d waste , a s define d b y 60.51(b) , the n I t i s subjec t t o NSP S for Incinerator s (Sulxpar t E) . update i A revisio n o ft*»P S Subpar t D publishe d i n 4 1 F R 5139 7 o n Novenbs r 22 , 197 6 include s turnin g o fwoo l residue s i n combinatio n wit h fossi l fue l for us e aa

a dilutio n agen t i n complyin g wit h th e SO j standard . A l 1 standard s mus t b e conp l le d wit h whe n ccntxistir g thi s couhinatic n o ffossi l fue l an d woo d waste . b ) Wha t I s ti e definitio n o f fossi l fiel ?

c ) D o NSP S limi t gaseou s emis sion s o fannu l ia , S^ ' o r organi c oinjound s fro m t o I i d URist e incinerators ? 60.41(b )

Sulipar t KIs b Fossi l fue l mean s natura l gas , petroleum , coal , aii l an y form o fsolid , liquid , or gaseou s fue l derive l fra n suc h material s for th e purpos e o f creatin g usefu l heat' .

D-5 0 lette r (T . Harriso n t o

Jone s an d SewelI ) 3/8/7 6 Sam e a s l>- 3 Se e D- 3tXlH i

D-5 1 KIl'KKIN-.'l- : ( J «-STU N

Mui o (R . Wilso n t o I) . Hansen ) 5/10/7 6 AI-rUL-IU ) RIU.II A T K M M1NATK N DISCUSSIO N

a ) Same a s D-l1(c )

b ) I f lo wsillfu i fue l i s use d t o compl y wit h ti e SO2 standard , ait l fue l analysi s i s U6u l fo r monitoring , i s agra b sampl e analysi s o f

eac h loa d o f

fue l sufficien tt o mee tU e nonitorin g requirements ? 60.4 5 (b)(2 ) Se e D- l 1(c ) - .I f th e generato rwa s modifi.i l s o Uia ti twoul d b e incapabl e o f operatin g i n exces s o f 25 0 mi l lie n Utu/lour , tle i I twoul d no tb e sub jec tt o NSI'S . Sinc e thi s sectio n o f th e regulatio n i s currentl y lelr q reviail , w e canno tspecificall y detennln e th e frequenc y o f

analysi s a tthi s tine . Thi s metho d seem s appropriat e a s a n interi m measure .

l > 5 2 lette r(D . Goodwi n t o

W . Killer ) 3/24/7 6 Same a s D-51(a ) Se e D-51(a )

D-5 3 lette r(R . Wilso n t o

M . Reilly ) 4/1/7 6 I s aoial/oi l slurr y aonibina tio n fossi l fuel ? 60.43(b ) Ye s Th e SO ? an d NO, , emissio n limit s wuul d var y 60.44(b ) dependin g upo n th e % o f hea tinpu tderiva l fro m eac h o f U e fuel s (coa l L oil) .

D-5 4 Men o (R . Wilso n l o

T . Iturison ) 4/7/7 6 Sin e a s D— 3 Se e D- 3

D-5 5 Men o (R . Wilso n t o

laegion s 1-X ) 4/15/7 6 Ma y asourc e vjKis e r*> xnimi - 60.13(b ) loriu j I'txpiiruiiui ti s contitrjen l 60.45(c ) uix m (l e result s o f ti e |e i fonitiiK- e CO. 8 tes tb e nlbiwo l ii)

> I n 1. nonlh s 60.4 4 afte rti e |c i loniaimi. ' tes ti s cioduclo l l«-foi e insbi l I in g suc h e < juipmiji l ? Ye s Ti e regulation s wil l b e re v 1 so l accordingly .



# _ TP.4 8



# s

§ 5



### 5



# 'i , J O ) a a J i g XJ iz i) 

### 5 

### (B' 3 

### tytSF I JS 

### u s XJ 2 * 

## •HSJ J

Ik l j - 

### t ! > S 3 1 V 

### J S 

# J i u s *J j J : 3

—* S • w < 0 O



## . 51

S ~

5
•7 1 i 

# I J C o . 

# 1 = 5

• 5 aZ ri S fl

• . 5

u j r . 6--a .

—« T 

### 5 9

XJ a 

## * 3
X 

## 8

£

J l aJ M »

41 £" • •

- wW

i n J

. 

## - ait

3*18 5
• a • ' - « a 5 a * - n

0 a » j 2 " ^ 

## ii«oS- =

J j j g
( 3 —^ a 

# 3 i |

tw 0 1 - . 

# - I * i i c3 c s i n 

## • 8

u > ,



## Std * = = * $ tf i * e

### » < A L . i i ^a ) 

### < o o rn SS I S. a



# s s i 

# p ^

" fl • - a

- i * * " 

### J C J

- 5 ) f i • - 'J M 

### C - i —= Z 3

5 

### * 3 ^ 

### 5 ° & >

. J L i 

### I * 

### 2 r
3UOI- : KKI-'lvKKNCi :

b-t> l lette rt o IXJ W (O . Livel y U i Itiund s an d llaigre ) 9/JI1/7 6 (MII-liiTU M

Sam e a s D- 3 

### Airnrnr n 1.1X21 1 ATHlN rxja"iH« - MINATKl N DISCUSSION

Se e D- 3

b-6 2 lette rl o W.A . Hira i

Associate s (C . Steven s t o M . Tanaka ) 10/13/7 6 Dee s ti e odditic n o l nuuiici|>u i wast e a s fie l l o a n existin g bagasse

—fue l oil-fire d stea m generato rbrin g U e generato r unde rNSI'S , wle n bagass e wil l continu e t o l e greate rUia n 511 % o f ti e wast e bein g consi«ne d an d als o contribut e greate rtlia n 50 * o f ti e tota l energ y input ? 60.51(b ) N o H e additio n o f combustibl e material s othe rtlia n 60.4 0 fossi l fuel s doe s no tbrin g U e tni taide rNSI'S ; furthermore , sinc e ti e soli d wast e consume d i n th e boile rwoul d b e les s Uia n 50 % municipa l typ e waste , ti e uni twoul d no tb e subjec tt o NSI' S fo r incinerators .

l>-6 3 lette rt o Knviiimnienta l

Dat aCorp . (It . Wilso n t o II . lord ) 1/19/7 6 Ma y OT> 2 continuou s nuiitnrin g equipmen tl e installu l tkiwn st.rea m o f

awe tlimeston e SCIUUAJ I destilfuriztiti m unit ? 60.4 5 Ye s A 1 % increas e i n th e F cfacto ri s require d whe n limeston e scrubbin g i s utilized . Ti e regulation s wil l b e amende d accordingly .

D-6 4 lette rt o linjar e Butt e

lileclri cCorp - ( I . bic-kslei u t o K. Vig ) 3/16/7 6 Ma y (ri ^ oontiuuou s nonitorim j equipmen tla : in.-.Ui l In l dnwnstiea m o f afl y as h 1 1 in - <|.i s dcsulfuti zatio n mil ? 60.4 5 Ye s A I tincreas e i n th e t'c facto ri s required .

### cu* : KH-'HaKNCT :

11-6 5 Mtii o (Ij. Steven s t o Katz )

9/30/7 6 Utl|i>-|:l( M AlFUCILl ) KtXJUIATK N u;ri:it MINATK N DISCUSSIO N

IX > NSI' S apj>l y t o tw o fossi l fuel - fire d stea m generator s Uia t hav e a ooiiiiu n stack , vJie n eac h generato r i s ilesignu l t o Uir n les s Uia n 25 0 n m Dtii/lmir . le t tojetle r Ue y Inr n greate r Uia n 25 0 n m Btu/linur ? 60.4 0 60.41(a ) N o

l>-6 6 Mui o (U . Steven s t o

D . Santella ) 10/1/7 6 San e a s D-3 6 Sam e a s D-36 , Plu s Shoul d U e non-oanbustible s no tb e renewe d prio r t o burning , NSI' S for incinerator s ma y apply .

D-6 7 Mu m (lieii h t o

I . Stevenson ) 11/15/7 6 l a U e iroratio n equatio n whic h wa s originall y pro m 1 1 gate d (Dec . 23 . 1971 ) unde r §60.43(c ) stil l valid ? 60.43(c ) M o Th e equatio n wa s revise d t o allo wa n owner/cperato r t o us e natura l ga s I n conjunctio n wit h non oanplyin g oi l o r coa l t o mee t th e standard .

l>-6 n Men o (leld i t o O . lively )

11/24/7 6 Ca n a n existin g fossi l fuel-fire d stea m generator , whic h wu s luou<jli t uitle r NSI' S di e t/ i a conversio n fro m natura l <ja s l o oil , ounver t I lac k t o ga s an i m t l e subjec t t o NSI'S ? 60. 1 N D Eve n afte r reconversio n t o ga s ti e sourc e stil l fall s tnde r U e NSI' S definitio n o f applicability .

l>-6 9 Mui o (leic h t o

O . lively ) 12/29/7 6 WTU M a wast e lea t recover y Ulile r foi l iikle r NSI' S fo r fossi l fuel-tiru l stea m geneialois ? 60.41(a ) N o A wast e hea t recover y boile r doc s no t fi t th e definitio n o fa fossil fuel-fire d stea m generator .

O l o

## tun
. itij'ijtiiMCt : UMSiMt N AIVU-TL D R1GIIIATIO N i»;it:B MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N

l>-7 0 Mai o (Uitd i t o Ai r

I)KJInfee i in g Branc h thief . Ke

g io n IV ) 1/12/7 7 Ma y afossi l fuel-fire d stea m generato rviiic h use s aBui«ple nenldr y non-fossi l fue l oile r tlia n wood wast e fie l l e allowe d t o hav e ti e lea tinpu to f ti e supplementar y non-fossi l fue l include d fordeterminin g complianc e wiU i NSI'S ? 60.4 5 No Srhpar tD ha s n o provision s forallowin g th e hea t (f)(6 ) input s frcni non-fossi l fi e l aothe rUia n woo d resIdi e fuel s t o t e Include d fordeterminin g con p i iance . fic h agenerato rmus tfir e onl y fossil fue l (ai d woo l residue ) durin g performanc e tests .

D-7 1 Mem

o t o H-1 V (fc . Heid i t o T . Oibbs ) 2/10/7 7 I s acumhinatio n woo l residue / fossi l foel-fired stea m generator , whic h consume s greate rtlia n 25 0 m n Btu/lir . o f

fossi l fte l hea tInpi t onl y durin g almomia l operation s causei ] l y mal fiuictio n o f li e fue l feedin g system , subjei.- tl o NSI'S ? 60.4 0 Tfes Ti e uni tha s adesig n capacit y o f greate rtha n (a)(2 ) 25 0 tu n Btu/hr . o f

fossil fue l hea tinpu tan d i s therefor e subjec tt o NSPS , Subpar tD .

D-7 2 lette rl n U-X

(11 . Ituise u t o R . Mikkelseii ) 3/4/7 7 I f thre e fossi l fuel-fire d stea m generator s exhaus tt o aplenu m an i tha i t o adua l fli e stack , wil l armllnunu s min i tillin g system s l e necessar y fo rlot h flues ? 60.4 5 Condi - Sinc e th e pleru n i s ver y smal l ai d wil l no tpro tiona l vid e adequat e mixin g t o assur e identica l ga s

canposltic n i n bot h flues , i twil l b e necessar y t o instal l opacity , NX\. an d 003/0 2 monitorin g equipmen ti n bot h flues . Dua l continuou s monitor s forSOj ar e nu trequire d sinc e littl e fluctua - t e expecte d i n th e SO 2 concentratio n o f exhaus t gase s becaus e th e fue l use d t o fir e eac h generato r i s draw n fro n acanno n supply .

l>-7 3 Men o t o K-V I I I f a n affecte d facilit y elect s (I-: . Ifcic h t o f. Urlver ) l o nuiilo r^i 2l> y fie l samplin g 5/3/7 7 an i analysi s unde rsec tio n 60.4 5 (b)(2) , i s i tlofiire d t n 11m duc tt> m 11 samplin g al . thi s line ? 60.4 5 (d ) N o Sinc e sectio n 60.45(d ) i s no w reserve d i n U e regulations , th e facility I s no trequire d t o conduc tsamplin g an d analysi s a tthi s time . Ih e regulation s ar e expecte d t o b e uiervle d soon .

T l O lU1J K I<I>H<II*.I : <jtn
*i!K» i 

### Ai-vucn-j )

RIGUIATJCI

M DLTKR MINATIC N DISCUSSIO N

l>-7 4 Men o t o R-V l (K . Reic h

t o II . Bergman ) 5/5/7 7 San e a s D- l Se e D- l

l>-7 5 lette rt o Ni*M A (E . Reic h t o J . Greoo ) 5/9/7 7 a ) I s a n existin g fossi l fuel - 60.40(b ) fire d stea m generato rvliic h i s nolifle d t o bu m les s tlia n o r equa l t o 5t) T/da y o f soli d wast e subjec tt o NSI'S ? b ) I s a n existin g fossil fiel - 60.5 0 fire d stea m generato rwhic h i s mallfle< l t o tur n greate rtita n S O T/da y o f

so l i d wast e subjec t t o NSI'S ? N o

Condi tiona l "An

y chang e t o a n existin g fossi l fuel-fire d stea m generatin g uni tt o accomodat e U e us e o f combustibl e materials , oilie rtita n foss U fuel s a s define d i n thi s aiopart , shal l no tbrin g Uia t uni tunde rU e applicabilit y o f thi s subpart. " Suc h a tni tna y b e subjec tt o NSP S fornu.icipa r incinerators , dependin g upo n it s deslig n an ] operatin g conditions .

c ) Same a s D-4 9 d ) San e a B D-4 9
e ) San e a s D-ll(b ) S e e D-4 9 S e e D-4 9 S e e D- l 1(b )

l>-7 6 lette rt o D . Anderso n

fro m G . SIeven s 3/24/7 7 l> > liy-produc tblaa l furnac e gas , liy-prolm tta rtn m cok e oven s an d ly-produc l ixik e ive n ga s constitut e fossi l fi e I s a s define d t y $CO.41(b) ? 60.41(b ) N o The y ar e tu tderivo l forth e purpos e o f creatin g usefu l leat .

l>-7 7 lette rt o Sirrii e U) .

(T . Gili. s t o II . Stokes ) 5/16/7 7 Mia tsU.il. l l e li e lei>jll i o f fi e lea k<ia_ialiiK | rat e lo raluilcr ? O e t o fou rhours .

O l r ocii* : lUJ-llttNC K Gill-STU N AITHLTM

. RKIIIATIO N U-TKR MINATIO

N DISCUS S K M

IV7U Mui o t o K-V1 I (E . Ifclil i t o

It . Markey ) G/29/7 7 Ifc w i s uoot-blowii y l o l e inclmle. 1 i n rerfonikinc e test s fo rfossi l fuel-fiii* i stea m generator s vJiic h liav e ion - co n tirmoua , non-aulciiiati c uoot-blowing ? 60. 8 Unit s whic h d o no tblow soo tcontinuousl y mus t have U e effec to f soot-blowin g include d l y performanc

e testin g i n th e norma l manner

, provide d Uiatth e following precaution s ar e taken i 1 ) soot blowin g i s permitte d onl y durin g on e o f th e tes t runs , 2 ) thi s soot-blowin g i s representativ e o f th e plant' s typica l cycle , and 3 ) th e tes tru n i n whic h th e soot-blowin g occur s i s properl y weighte d wtit n averagin g with th e othe rtw o tes triais . Th

e soot-blowin g performanc e tes tru

n shoul d includ e a s muc h o f th e soot-blowin g cycl e a s possible . Th e weigh to f

th e soot-blowin g performanc e tes t ru i ma y b e determined t y th a following generalize d equation . Thi s equatio n insure s prope rweightin g o f a eoot-blowin g performanc e tes tru

n regardles s o f vhethe rth e soot-blowin g last s th e entir e tim e o f th e tes trin , an d als o regardles s o f th e ixinte r an d duratio n o f

th e no

n soot-blowin g tes truns mad a whil e performanc e testin g a fossi l fuel-fire d stea m generator . W - ST/(AR-S0) WHER E R- th e averag e nuttie ro f hour s o f operatio n pe r2

4 hou rday . S - tli e averag e rembero f hour s o f eoot-blowln

j operatio n pe r2 4 hou r day . T » th e tota l tes ttim e o f U e no

n soot blowing perfonnanc e tes trun s (lours) . A < = fi e time spen tblowin g soo tdurin g th e soot-blowin g perfbnnance tes t ri n (lours) . B = th e time spen tno tblowin g sxj t durin g ti e soot-blowin g performanc e les tm n (hours) .

## cu* : RU-UalM E

I1-7 U oon't . UUI-STX* . A1VUCI W IttrjIIIATIO N DETEKMINATIG N DISCISSIO N
Multipl y ti e soot-blowin g tes tru i L y W befor e talkin g U e arithmeti cnea n o f U e porfonnanc e tes trun s a s require d l y Sectio n 60.8 ( f) . Ihi s determinatio n ha s bee n revise ] an i ca n h e foun d a tD-88 .

D-7 9 Mui o t o R- V (E . teich t o

1 . Gross ) 10/7/7 7 I s permanen tderatin g o f stea m generator s an acceptabl e metlio d o f avoidin g ftpplicahilit y t o NSPS , Sill-par tU ? Subpar tD teaTh e deratin g nus tb e acconpliBho d througl i a permanen tphysica l chang e I D th e affecte d facilit y vJiic h wil l preclul e i tfran operatin g a taoapa - ,'• ' cit y greate rUia n th e derate d value .

l>-0 0 Men o t o R-V I (E . Neid i

t o II . Bergman ) 12/13/7 7 I tawslioul' l th e conflic tletwee n 60.4 2 t i e stea m generato ropacit y (a)(2) , stai n lar d an d IJ' A referenc e (g)(1 ) iieUm d 9 , U Knean s t o (Liter - Ref . MeUi . min e opacity , b e resolved ? 9 Th e stea m generato ropacit y standar d wa s anenda d o n Dec . 5 , 1977 , t o allo won e si x minut e perio d fe rliou ro f

no tmor e tha n 27

% opacity .

D-U l Mui o I O R-I V (E . K_-icl i l o T . Gibt.s ) 11/1/7 7 Wil l aIxjile rvJiic h turn s a c-uiliin.i l iot i o f

wtx.il waste , &|eu t sulfit e I i triot , an i oil , t e subjec tt o NSI'S ? Subpar tD tes Th e toller rfonld b e performanc e teste d whil e firin g arepresentativ e combinatio n o f fossi l fue l an d woo d wast e a to raliov e U e norma l cpera tin g rate , Ixi tpreferabl y a tdeslcy i capacity .

D-0 2 Muno l o H-1 V (E . keid i t o

II . Uisebio ) I/9/7 U I s asleai m generato rwlii.t i lairn s 11X1 % Mfj l lu^i.ln e subjec tt o NSI'S , fiil^n tI) ? 60.4 0 l\r> unit s wlild i bur n 100 % woo d residu e d o no tfi tti e definitio n o f

affecte d facilit y i n Sectio n 60.40 .UJ* : Kn-'EHEM.' E

l>-U 3 Mui o l o R-I V (E . Reid i t o B . reals ) 2/2H/7 B (jUKSTIti N AEm.'1'El i

RIUIIATKM I*:IT:R M l NA TKI M DISCI ES1U N

Wha ts|ec i fi e change s t o a fossi l fiel-firu l stea m generatr cwiel d insur e tha t deratin g i s acecnip l ishe d througj i arennanen tphysica l diarig e Uia tpreclule s opera t i m a tacapacit y greate r Uia n U e derate d valie ? SUlipar tI ) I n thi s case , wlier e ne w loite rfan s whos e maxl na m cwpacit y i s lelo w 25 0 n m Btu/lir . ar e bein g insta l la] , IvPf

tshoul d b e sen tacop y o f engi neerin g calculation s showin g th e tota l ga s flo w correspondin g t o les s tha n 25 0 m n Btu/hr . an ) a fa n curv e fra n th e Ca n manufacture rstowin g th e maxlnu n capacit y o f th e fa n t o l e les s Uia n th e ga s flo w correspondin g t o 25 0 mn Utu/lr .

l>-8 4 Mui o l o R-I V (E . t-teic h

t o .1 . Sargent ) 4/29/7 6 Ma y ane w stea m generato rwhic h wil l Ixi m lo w su l fu rcoa l t o achiev e ciinp ] lanc e wit h NSI'S , tur n higl i su l fu rcoa l fra n th e tin e o f startu p inti l ti e tin e perfotinann e test s ar e required ? 60.11(d ) N o Sectio n 60.11(d ) state s tha ta tal l times , includin g period s o f startup , shutdown , an ! mal function , owner s an d operator s shall , t o U e exten tpracticable , maintai n an ! operat e an y affecte d facilit y Includin g associate d ai rpol lutio n contro l equipmen ti n amanne rconsisten t wit h goo d ai rpollutio n contro l practic e for mlnimizin j auissions .

l>-8 5 Men u t o R-V I (E . fteic h

t o A . Harrison ) 3/3/7 7 foe s |yrolysi s fue l oi l con stitut e fossi l fuel ? 60.41(b ) No , .I f ane w stea m generato rwhic h turn s pyrolysi s toweve rfue l oi l i s designs ) t o bur n nor e tlia n 25 0 n m Btu / h r . o f fossil fiel , the n i twil l b e subjec tt o NSPS , subfiar tD , an ) alcul d l e performanc e teste d whil e turnin g 100 8 fossi l fue l a to ralov e norma l stea n productio n rate , hu tpreferabl y a tdesig n capacity .

D-0 6 Mui o l o R- l I I (E . lelcl l

t o S . Wassersug ) 9/6/7 0 Ma y fiiirticijlat e maile rait l S<v » 60. 0 | e i fonnauo e test s l e waivo I fo r(b)(4 ) astea m .eneial.o i vJiii. h wil l I ur n 1 2 fue l oil ? Ve s Uicotitrolle d enission s ar e wel l belo w th e stan dard . Ti e facilit y I s subjec tt o continuou s monitorin g tha twil l in l ica te exces s enlssions , an i fue l analysi s ma y b e require d a tai y tin e t o assur e onnp l ianc e wit h U e stanlard . 'H e sourc e i s requir e I l o notif y UV \ immediatel y i f

i t KW!tele s t o adirtie rfie l vhic h na y liav e U e potentia l t o excee d ti e standanl .

O l O l

### tun :

IV11 7 ItEKERENCE I»IE..TII H AIKECTK D 

### ittxajiAi'ior i

Menu i nR-VI l (P . Culve r t o file ) 9/25/7 0 Doe s ho i lout , i.e. , th e firs t firin g o l a le

w stea m generato r t o remov

e oil s ali

i s o i nthat woul d otlerwis e hinde r stea m generation , constitut e startup ? 

## 60. 2 

## (o ) m-.Ti.ia MINATJG N
N o DISCUSSIO N

Dollou t i s a pre-startq p procedur e ar d shuul d no t L e considere d t o b e par t o f sourc e startup .

D-8 U Men o t o Region s (frc m

E . Iteich ) 3/6/7 9 Se e D-7 B 6 0 . ti Unit s wliid i d o no t blo wsoo t continuousl y ma y hav e U e effec t o f soo t blowin g include d L y performanc e testin g i n th e norma l manner , provided : 1 ) soo t blowin g i s permitte d onl y durin g on e o f th e tes t run s (i f greate r tha n 50 % c f particulat e emission s occu r durin g sno t blowin g periods , Ue n soo t blowirr j shoul d b e require d durin g 2 tes t runs) , an d 2 ) U e soo t blowin g performanc e bes t m n shoul d includ e a s mud i o f th e soo t blowirr j cycl e a s possible . Mie n a star t duratio n soo t blowin g perio d limit s th e numbe r o f point s whid i wil l h e sample d durin g U e portio n o f th e tes t ru n tha t t i e soo t blower s ar e on , the n al l o f th e samplin g point s lyin g o n a t leas t on e stac k o r duc t dia - mete r slioul d b e sample d whil e ti c scxi t blower s ar e o n , i f possible . Th e representativ e averag e poind s o f particulat e imission s pe r millio n Bt u (E ) mus t h e calculate d b y li e lollowin j gereralize d equatio n rathe r Uia n l y simpl e averagin j a s outline d i n 4 0 CI H 60.8(f )


### E = E (AjOLJ ? + E 

### i!t"J ? .'SI R ~AR NIJH J R BS ) A R 

### where : E = |xxind s o f particulat e emission s pu r millio n Bt u lea t inpu t (lb/nt n Dil i o r ng/.l )

0 1

### o n : RU'ERINC E Ot'i^niii N AH-TITI'l-J ) RtUUIATK N DETER MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N

D-B 8 (emit. ) E = averag e E fordail y operatin g tim e E = averag e E o f sample(s ) containin g soo tblowin g SBR E = • averag e E o f

sample(s ) wit h n o soo tblowin g NOS1 1 A <= hour s soo tblowin g durin g sample(a )
B * hour s no tsoo tblowin g durin g sample(e ) containin g soo tblowin g R= averag e hour s o f operatio n pe r2 4 hour s S = averag e hour s o f soo tblowin g pe r2 4 lour s I f asignifican tvariatio n l n th e quantit y o f exces s ai r i s expected , the n an additiona l analysi s shoul d h e con ducte d .

D-0 9 lette r(E . Uticl i l o

M . I€.vipudi ) 2/23/7 9 Ar e U e lou rI y lea tfnpu l s o f t\a«) seiiaral e axil-fire d stea m generators , eac h o f 2t m millio n Bt u pe rI pour , aiklitiv e fo rNSI' S pur|r«se3 , i f

lot h ar e imilu l thrrxigl i atxiinin i precip i l.ili u ? 60.40 , 60.4 1 No A n affecte d facilit y i s define d a s "eac h fossil fuel-f i ru i stea n generatin g uni to f mor e tha n 25 0 millio n Bt u fe rhour" . I-tssi l fuel-fire d stea m gereratiu j uni tmean s " afurnac e o rboile ruse d l n U e iroces s o f

turnin g fossil fie l forU e purpos e o f producin g stea n l y hea ttransfer'* . Base ) o n Uies e do f

Initlor e tli e lea tinput s ar e lo t additiv e atx l NSI S woul d no tapply . Se e D-2 3 an ! D-65 .

### an A: ItEEEKENCE OIIL'.THlt l AI-THf-TED KIX1JIATIC N DETER MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N

I J - 91 1 Mum t o R-1 X (E . Reic h l o

C . Idler ) 4/25/7 9 A resourc e recover y facilit y wil l bur n refus e derive d li e I . Hil l th e Mil' s fo rfossi l fuel-file d stea m generator s am i lo r incineiatoi s appl y t o thi s facility ? 60.40(a)(1) , Condi - An USP S applie s b o eac h fossi l fuel-fire d stea m 60.50 , 60.5 1 tiona l generatin g uni to f mor e tha n 25 0 millio n Bt u |e r lour . Sinc e refus e derive d fue l i s no tafossi l fuel , U e resourc e recover y facilit y woul d no tb e covere d unless , i n ailditio n t o refus e derive ) fuel , U e facilit y woul d als o l e capabl e o f burnin g 25 0 millio n Bt u pe rIxx ro f fossi l fuel . An NSPS applie s t o ead i incinerato ro f mor e tha n 5 0 ton s pe rda y chargin g rate . Incinerato ri s an y fu rnanc e use d i n U e proces s o f turnin g soli d wast e fo rU e purpos e o f reducin g ti e volun e o f t i e wast e b y tamovin g combustibl e material . I f t i e resouro e recover y facilit y ha s adiargin j rat e greate rtha n 5 0 ton s pa rda y an d burn s soli d waste , i twoul d l e subjec tto th e incinerato rNSPS . Als o se e discussio n a tDa-1 .

D-9 1 Mem

o t o R-V l (Reic h t o button ) 6/211/7 9 a ) Wha ti s li e |jro|e rspu n valu e t o l e use d wit h a n NT ) no n j lo r wliid i i s require d I n fxu n acom binatio n o l Ioss i I am i um-ldss i I fuels ? 60.45(c)(5 ) Ti e spa n valv e shoul d L e 50 0 ppm , Wiic h MI S drosc n t o represen tarang e consisten twit h the neasuru l emissio n rat e o f

8 6 nanograms/joule .

b ) Wha

ti s ti e valu e o f

I an d I c t o l e usi- d wliei i usin g a n tK> x monito rwhei e los s i I an i non fossi l I li e I ar e I ire . I simn l taiieously ? 611.45(f)(5 ) 'Ih e formulas outline d i n 60.45(f)(5 ) ca n L e used ; however , U e fie l fee d txmpositio n mus tb e iletetmined . I f

individua l value s fo rnatura l ga s an d purg e ga s ar e known , Kan d F cfactor s ca n b e detetniino l fo read i ga s an d the n prorate d t o obtai n a n overal l factor .



# B sCtl U KU'U:1NC K (UIOTIU N 

### Airiciu ) PFGULATIO

N ll-TKH MINATIf>

» DISCIK-JiO M

D-5> 2 tMr o (Reic h t o (Wine ) 

### 11/27/7 9 A n oil-firo o boile ri n ti e Cit y o f I-akelan d wil l b e con verte d t o coal/oi l mixture s (CXM) . The boile ri s currentl y subjec tt o N.PS . Wil l ti e conversio n subjec tth e sourc e t o Subpar tD , Co, o rneither ? 60.40 a(d ) Ye s - NSP S appl y to th o 

### owne ro rojierato ro f an y Subpar t0 stationar y uourc e vlilc h contain s an affecte d No - . facility , th e constructio n o rmodificatio n o f Subpar tD

awhic h i s commenced afte rth e effectiv e rlat e o f ti e standanl . Onu

e a sourc e i s subjec tt o ISPS , i t wil l alway s b e subject ; th e boile rcanno tb e exempte d fra n continuin g t o mee tSdopar tD . Mie n th e CT> . ar e burned , th e sourc e mus tmee tth e proratio n standar d unde rSubpar tD . Ih e holle rI s considere d an e t1s tin g facilit y

. fo rpurpose s o f

Subpar tDa , ar d woul d b e exempte d fro m meetin g D

asinc e S60.40a(d ) exempt s fro n

. mo d i f ica tio n provision s an y chang e t o a n existin g uni toriginally-designe d t o fir e osseou s o r liqui d fossi l fuels , to accomodat e th e us e o f an y othe rfuel .
D-9 3 Mem

o (Reic h t o Celcelman ) 2/4/E0 . A utilit y generatin g plan twa s 111(a)(8 ) o f ordere d t o conver tt o ooa l unde rCAA A o f th e lowe rPlan tan d Industria l 1977 . Fue l Us e Act . Ih e generatin g 60.15(b ) plan twil l effec ts o man y change s 60.14(e)(4 ) tha ti twil l b e considere d a60.40a(d ) reconstructio n a s wel l a s a modification . Doc s th e exemp tio n fo rmodificatio n wde r Slll(a)(0 ) o f

ti e Clea n Ai rAc t ala s tppl y t o reconstruction ? No - Subpar tDa , a tS60.40o(d) , exempt s ainl t(ra n Subpar t0 applicabilit y when a fue l conversio n i s under Condi - taken : "an y dianq e t o a n existin g 6tea n generatin g tiona l - uni toriginall y designe d t o fir e gaseou s o rliqui d Subpar tD

afossi l fuels , t o accomodat e th e us e o f an y ot.'ie r fue l (fossi l o rno n fossil ) shal l no tbrin g tha t uni tunde rth e epplicabilit y o f Uil s sibpart" . however , th e total , financia l contributio n o f th e fue l conversio n mus tb e separate d fra n cost s attribute d t o upgradin g and in-provin g th e qualit y o f ti e facility . I f

thes o othe rcost s ar e i n ti e amoun tto trigge rth e reconstructio n rcqulrurents . Subpar tD

ama y apply . Althoug h Subpar tO exempt s fue l conversio n noti fication s require d unde ran energ y order , modifi catio n i s differen tfrom reconstruction . EP A consider s reconstructio n tantamoun tt o buildir g a newsource , and U e exemptio n provide d formodifi cation s shoul d no tappl y t o reconstructions .CCD E RfJlHQJC E QUESTIO N AFFECTE D REGUI.ATIO N 

## Dmm

MIN'ATKa

N DISCISSIO N



### D-9 4 Mem

o (fcic h t o Murphy) 3/21/80 . Woul d th e propose d conversio n o f Schille rStatio n Uni t| 6 fra n oi l t o coa l b e subjec t t o Subpar tD o rDa ? 60.40a(d ) N o Ti e uni twoul d no tb e subjec tt o Subpar tCo, 60.14(e)(4 ) sinc e S60.40a(d ) exempt s sic h conversion s fra n bein g considere d a s modifications . Klethe rth e uni ti s sdtijcc tt o Subfar tD depend s o n vhethc- r i ti s exempte d unde r{60.14(e)(4) , whic h state s tha tus e o f

a n alternativ e fue l i s no tconsidere d amodificatio n if , prio rt o Augus t17 , 1971 , ti. e existin g facilit y wa s designe d t o accomodat e t. K 

### .a t alternative : use . A facilit y i s considere d t o b a designe d to accommodate an alternativ e fie l i f tha tus e coul d b e accomplishe d unde rti e facility' s oonstructio n specification s a s anendo J prio rto th e change . Uni t1 6 wu s con structe d prio rt o 1971 , and it s constructio n specification s ar cidentica l t o thos e o f ir.it s 4 an d 5 . Sinc e unit s 4 an d 5 burne d coo l prio r t o 1971 , uni t6 als o ha d th e capabilit y o f

doin g s o . Hence th e exemptio n indc r560.14(e)(4 ) i s applicabl e an ) th e uni ti s no tsubjec tt o Subpar t D . 

## T f W B/n/a o

(Mid i t o Ullrich ) Norther n Petroleu m Oanpan y ba a tw o hollar s raaulra d t o monito r ID , •aUalona . Th s hollar s bur n • variabl e ocrabinatio n o f fossil an d nonfoesl l funis , wit h hydroge n ga s aoraprlsln g a s Muc h
• • 70 1 o f

th anonfossl l ooropo iMnt . •i d CF R6f l Subpar tD , Afyandl x A (Metho d 19 )

a ) Dstsmln ath e correc t aquatio n fa rcalculatin g th a P-Fhcto rwha

n hydroge n ga s I s an ao f

th aeanponant s flrs d i n th s toollar . b ) Dstsreln aI f

• 00- j monito rca n bauaa d t o oonvar t NO - concentratic n value s t o unit s o f standan l I f

hydroge n 9a s i s burned . Sino s th s tydroga n gs s strss acontain s organi c compounds , th s 9 Q 

### equatio n in Method 1 9 ma y b e used ; th s ua s o f

thi s equatfc n i s onl y practica l I f th s compositio n at

th s nonfbssl l t—X strea m doe s no tvary . A CO] monito rcanno tto use d t o oonvar tN \ concentratio n value s t o unit s o f maa s pe runi t calorifi cvalu e i f

hydroge n ga s onl y i s turned . However , aCD

j tocnito rca n b atue d I f th u )ydiv> - gu n ga s I s alway s bums ! I n combinatio n wit h a fossil fuel . Thi s practic e woul d b alimlta l t yCO M 

## BBrasacs OESTIO M AFKUCTUJ RUQLDAriC N CfcTER M I NATIO N DISCUSSIO N


### IM S (out, )

o ) DetenaJn e aproosdur s for proratin g ^-factor s forus s l n calculatin g tt\ axoss s .Mission s fro m CD 4 dat awh m th aDolla rl a burnin g aaanblnatlo n o f fossil an d nonfossl l fuals . d ) Determin e aproosdur s for proratin g th aNO , amissio n liial t I f aoontoinatic n o f

fossil an d nonfossl l fuel s I s burned . th aaccurac y o f th s CD

j monito ra anor e tydro ge n l abumed f

th s resultan tCD

j l n th aeffluen t ga s strea n wil l b e loww ra s th aproportio n o f hydroge n i aIncrease d en d th s instnmen tnua t measur e th aCD

j wit h greate raccuracy . Thaprocedur e forproratin g P c 

### -Pactor » in thl a situatio n i s th s sam aam describe d for acom binatio n o f

fossil funis . Sinc e th aboiler s bur n variabl e oaublnatlcns , thi s procedur e ma y no t b aeasil y carrie d out *
I tl aunclea rwh

y thi s situatio n rfould arias . Subpar tD ha s n o provision s forallowin g th e hsa tinput s fra anonfossl l fuel s othe rtha n woo d residu afuel at o b o include d fordatarmlnln g aonplianoe . Ih e NO

„ emissio n limi ti s tune d onl y o n th s hea tconten tresultin g fra n th e combustio n a f

fossil fuel , prorate d onl y t o aoaoun tforth s burnin g a f aoattolnatla n o f fossil fuels .

• ) Datamin i aprocedur e for calculatin g tt o IB L .Missio n rat s an d amissio n "imitatio n for aperformanc e tes tt o b s oonducta d o n aboile rburnin g aocnbinatlo n o f

fossil sn d nenfossi i fusls . th s anissio n limitatio n uaad for aparfonnano e tes tshoul d b atha tlimitatio n specifie d a t 4 0 CF R60.44 . Thi s limitatia i specifie s amas s pa rutl to f

haa tinput

tterlve d fra n fossil fiel . Therefore , Subpar tD require s tha t100 1 fossi l ftul b e burne d durin g th s performanc e test f th s onl y proratio n procedur e allowe d i s for a ocmblnatio n o f

fossil fuels , o raoonhlnatio n o f fossi l an

d woo d residu afuels .
D-9 6 Mo o (Raic h t o CfenfcfarJng) 

## ifr/eo NOuld Modification s o f handlin g an d feedin g equlp - •an ta taavara l unit s siiijac t U m unit s t o USPS ? 

# 1 60.2(h ) 60.14(e)(2 ) Oandltiona l I tappear s tha tNorther n State s i aundergoin g an increaa ai n productio n rate , tnia woul d b e subjec tt o NSP

S i f i tinvolve s acapita l expendi tur e c n th s facility , th s Individua l boiler . I tI s thu s essentia l to determin e i f th e con — ponent s bein g enlarge d ar apar to f th e affecte d facility .

b i

### COD E REFERENC E QUESTIO N AFFECTE D REGULATION rFTER MINATIO N DISCUSSIC N

D-9 7 Mem o (Reic ht o Ferdas )

9/19/8 0 A stea m generato r i s designe d t o bu m primaril y

woo dwast e supplemente db

y No . 6 fue l oil . Th e owne r wishe s t o bur n2.4 % sulfu r fue l oi l i ncombinatio n wit hwoo dwast e suc htha t th e NSP S o f 0. 8 l bST> 2 

### pe r m m Bt uI s no t exceede ddurin g norma l operations . I s tli e exclusiv e us e o f 2.4 % sulfu r fue l oi l allowabl e durin g period s o f startup , shutdow n andmalfunction ? S60.2(o) , Ye s Th e Chesapeak e Corporatio ni s no t require dt o (p) , (q) ; stockpil e lo w sulfu r oi l for us e durin g period s $60.11(d ) o f startup , shutdown , an dmalfunction ; burnin g 2.4 % sulfu r oi l i s acceptable . Fhiissions durin g thes e period s mus t b e limite dt o th e exten t practicable , a s require db y 4 0 CF R60.11(d) . I t shoul dals o b e pointe dou t tha t lac k o f sufficien t quantitie s o f woo dwast e canno t b e considere da malfunctio nan dtha t lac k o f availabilit y

o f fue l oi l i s no t a justifiabl e excus e fo r non-compliance .

D-9 8 Mem o (Reic ht o Gardebring )

11/21/8 0 (a ) Ar e ramping an dsoo t blowin g cycle s considere d representativ e condition s fo r coal-fire dstea

m generators ?

(b ) Unde r wha t circumstance s ca nMetho d1 7 b e substitute d fo r Metho d5 , l nperformanc e testing ? $60.8(c ) Soo t Soo t blowin g i s a norma l par t o f ever y sourc e blowing - operation , an di t woul db e artificia l t o cu t the Ye s cycl e of f durin g th e performanc e test . Soo t Ramping - • blowin g wa s considere di ndevelopin g Subpar t D N o an

di nsubsequen t amendment s t o tha t standard . Ramping i s no t necessaril y representativ e o f sourc e operation , particularl y inthi s cas e wher e th e sourc e inquestio ni s bas e loaded . Addi tionally , ther e i s littl e evidenc e t o supior t a contentio ntha t rampin g wa s considere di nthe origina l Subpar t D testin g data . 4 0 CF R60 , Metho d1 7 ca nb e use da s a nalternativ e t o Appendi xA

Metho dS a t fossil fuel-fire dstea m generator s whe n(1 ) th e flu e ga s temperatur e a t th e sampling locatio ni s consistentl y les s thano r equa l t o 320° F an

d(2 ) the flu e ga s a t th e sampling locatio ni s unsaturate dwit hwate r vapor . Fo r flu e gase s unsaturate dwit hwate r vapo r and havin g temperature s greate r tha n320°F , the acceptanc e o f Metho d1 7 a s a nalternativ e t o Metho d5 wil l b e base do nth e demonstratio ntha t the particulat e matte r concentratio ndetermine d by Metho d1 7 i s greate r tita no r equa l t o the particulat e matte r concentratio ntha t woul db e

# ax e REFERENC E OUESTIO N AFFECTE D REGULATIC N CRTFR MINATIO N DISCISSIO N



### •easure d b y Metho d 5 a tatemperatur e o f 320°F . I f sit e specifi csamplin g logistic s preclud e o r compromis e th e us e o f Metho d 5 , request s fo rth e alternativ e us e o f

Metho d 1 7 shoul d b e addresse d b o th e appropriat e regiona l office . *D-9 9 tette r(Johnso n t o

Dhonau) 12/11/8 0 I s pea tconsidere d afossil fue l fo rpurpose s o f

Subpart s D an d Da ? 60.41(b) | 60.41 a



# * Clarificatio n N o Fossi l fue l mean a"natura l gas , petroleum , coa l an d an y for

m o f solid , liqui d o rgaseou s fue l derive d fro m suc h material s forth e purpos e o f creatin g usefu l heat" . Pea tI s no tconsidere d a fossi l fue l unde rthi s definition ; hence , electri cutilit y powe rplant s burnin g pea twoul d no tb e subjec tt o NSP S uvles s the y wer e als o capabl e o f

firin g fossi l fue l a ta hea tinpu t rat e o f ove r25 0 n n Bt u pe rhour , l n vhlc h cas e the y woul d hav e t o mee tth e standar d fo rtha t portio n o f

th e fue l comprise d o f fossil fuel . 

# Fo r ne wunit s capabl e o f combustin g mor e tha n 7 3 MW hea t inpu t o f fossi l fue l (eithe r alon e o r i n combinatio n wit h an yothe r fuel) , Subpar t D a woul d appl yand th e performanc e tes t woul d b e conducte d regardles s o f th e actua l fue l fired
. Th e Subpar t D a standar d wa s writte n purposel yt o avoi d anyproratio n o f th e standar d base d o n th e percentag e o f fossi l fue l i n th e tota l fue l mix
. However , i f th e percentag e o f fossi l fue l i s 2 5 percen t o r less , th e boile r i s classifie d a s a resourc e recover y uni t unde r th e definitio n i n Sectio n 60.41a . Aboile r capabl e o f firin g ove r 7 3 M W hea t inpu t o f fossi i fuel , whic h burn s ove r 7 5 percen t pea t o n a calenda r quarterl ybasis , woul d b e consi

dere d a resourc e recover yfacility
.

T J b i c o

### COD E REFERENC E D-16 0 Mem

o (Reic ht o Voltaggio ) 1/23/8 1

D-1Q 1 Lette r (Reic h t o Chandler ) 2/11/8 1 QUESTIO N APFECTED

REGULATIO

N D o wast e lubricatin g 60.41(b ) oil s whichar e re refine dan dthe n burne dina stea

m generato r constitut e fossi l fuel ? DETER MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N No

Woul d th

e conversion o f tw o boiler s fro

m No . 6 fue l oi l t o coa l be subjec t t o Subpar t D ? 60.2 | 60.14(e)(4) ! 60.1 5 No

.U-Sjet f 

### Fossi l fue l i s define dat 4 0 CF R60.41(b ) a s "natura l gas , petroleum , coal , an dan y for m o f solid , liqui do r gaseou s fue l derive dfro m suc hmaterial s fo

r th e purpos e o f creatin

g usefu l heat. " Hast e lubrica tin g oil s are not considere dfossi l fuel s becaus e thei r purpos e i s no t th e creatio

n o f usefu l heat , but rathe r fo r us e as a lubricant . The steaa generato r wil l becom e subjec t to NSP S if , a

t an y time . I t burn s o r become s capabl e o f burnin

g fossi l fue l a

t a hea t inpu t rat e o f ove r 25 0 m m Bt u pe r hour . I t mus t the

nmee t the standardfo r that portiono f th

e fue l whic hi s fossi l fuel . Sinc e th

e boiler s l nquestioncommenced constructio

nprior t o th

e tim e o f proposa l o f Subpar t D , the

y wil l b

e subjec t to NSP S onl y if the y underg o a modificationor reconstruction . As provide dat 4 0 CP R 60.14(e)(4) , th

e followin

g shal l no t b

e considereda modification ! "us e o f a n alternativ

e fue l o

r ra w materia l If , prior t o th e dat e an

y standardunde r thi s par t become s applicabl e t o tha t sourc e type , th e existin

g facility

wa s designed to accommodat e that alternative use . A facilit y shal l b

e considere dto b

e designed t o accommodat e a

nalternative fue l o r ra w materia l if tha t us e coul db e accomplished unde r th

e facility' s construction specification s a s amendedprio r to the ' change..." . Sinc e th e tw o boiler s wer e desiqne dt o accommodat e th e us e o f coa l prio r to Augus t 17 , 1971 , thes e boiler s qualif y for th e exemptioni

n 560.14(e)(4) . A s define

dl n60.15(b) , reconstruction "mean s th

e replacemen t o f component s o f a nexistin

g facility

t o sucha

nextent that t (1 ) th

e fixe d capita l cos t o f th e ne w component s exceed s 5 0 percen t o f th e fixe dcapita l cos t tha t woul dh e require

d t o construc t a comparabl e entirel y ne w facility , an

d(2 ) i

t i s technologicall y an deconomicall y

feasibl e to mee t th e applicabl e standard s se t forthi nthi s part. " Th

e sourc e ha s demonstrated that th e cost s o f th

e ne w component s fo

r boiler s on

e an dtw o wil l b

e significantl y lens tha

n5 0 percen t o f th e cos t fo

r comparabl e entirel y ne w boilers .COD E REFERENC E QUESTICN AFFECTE D REGULATIO

N ttTERMINATIO

N DISCUSSIO N


### D-10 2 Memo(Reic ht o Garber )

7/9/8 1 fou r ooal-fire d boiler s eac hhav e a desig nrate d capacit y

o f 294. 9 m n Bt upe r hou r hea t inpu t rate . Th e boiler s have bee n operate dfor varyin g period s o f time abov e 25 0 m

m Bt upe r hour , bu t becaus e o f desig ndefects , hav e no t bee nabl e t o d o s o o na continuou s basis . I s Subpar t D applicable ? 

### «U0.a),2 J 560.40(a)(2 ) state s tha tth e standar d applie s t o eac h fossil fuel-fire d stea m generatin g uni tcapabl e o f firin g fossi l fue l a tahea tinpu trat e o f mor e tha n 25 0 m m Bt u pe rhour . Thi s ha s consistentl y bee n Interprete d t o mea n 25 0 m m Bt u base d o n desig n capacit y art ) no t norma l operatin g capacity . Th e boiler s l n thi s cas e hav e adesig n capacit y o f ove r25 0 m

m Btu , ar e physicall y capabl e o f operatin g a tthi s rate , and hav e don e a a l n th e past . Additionally , th e sourc e ha s no tbee n abl e t o presen tan y technica l evidenc e t o suppor tIt s clai m tha tth e boiler s at e no tcapabl e o f firin g ove r 25 0 m m Bt u pe rhour . Se e determination s D-20 , D-5 1 an d D-59 . Onl y th e hea tInpu tfra n fossi l fuel s en d woo d residu e ar e t o b e used . Thi s i s base d o n th e provision s o f 560.43(a)(1) , %hic

h prohibi tan y owne ro r operato rfrom dischargin g SO j emission s l n exces s o f

0.81b/m m Bt u hea tinpu t derive d from liqui d fossil fue l o r.liqui d fossi l fue l an d woo d residue . Non-fossi l fuel s suc h a s cok e ove n ga s ar e no t Included , and thu s canno tb e use d t o sho w compliance . Se e determinatio n D-70 . Ye s

D-103 Memo(Relch t o Ferdaa )

8/7/8 1 Doe s Subpar tD allo w th e hea tinpu tfro m non-fossi l fuel s t o b e Include d for determinin g complianc e wit h NSPS ? 60.43(a ) N O

...... . • a . •

0 1 O lP.6 6



# s 1 2

0 O l

_ al l I C 

## 2 £ 

# B l

u J J u rt ni ^ 4 1 y m —C m

- * O a U y - < - 

## e S » v

3 

### ii 4 1 u ff

1 3 

## 8 S fl . 3 " 3 "" 

# J 4 i y 4 > y 5 U U I S 0 . 4 1 0 1 —J = w a "^"o H O H u i


## a I E • S.5 £ 41 « J C H lai l L ^ t l 4 1 - < 0 4 1 C O •

D - »

. . - _. , -• •j i u e ,i3 i n 4 1 4 > 4 1 -a
_ Q.r t (/I —ti n u u BiH^-£X.a<Iis g .CCO . 0 —ias o gx i 'R''~"P 3 1 ! J * i ^ 3 u i JS'j : S i i

. ~ " a

J u is u 4 1 *i C z 

## a o i ° 2
. £ w 

## fl- o t

c 

# 1 2 s Sa g C H (

0 

## & § o o

IN 0 0



## 3 • 8 ?-S 2 5 

# Jil t -otlfr t rtQ i n i g it ] rtC 0 u » m c

v 4 1 3 xJ 41 d 

# "'"IS. : k . rt a K

J u U ff Cr t 8 S o i 0 B 0 > C <B < o
ttr t m 0 

# f " G S > £ rt

rt U J 01

_ > rt 4) - O 

## " 3 O 

## & •1 5 

## 3- S h.£ S

rt 0) Bl £ I

Q rt ( U g y 

### &
. a j •• * 4 ) 

# .es s e o 

## A

A 

# I

3 2 

# 3 * wo o 5 1 o- - • M 4 1 aaa

1 Q 

### 2 ? 4 1 « 5 . 0 I S rt 4-

> I S U 0 rt u f « M H > i V , g .

V - "

### m» : i<i:in<iwti : rUKSTK* ! Al'lTX-'IM ) KHJIIAI'ION M.-I1.II MINATH W DISCI fcSItJN

IVi- l 

### Mu

m l o It-Il l (K. 14.'uli t o II . li-im ) 12/7/7 8 Hi e .Southeaster n I'uh l i c ik.'ivic e Authorit y o f

Virgini ai s plannin g l o buil d aresouroi. ' rooovei y plant . Hi e boiler s hav e aca|iacit y t o burn 316. 9 x IO 6 litu . NLIIIIM I 

### o|«raliii j condition s col l to r80 % UHt- ' an d 20 % coal , altlomjl i 11111 % coa l ca n b e fired . 'Hi e boiler s wil l h e use d exclusivel y U i furnis h stea n fc eleclricil y l o th e Rirtswiul h Naval Shi|>yarii . Shoul d tl*. - propose d NSI' S fo r electri cutilit y sleai n generatin g unit s (4 3 H

t42154 , .Sept . 19 , 1978 ) ti e applie d t o liti s facility ? tO.40 , 60.40 a 60.41 , 60.41 a 

### N

o Hi e propose d NSP S i s applicabl e t o source s satis fyin g two tests : 1 ) tli e sourc e mus tb e a n elec tri cutilit y stea m generatin g uni twtiiii i cuwience d constructio n afte r9/18/78 ; an d 2 ) tli e sourc e mus t h e capabl e o f

oanbustin g not e Uian 7 3 m w(25 0 millio n ntu/hour ) hea tinjxi to f fossi l fuel . Altlomjl i meetin g tli e accor d test , tli e boiler s d o no tappea rt o meetth e first . "Electri cutilit y stea m generatin g mit " means "an y stea m electri c generatin g uni ttha ti s constructe d fo rth e pur pos e o f supplyin g mor

e tha n one-thir d o f

it s maximu m desig n electrica l outpu tcapacit y t o a n electrica l distributio n systt m (b rsale. " I n till s case , th e electricit y wil l b e sold , bu tno t throug h an electrica l distributio n systt m t o tli e genera l |*iblic . Hi e boiler s wil l no tb e Bubjec t t o tli e propose d NSIS pwido l th e electricit y wil l nex tb e Bupplia l had e throug h th e distributio n syste m onc e i tenter s tli e shipyard , tlies e boiler s wil l b e subjec tt o th e existin g NSI S fo rfossi l fuel-fire d stea m generators . Update : Hi e prunulgate d NSP S define s electri c utilit y stea m generatin g ini ta s an y stea m elec tri cyeneratin g uni ttha ti s physicall y connecte d t o autilit y powerdistributio n systa n an i i s constructe d fo rth e purpou e o f ee l lin y not e tlia n 2 5 m welectrica l out|u tan d mor e tlia n 1/ 3 o f

it s potentia l electrica l out|>u tcapacity . Hesourc e recover y mit s incorporatin g stea m electri c generatin g unit s tha twoul d meetli e applicabilit y requirement s tu tUia toanbus tles s tha n 25 % fossi l fue l o n aquarterl y basi s ar e no tcovere d b y tli e St> j * reductio n requirement s l 30 1 ar e

### silijec tl o th e St) ? emissio n limitatio n an d al l othe r provision s o f

Ota regulation .

## umt :

IXi- 2 io:ii]tii*i : til l .S T IO N Aini-'iw i

IUIJIIAIKI N mrn:it H1NATU- N IlISCIJESlON

lette rt o llivimspliei e (l\ . Illici tl o S . (IIIIIIiiKjs ) 7/2V « a ) I s a n existiu j j«**.- rplan t60.40a(d ) considere d U

» hav e l«ju n originall y designe d l o Uir n coal , o roi I o rgas , i ti toriginall y burne d aw l bu twa s tlie n modifie d an d currentl y turn s oi l o rgas ? b ) I f th e plan ti n ijueslio n wa s Snlipjr tI I determine d t o li e "originall y am i Vu, designed " l o Uu n owl , prio rt o 60.14(e)(4) , B/18/71 , woul d i th e exeni|i tfir m CA A £111(a ) (8 ) NSH S unde rSubfia i tI) an d fla , i f t i cplan twa s no wmodifie d t o bu m coal ? Ye s Originall y designe d refer s t o wliateve rth e plan t wa s capabl e o f

bur n i n

j prio rt o tli e dat e o f proposa l o f

th e relevan tstandard .

linde r4 0 U-' K60.14(e)(4) , tli e us e o f a n alternat e fue l o rra wmateria l i s no tconsidere d a modification , i f

"prio rt o Ui e dat e an y standar d unde rthi s par tbecome s applicabl e t o tha tsourc e ty[>e , Ui e existin g facilit y wa s designe d t o accraroodat e tlia talternativ e use. " I f th e plan twer e considere d t o b e originall y d e s i glia l t o I Hi m oi l o rgas , conversio n t o coa l woul d no tsubjec ti tt o Subpar tOa. Conversio n woul d subjec tasourc e (no tsubjec tt o Subpar t Da ) t o Subfku' tU unles s i tcoul d slo wconversio n wa s b y reaso n o f

a n orde runde rtSEC A o ran y su|icrsedin g legislation .

### COD E REFERENC E QUESTIO N AFFECTBD

REGULATIO

N DETER MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N
Da- 3 Lette r (Reic h t o Stuart ) 4/2/8 1 A

cogeneratio

npowe r plant wil l hav

e tw o 78 5 m m Bt upe r hour inpu t boiler s connecte

dt o a singl e turbin e generator . Th e plant i s covered unde r Subpar t Da . Doe s thi s plant requir e a spar e flu e ga s desulfurlzation (FGD ) module ? 60.40a(a) r 60.46a(d)(3 ) Unde r 560.46a(d)(3) , "a naffecte dfacility wit ha malfunctionin g FGD syste

m ma y b e operatedi

f SO 2 emission s ar e minimized b y .. . designing , constructing an d operatin

g a spare FG

D syste m modul e fo

r a n affectedfacility

large r than36 5 M W (125 0 m m Btuper hour ) hea t input. " Affected facility

i s define

da t S6O.40a(a ) a s each electri c utility

stea m generating uni t capabl e o f combustin g ove r 25 0 m

m Rtu pe r hour heat inpu

t o f fossi l fuel . Althoug h eac hboile r is a

naffected facility , neithe r i s larger tha n125 0 m

m Rt upe r hour Input , an

dneithe r require s a spar e FG D module . The cogeneratio

nplant mus t stil l mee t tw o provision s durin

g emergency

conditions . Unde r $60.46a(d) , a naffectedfacility wit h a malfunctionin

g FGD syste

m may onl y b e operate dIf SO 2 emission s ar e minimized b y 1 (1 ) operatin

g al l operabl e FG

D syste m modules , an

dbringin

g bac k Int o operatio

nan y malfunctione d modul e a s soo na s repair s are completed , an d (2 ) bypassin

g flu e gase s aroun

donl y th e FG D syste m module s tha t hav

e bee n take nou t o f operatio

nbecaus e the

y wer e Incapabl e o f an y SO 2 emission reductio

nor whic

hwoul dhav

e suffered significant physica l Hamaq e if the y ha dremaine

di noperation . N oCOD E REFERENC E QUESTIO N AFFECTE D REGULATIO N DETER -

MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N


### Da- 4 LetterfReic h t o Miller )

5/15/8 1

Da- 5 Memo ( Reic h t o Beals f 8/10/8 1 Electri cutilit y stea m generatin g uni ti s define d a s an y stea m electri c generatin g uni ttha t i s constructe d for th e purpos e o f supplyin g more tha n 1/ 3 o f It s potentia l electri coutpu t capacit y and mor e tha n 2 5 M

W electrica l outpu tt o an y utilit y powe rdistributio n syste m fo rsale . Fo r purpose s o f

determinin g applicabilit y o f Subpar tD

at o cogenerators , doe s EP A conside ronl y th e ne tpowe rdelivere d t o th e utility ? 4 0 CF R 60.41 a Ye s 

### EP A di d no tInten d tha telectri cpowe r generate d a ta n Industria l sit e an d use d a tth e Industrial'sit e b e considere d a s bein g si^pllc d t o th e gri d syste m forsale . I V sale , EP

A mean telectri cpowe ractuall y supplie d t o th e gri d syste afordistribution . I.e . th e electri cpowe rgenerate d b y th s cogeneratio n uni tminu s th e industria l on-sit e consumption .



### i a A n affecte d facilit y i s define d a t $60. 4 l aa s "an y ste m generatin g uni ttha t constructe d fo rth e purpos e o f

supplyin g more tha n 1/ 3 o f

it s potentia l electri c outpu tcapacit y an d tha n 2 5 M

W electrica l outpu tt o an y utilit y powe rdistributio n syste m fo rsale. " A sourc e plan s t o construc taboile rwit h a1,09 5 m

m Bt u pe rhou r hea tinpu tcapacity . Th e electri coutpu t supplie d t o th e powe r distributio n syste m for sal e wil l b e les s tha n 1/ 3 o f th e potentia l electri coutpu tcapacit y o n ayearl y averag e basis , bu tgreate rtha n 1/ 3 durin g th e 18 0 da y sumne rperiod . I s thi s propose d boile rsubjec t t o Subpar tto? 

### Subpar t1S T No I tM M newe rIntende d tha tth s standar d * cove rthi s boiler , whic h ove rth e aours e o f ayea rwil l sel l lea s tha n 1/ 3 o f lb s potentia l electri coutpu tcapacity . Althoug h Subpar tVa doe s no tcurrentl y specif y atim e perio d ove rwhic h th e 1/ 3 threshol d i s to b e determined , technica l amendment

s to D abein g prepare d b y OAQP

S wil l specif y th e us e o f a n annua l averagin g perio d for determinin g th s 1/ 3 threshol d value .CODE REFERENC E QUESTIO N AFFECTE D REGULATIO N DETER MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N



### Da- 6 Lette r (Johnsont o Binder )

9/14/8 1 Subpar t D a provide s tha t resourc e recover y

facilitie s combustin g les s than 2 5 percen t fossi l fue l o na calenda r quarterl y

hea t input basi s ar e exemp t from th e S0 2 

### percentag e reductio n requirement . Ca na facilit y

whic h normall y

utilize s les s tha n2 5 percen t fossi l fue l utiliz e fossi l fue l in exces s o f 2 5 percen t durin g a refus e collectio nstrik e andstil l retai nth e resourc e recovery exemption ? 60.43a(d ) Conditiona l Ih e libera l 2 5 percen t allowanc e wa s provide dbecaus e EP A recognize dthe problem s involve dl noperatin g resourc e recover y

facilities , an

dwante dt o allow fo r intermitten t period s whe nrefus e wa s no t available , period s o f equipmen t breakdown , an

dstarti pperiods . Th e facilit y

a t issu e intend s durin g th e winte r month s t o supplemen t wast e wit h fossi l fue l t o th e exten t tha t the fossi l fue l ma y

suppl y 2 0 percen t o f th

e tota l hea t input . Whethe r th e facilit y i s a resourc e recover y

facilit y

exemp t fra n th e percentag e reductio nrequiremen t wil l b e base dc nwhethe r the sourc e ca n presen t reasonabl e assuranc e i t wil l b e operate dbelow

th e 2 5 percen t fossi l fue l cut-off .COD E REFERENC E

Da- 7 

# I Mem o (Reic h t o •fleal s 5/3/B 2 QUESTIO N AFFECTE D REGULATIO

N DETERMINATIO N DISCUSSION

"al Art

e boiler s les s $60.40a(a ) tha n25 0 m

m Btu/h r exempt , i rrespect i v e o f how muc helectricit y i s produce d for sale ? 

### Ye s

b)Th e compan

y i s involve d i ncogeneratio n o f electricity . Woul d i t matte r whethe r the compan y generate s electricity , use s «4ia t i s neede d on-sit e and sell s th e remainde r t o a utility , o r initiall y sell s al l electricit y t o the gri d and buy s bac k th e electricit y neede d on-site ? $60,41 a 

### Ye s Th e affecte d facilit y i s eac helectri c utilit y

stea m generatin g wi t capabl e o f combusting ov e 25 0 mm Btu/h r hea t inpu t o f fossi l fuel .
Th e tw o method s woul d no t b e treate d differently , sinc e th e ne t amoun t o f o f electricit y

sol d t o th e gri d woul d b e the sam

e i nbot hcases . Se e als o Da- 4

c)T o b e Subpar t Da , mus t a boile r sel l 2 5 M W and 1/ 3 o f tli

e potentia l electri c outpu t capacity ?

d ) I s powe r sol d compute d o na yearl y $60. 4 l a 

### Ye s

S60.41 a averag e o n A nelectri c utilit y stea m generatin g uni t i s define d a s 'any steam electri c generatin g uni t tha t i s constructe d fo r th e purpos e o f supplyin g mor e tha n 1/ 3 o f it s potentia l electri c outpu t capacit y

an d mor e tha n2 5 M W electri c outpu t t o an/

utilit y

powe r distributio n system fo r sale . Bot hcondition s mus t b e me t fo r a boile r t o b e subject . •
I t wa s neve r intended tha t the standar d cove r a boile r selling les s than25M W ove r ti e cours e o f a year . EP A i s currentl y

preparing technica l amerrtment s specifyin g a yearl y averagin g period , am i wil l conside r the 2 5 M W a yearl y

averag e whe nevaluatin g a napplication .COD E REFERENC E QUESTION AFFECTE D REGULATIO N DETERMINATIO N DISCUSSION

e ) I s the powe r sol drelativ

e t o eac h turbin e generator , o r th e tota l o f al l th e turbin e generator s a t a site , o r t o eac h boiler , for purpose s o f determining Subpar t D a applicability ? $60.41 a Wher e ther e ar e severa l generatin g unit s whic hpas s stea

m throug

ha ccmmonturbin e generator , th e annua l averag e ne t powe r sale s (the electricit y produce db

y th e turbin e generato r an dsol dt o th

e utility ) ca nb e determined . Th e tota l canbe proportione dbac k t o eac hboiler , base d a nthe amoun t o f fue l lrput fro m eac h boiler , t o determin e ho w muc ho f the sale s t o assig nb o eac hboiler . Fo r example , i f two boiler s o f ove r 25 0 nm Btu/h r hea t lrput pas s stea m througha canno ngenerato r an dsel l a tota l o f 6 0 M W o f electricity , the tota l wil l be proportione dbac k bo eac hboiler . Assumin g th e fue l input fro m eac hboile r i s the same , eac hboile r wil l sel l 3 0 MW . I f thi s I s mor e tha n1/ 3 o f the potentia l electri c outpu t capacity , eac hboile r wil l b e subjec t t o Subpar t Da . I nanothe r example , tw o boiler s o f equa l hea t input rat e sen dstea m throug

ha singl e turbin e generato r an dsel l a tota l o f 4 0 M

W electricit y

t o a utilit y

grid . Assumin g the fue l inpu t fra neac hboile r i s tli e same , the 4 0 M

W o f tota l sale s woul dIt

- ; roportlone d equally , wit heac h boilc i -jne

d 2 0 MW . Hence , neithe r bo i le t <- . i excee dth e 2 5 M W andhecan e subjec t t o Subpar t D , however .

^ i

### COD E REFERENC E QUESTIO N AFFECTE D REGULATION DETERMINATION DISCUSSIO N

Tw o point s mus t b e emphasize di n thi s determination . Th e annua l averag e ne t powe r sale s ar e proportione dbase do nthe amoun t o f fue l actuall y

firedi neac h boiler , no t simpl y

o nboile r capacity . Subpar t D a canno t b e circumvenete dt y

combinin g stea

m fra nexistin g an dne w facilitie s o f identica l capacit y an dsupplyin g a greate r proportio no f th e stea m usin g th e ne w

facility . Th e secondpoin t i s tha t usin g thi s proportiona l approac hi s onl y possibl e whe nthe boiler s ar e interconnecte dt o th e steam turbine s b y a cuiim i stea

m line .



# L 

# J

### 5 i C



## . 5 K-

_ l lm 

# M z o- S 

# I 2

s 

## !

0 < U 

# J - ffl q 

## ^ 3 2

" ac 

## 2 

# iS


# I

s s

- fe — < £

a . a - o 

## 5 - 1 r 2 *
" 5

- 

# s * a
s 0

- ; i



### £ 2 N 

## 5 — J 

# HI " 

# 1

» « > • 

## •p 

# 1 1

• V > , n e 

# r

s . s

y u i 

### x u i

- 5 1 0 1 - c n « a W P >s o i C 3 . ' fe » C U C ^ It "- « T- XJ

^ 41 x. Z —3 Z



## •5 H& 5 I * !*• . a l * ^ > . ID B H \_ , " 2 fe ~ g —(» .


### " ?i Q & 

### S" < 

## * £ ^S 8 

## s * 9 

### > < - S * - g —*J

c 1 0 J 

## B&$1%2$

" 5 

### sis '

• 5 fl — 

### § 

### <5 ~ " B w S 0 — fe • " w 

## * * -3. ,

W- J l 

### _«

' »*•? « 1 . 5 C * " , 

# It

C L a *j"f i J 0

1 w1 . C



# -SflSiT.3
-



# s 3

1 3 »

6 £ 3 

## .pf e
n I zs a * > 

## S S j , 5 .f e

- 3- •* = «>*-.„

_

1 0 1 ) — 

# ;42j »

S 2 

# J . u —

—>a ~

* J —

1

### out :

t - 4 BIJWHK K UHI-STU N Ait-tlcriai ) R1X1IIATIC N IH-.TKH MlNATlt N DISCUSSIO N

Interna l inunoratilu m (Wllaci i t o Devine , Ifeyio n I , 11-10-74 ) .I s tli e combine d nunicipa l reftise/scwtig e slmVj e Incin erato rpnijiOBo l fo rHi e trw i o f Ifcilyofce , Massachusetts , subjec tt o HKC

S unde r Sui-pur ti-:,o , o rboth ? Subpart s Subpar tE
Rcvised i See B- 7 Ih e facilit y I s onl y subjec tt o N5I 5 formuni cipa l incinerator s becaus e (1 ) tli e feci lil y i s designe d primaril y a aanu n le i pa l incinerato r an d (2 ) th e fecillty wil l consum e 10 0 tone/da y o f soli d waste , mor e tha n 75% o f wlild i i a municipa l typ e waste . Sinc e th e regulation s fo rsewag e sludg e incinerator s d o no tspecif y ho w th e standard s wil l appl y vhe n sewag e sludg e i s bums ) l n ccntiinatio n wit h othe rwast e materials . I twil l h e necessar y t o refe ral l question s o f

interpretatio n o f Subpar tO , othe r Ow n 100 % sewag e sludge , t o OSSK. M e hav e re - queste d 0AQP

S t o prepar e amendment s t o th e sewag e sludg e regulatio n t o clarif y thi s situation .

L'- 5 Interna l manoramlii n (Wilso n

t o Ikanher , 11-29-74 ) I f a n existin g fossil fuel-fire d stea m ijenerabo ri s chaikjo l t o acociwialal e Ui e us e o f nor e tlia n S O Ions/da y o f

soli d wast e (niuiiei|v, l type) , i s tha tuni tsubjec tt o Sub|vu~ l t ? 60.5 0 N D O

n Jun e 14 , 1974 , M>P S wer e amende d t o specifi - call y exemp tsuc h stea m generator s fro m Subpar t D . At . tli e tim e thi s amendmen twa s bein g con sidered , w e tlnugh tI twa s unnecessar y t o exemp t tlies e init s fran subpar tE sinc e Ui e "primary " purpos e o f

aud i unit s wa s t o generat e steam , no t reduc e wtste .

L'- 6 Akro n nunicl|¥i l

incinerato r(boye r to alones , 11-10-75 ) Hi e Akro n mdiclfvi l incinerato r generate s Ble<-n

n .in I I s design** ! fo rfossi l fue l fiiiiH j i f liv e refus e subtl y shoul d l e inter - rupted . I s i tsubjec tl o SulHMi l I) (Sle.n n ffcnera tion) ? Sulifnrl s Ma s I f

tli e desig n hea tinpu tfor fossil fue l exceed s I) an d I . 25 0 mJUic n ntu/ltr .

^ i 0 1

### Ult i HIIIHII*:.- : (Jtll'^liK M AKKtl-'ITJ l RMUUIATIt N IOTER MINATIO N DISCUSSION

E- 7 Men o (W . .lobnsa n l o

R. n'Unviell ) 1 7 May 7 6 Ib w d o NSP S appl y t o apropose d cruidnu l niriicipa l refuse/sewnrj e sltnlj e incinerato rfo rwliid i liv e fee. I make iq

> ln o no tbee n determined ? Subpart s CTND .I f th e incinerato rburn s greate rtha n 50 % municl E s. O pa l refuse . Subpar tE applies . I f i tturn s greate rtha n 50

% sewag e sludge . Subpart . O applies . I f O applies , a n optiona l prorate d standar d base d a n th e percentag e o f ead i wast e consume d wil l b e acceptable . Optiona l SI P- (Sewag e sludg e SID ) ( % sludg e ootmmed ) + (municipa l refus e inc . STD ) ( % refus e consumed) . Ih e 20% opacit y stahlar d for sludg e app l ie s a tal l time s unde rSubpar tO excep tdurin g malfunction , startup , o rdmtdown . Th e sourc e coul d conceivabl y qualif y for ales s stringen topacit y standar d unde r60.11(e) . Se e detenninatio n E-1 2 forupdat e
E- 8 lette rt o Michiga n l>ept .

o f Natura l Resources . (R . Wilso n t o I) . (Prison ) f » Januar y 7 6 I a a n 8 5 ton/da y solld-liqni d wast e incinerato r subjec t l o NSP S fo r iimicipa l incinerators ? 60.51(b ) OM ) I f I ti s designe d t o bur n mor e tha n 5 0 tons/da y o f soli d waste , i ti s subjec tt o NSPS .

E- 9 Mu m (Heid i t o I) . Hanse n

1 9 .Ian . 7 7 Woul d Seattle' s proposa l soli d wast e lyiolysi s facility b e ccmsldero l amunicipi l incinerato r subjec tt o NSI'S ? N D Pyrolysi s i s atotall y differen tproces s tha n Incineration , an i i ti s no tappropriat e t o afipl y NSP

S incinerato rstanlard s to th e process .



# L

_ t :cxi* ;

t>-i o RI3'H(l-Nt> :

lette ri n K-

X (C . (iaiil.lirxj t o A . Nswnan ) 4/12/7 7 UUKSTH N Al>'IXTn-3 ) RIWIATIO N ll-.TKH MINATIC N DISCI SSIO I

I s ti e pro|x.se d "starve d ai r gasifier " i n Richland , Washington , subjec tt o NSI' S fo rn>uiici|>a l Incinerators ? 60.5 1 No Th e facilit y onl y partiall y oxidize s th e soli d wast e materia l unde rstarve d oxyge n conlltlon s an i the n ca|*ture s th e entir e ho tconbustibl e ga s generate d l n th e proces s forby-produc t usage . Du e t o tlies e majo rdesica i differences , th e facility i s no tsiabjec tt o NSI' S Subpar tE .

t'-l l lette r t o Alask a lumlie r

(K . lepl c t o O . Mason ) 5/10/7 7 I s ableac h plan tincinerato r wtitd i burn s onl y chanical s re - coveru d l n tli e sulfit e |ulpin g proces s subjec tt o NSI' S fo r imnici|>a tincinerators ? 60.5 1 No Tli e chemical s turne d d o no tfi tth e definitio n o f soli d wast e l n 60.51(b) .

E-1 2 lette rt o Alask a(J . Karme r

t o T . Itanna ) 1/24/7 8 Whati s th e presen tapp l icabilit y Sibpart s o f NSI' S t o con tliner ! iiiaiici|ia l E & O incinerator/sewag e treatmen tplants ? Municipa l Incinerato r Sewag e Itefus e % Chargli q Sludge tRat e (tons/day ) 10 0 0 an y rat e 51-10 0 0-4 9 >5 0 tota l wast e 0-5 0 50-10 0 > 5 0 tota l wast e 0 10 0 ' iz- S O mun . refus e 1-9 9 1-9 9
11-9 9

0-1 0 i=. SO tota l waste s > 1. 1 sewag e sludg e App l icabl e Subpar t (4 0 art 60 ) subpar tO •prorated , O/

E eulipar tE
non e subfiar tO
1-0 9

_5 0 tota l wastes , subpar tO

£.1. 1 sewag e sludg e 90-10 0 L 5 0 tota l wnstes ,

i. 1. 1 sewog e sludg e non e

* se e determinatio n E- 7P.7 9



### 'DISCISSION



# . S 

# 1 * d

~s F t 

# 2 

# I

I r 

### >• < 

# s 1 1

1 

## j 

# •I 1 A 

## 2 

# I

1 i

1 

### 1ir^burnedis"amixtureofofwhichisnuiicipaltypemixtureofpaper,wocd,,leather,rubber,aniotherxnbustiblematerialssuchadoesoonstitiitesolidvaste60.51(b).Therefore,theiterneetsthedefinition.Ion60.51(a).andsothe>cttoNSPS.aiipart_neethematerialhefuse,morethan50%steconsistingofardwastes,plasticsnbustibles,andnoniglassanirock",iidefine]insectionlustrialprocesshe*incineratorinsect:ilitywillbesubjc



# 32ss.Ssa.So'. s .

c o

a ^

—<J3 i n60ter(aeinerbasbeendesignedtoburnU/lr.offoes11fuel.IttoruhpartD.whichisnoreIfUiesteamgeneratorgreatertlian250M-tBTwouldalsobesubjectstringent.

u

XJ U 

# 8- u a

a U

- 0 J l 

### « * » - I s 

### Jr 3 ( 0 k. rt —1 T13

_ 

### ~B aiJiWillanindustrialheaterwhichwil1than50T/ilayof6liesubjectLoNSI'Sators?



### a i i ~ a a . ^

_cMoil)tolt-11LoM.Scxilni19APR7H



# £1 | = 3 

### , , I i 

# 5JS i s
_• " <» • 

# 5 8 'isc"Wl11asteamgeneraburnsgreatertliansolidwastet«subjIncineratorstaular



# 1 u —

—1 8MemotoR-IItoD.Santel110MAY78



# z 

# 1

### COD E REFERENC E QUESTIO N AFFECTE D REGULATIO N DETER MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N
E-1 5 Mem o (Reic ht o

Santella ) 4/10/8 1 A modula r incinerato r syste m i s supposedl y designe dsuc htha t i t ha s a capacit y

o f les s tha n5 0 ton s pe r day . Tes t report s andflo w calculation s bot h indicat e th e chargin g capacit y

i s ove r 5 0 ton s pe r day . Doe s NSP S Subpar t E appl y t o thi s system ? 60.50(a ) Ye s Subpar t E state s tha t th e standar dapplie s i f th e chargin g rat e i s ove r 5 0 ton s pe r day . Th e backgroun ddocumen t state s tha t charqln q rat e refer s t o th e capacit y o f th e incinerator . Sinc e tes t result s an dai r flow calculation s sho w tha t th e incinerato r uni t ca nproces s mor e tha n5 0 ton s pe r day , i t i s clearl y

capabl e o f processin g mor e tha nS O ton s pe r day , sn di s thu s subjec t t o th e NSP S o f 0.0 8 gr/dscf .

T J ®COD E REFEROIC E QUESTIO N

E-1 6 Memo (Reicht o Kahn ) 10/30/8 1 AFFECTE D REGULATION DETER MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N

A permi t wa s issued for oonstructio no f a devic e t o recove r silve r fro

m expose d photographi c film . Th e applicatio n claim s the devic e i s a nexperimenta l pyrolysi s device . Evidenc e suggest s tha t municipal / commercia l typ e refus e wil l b e burned , no t solel y photographi c film . I s thi s devic e an incinerato r subjec t t o NSPS ? 60.5 1 Conditiona l Thi s i s no t a pyrolysi s devic e becaus e i t Ye s operate s unde r oxyge nric hcondition s (se e E- 9 an dB-10) . Incinerato r i s "any furnac e use di nth e proces s o f burnin g soli d wast e fo r th e purpos e o f reducin g th e volume o f th e wast e b y removin g combustibl e matter. " Soli dwast e i s "refuse, ' mor e than5 0 percen t o f whic hi s municipa l typ e wast e consistin g o f a mixtur e o f paper , wood , yar dwastes , foo d wastes , plastics , leather , rubbe r an d othe r combustibles , an dnoncombustibl e material s suc ha s glas s an drock. " Accordin g b o the application , RD F wil l b e evaluated , includin g wood , paper , cardboard , office . Industria l and municipa l waste . Sinc e thes e material s ar e considere dsoli dwaste , an dsinc e th e purpos e o f th e devic e i s t o reduc e th e wast e volume , thi s devic e shoul db e considere da nincinerator . Sinc e it s chargin g rat e i s ove r 5 0 ton s pe r da y an d i t wa s constructe dafte r th e effectiv e dat e o f Subpar t E , i t i s subjec t t o Subpar t E whe nburnin g soli dwaste .

T J c o

### I I m:II:UI> * I- :

Amcor dInc . i

nClatk djle , Arizona (3-^!)-74 , Wils-m ) t»u:STi<i N

AIT I H« : pr<)|«s«.« I change s l o th e Ainun d bictlil y i n ("laik dal e considere d a iwl i lici t io n o r constructio n uvdc r NSI'S ? AI>IX*li:i » I'KtailAIKa M
60.6 0 mrii:it MINATH N DISCISSIO N

F 2 Inleina l Mcnorandun , (Wilso n

l o rtcaln , Regio n IV , 4-11-7 5 am i 5-15-75 ) Ho w<lue s a |ortliii» t cemen t plan t whic h utilize s tin ' kil n exhaus t t o hea t tli e leei l t n tli e drye r a|ipl y l o Mil's ? 60.6 0



### r- 3

F- 4 Idea l Cemen t Cn.

Wilson ) (7-31-75 )

lette r t o Enviroted i (G . Steven s t o IJ . Marline/ ) 21 1 Januar y 76 Ar e cemen t plant s whic h conver t fni n natura l ijas l o coa l subjec t t o Par t 60 ? N o discernibl e increas e i n emission s inrcuis .
SAU KA S F- 2 60.1 4 60.6 2 60.6 3
60.62(a) , (c ) N o Aincor d claime d tha t ti c informatio n i n it s re ques t unde r 60. 5 i s confidentia l ounmorcia l ani l financia l information . Therefore , thi s deter minatio n ha s bee n classifie d "(-U K OFFICIA L IH E CNI.Y. " Tli e Enforcemen t Divisio n Directo r i n eac h regio n ha s a onpy o fthi s determination . Th e fee d rat e t o b e use d l n determinin g compli anc e o fti e kil n shal l b e th e fee d rat e t o th e kil n only . Sectio n 60.62(a ) state s tha t "n o owne r o r operato r shal l caus e t o b e discharge d int o th e atmospher e fro m an y kil n an y gase s whic h contai n particulat e matte r i n exces s o f0.1 5 k g pe r metri c ton o ffee d (dr y basis ) to th e kiln" . Th e performanc e tes t slvoul d b e conducte d wit h ti e fee d to th e drye r sliu t off . Th e absenc e o fa significan t increas e i n emis sion s a s determine d b y th e student' s Ttes t i n Appendi xC o fPar t 6 0 exclude s the m fro m applicability . SAM KA S F- 2 HAG I I th e gase s fro m Ui e kil n pas s throug h th e kil n collectio n devic e prio r t o enterin j th e ra wmil l dryer , tie n tlx i rawmil l drye r contro l devic e must li e designe d to meet th e 10 % opacit y standan l only . 'Ih e sourc e coul d conceivabl y appl y for a les s stringen t Capacit y standar d uixlc r 60.11(e) . Th e opacit y standar d fo r tli e kil n collectio n devic e i s 20« . laL'ttc r t n Dept . o l Human Heimurce s (It . tl'fxmnel l l o Iv . Urogory ) 1 9 Apri l 7 6 SAMI vA S I- J Se e F- 3

loo froCOD E REFERENCE OUlvSTItl N AFFIvCTE D RICUI-ATIO N Dlv-lt.lt MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N

F- 6 lette rt o Portlan d Cemen t

Assn . (W . Johnso n t o C . Sclinetijetger ) 2 4 Jun e 76 . Ilow d o NSPS emission s standard s d|ol y t o ane woperatio n involv ii» l a4 stag e prelieate rwit h a prccalcine ran d tvypos s fro m whic h ther e ar e tw o outlet s fo remissions ? 60.62(a ) (1) . (2 ) Wit h th e bypas s closed , th e syste m mus tmee ttli e particulat e anissio n an d opacit y standard s o f 60.62(a) . Wit h th e bypas s opL-n , sin.ultaneou s samplin g a tbot h ojtlet s mus tyiel d aoailiinc d (•articulat e anission s rat e r o greate rtha n .3 0 lb/bi n o f

fee d an d eac h anissio n poin ti s . limite d to a20% opacit y requ i rement .
F- 7 Mem

o (Steven s t o Mas]any ) 1 0 Jan . 7 7 Ma y allowabl e particulat e emissio n rate s fra n bot h ti e kil n ari l tli e clinke rcoole rb e adde d whe n bot h thes e facilitie s hav e onl y on e camio n ven tt o tli e atmosphere ? Ye s Addin g th e emission s rate s t o provid e aoonblne d allowabl e emission s rat e i s acceptable .

F- 8 Mem

o t o R- X (C . Gauldin g t o B . Eusebio ) 3 Ma y 7 7 (a ) Wha ti s ti e applicabl e particu - 60.62(a )

lat e standar d fo ra kil n uhos e desig n incorporate s afeatur e whereb y th e produc ti s coole d prio rt o discharge ?

(b ) SAM E AS F- 3 (C ) SAM E A S F- 2 Ti e plan ti n questio n doe s ro thav e aclinke r cooler . Tli e kil n i s designe d suc h Uia ttii e clinke ri s coolt d i n alowe rextensio n o f th e kiln . Sinc e n o justificatio n lia s bee n provide d l o slw w tha tthi s kil n wil l resul ti n greate r emission s tha n tlo;:c - foun d i n nor e trai l tiona l kilns , thi s kil n mus tmee tti e particulat e anissio n standard s fo rkiln s i n sectio n 60.62(a) . (b ) Se e F- 3 (c ) Se e F- 2

o o c otun- : 

### itivFi-jtmc t OHVIIO N AH'H"IM 1 Hiiaiiy\TK W I>.-IT:R MINATIC N 

### DISCUSSIO N

C.- I lielte rfrom R-VII t o J . Eas ti n 2 9 Jun e 7 9

G- 2 

### Mem o (Reic h t o Davis ) 5/12/8 2 r o th e NSP S regulation s per tainin g l o nit i i c.«:i«l plant s ap|>1y t o any facilit y whic h produce s M.a

k(30-70* ) nitri cacid , regar d Ieii s o l 

### it s size ? 60.7 0 

### Ye s Ti e regulation s appl y t o an y facilit y producin g wea knitri caci d b y eithe rU e pressur e o r atmospheri cfircssur e process . Tlier e i s n o minimu m siz e governin g ajif> l ica tio n o f

th e regula tions . Th

e unit s i n question , whic h ar ccapabl e o f producin g les s tlia n tw o tons o f aci d pe r<liy , ar e coveio d unde rSubpar tG .
A nitri caci d plan t$60.2 » wa s constructe d i n $60.14(e)(6) j earl y 1975 . Th e Subpar tG compan y ha s no

w 

### discontinue d us e o f

th e contro l device , claimin g th e plan ti 6 no tsubjec t t o Subpar tG becaus e i t i s compose d o f

existin g equipmen trelocate d t o th e site . I s thi s ane

w sourc e subjec tt o NSPS , o r rathe rtb e relocatio n o f a n existin g sourc e an d a s suc h exemp tunde r$60.14(e)(6) ? Thi s facilit y wa s constructe d usin g component s fra n tw o existin g nitri c aci d plant s i n differen tStates , a s wel l a s $168,53 2 o f ne wequipment . A n existin g nitri caci d plan ti s an y nitri caci d productio n uni tth e constructio n o f

whic h cemmence d befor e Augus t17 , 1971 . Thi s facilit y di d no texis ta s a productio n uni t befor e tha tdate , eve n thoug h san e o f it s component s wer e i n existenc e prio rto tha tdate . Rather , thi s plan trepresent s ane wnitri caci d productio n uni tforme d fra n part s c f severa l existin g unit s a s wel l a s newcomponents , an d i s thu s subjec t t o Subpar tG .

o o js
.RM-'lvlll-NL' K (JtllvSTK N

II- I Itetrol tOioiilca l Works ,

Mich . (Nuv . 21 . 197 3 - Wilson ) AlVt-L-llvn RIUIIATIOM IKTKRM INATIOI M DISCISSIO N
(a ) Se e A4
(b ) I f productio n i s increase d aliov cdesig n ca|>acit y an i a n emissio n omitro l ilevic e i s in stalle d t o irevent . a n in crevis e I n actua l emission s i n term s o f weigh to f

|o l lutant/tlin e (e.g . lb/hr) , i s thi s anodification ? 6O.IT 0 60.2(h ) N o Se e A 4

Till s coul d no tb e considere d amodificatio n sinc e tlier e i s n o Increas e i n emissions .

11- 2 Allie d Cliemica l Plant ,

Anaoortes , W. . (6-10-75 , D . Hansen , R-X ) Wher e afacilit y i s enlarge d ari d "new " o n IssIon s ar e Intermingle d wit h ol d emissions , to w i s com plianc e determined ? 60.0 2 60.8 3 Th e entir e facilit y (ol d an d ne w section ) i s sub - jec tto NSP S unles s th e ne w emission s ca n h e monitored .

11- 3 lette rt o Northwes tAi r

Itillutio n Autliorlt y (I) . Hanse n t o O . Ibllman ) 1 2 Mar . 7 6 Ma y th e instmnen tspi n o f tli e continuou s unissio n monitorin g equipmen tli e se ta t0-200 0 |ip n a t Allie d Chemical' s recentl y expimle d Sulfuri cAci d plan ti n R-X ? Ye s Ti e accuracy , calibratio n erro rspecifications , an d respons e tim e o f th e non i to rwoul d b e th e sam e a s require d t y NSI' S bu tth e zer o an i cali - bratio n drif twoul d diffe rt y a s muc h a s 2 5 ppm .

11- 4

11- 5 lette rto 3 M (1). , (T . Voltaggi o l o l> . Derifora<Vi ) 1 9 fiel . 7 6

leLte r(O . livel y t o C . White ) 7 Jan . 7 7 .I s SL>2 testin g wit h Matliesou - 60.1 3 Kltagaw n ga s detecti m lul-u s ever y 60.8 4 s i x molli s «i

n <«x.tplabl e alternativ e t o SO j omi tiniKm s nonilo rh> j fii r Sulfuri cAci d plants ? N o

I s asulfuri c.el d plan twhic h i s desitjno l t o lre<i l an i o.mver tth e sulfu rilioxid e onill.e d fro m £in c concentrat e roaslfu j subjec tl o HSI-J ? 60.0 1 (a ) Usin g tlies e tubes , asampl e coul d onl y b e draw n fra n apoin tsevera l indie s inslit e th e stack , an d onl y lOOo e o f

sampl e i s withdrawn . Also , deter - minin g stac kga s Do w fra n proces s inle tai r conpressn rcurve s I s o f questionabl e accuracy . Ihes e tube s ar e no tdeslgna l forai d ar e no t suitabl e fii rmeaaurirr j effluen temissio n level s (ru n proces s stacks .
No NSI' S d o no tappl y to facilitie s wher e conversio n

to sulfuri caci d i s utilize d primaril y a s amean s o f preventin g sulfu rdioxid e anisslon s t o tli e aUiio6|iliere .

o o o i<» n H : Itlvl-lvltlNC C

l - l Interna l Mcmorandii n

(Conlwii i U i Regiona l fli t ic e Director s AI.W Progra m Div . H-27-74) . («u:;rii» i AFFI X.TE D l.rXaJIAI'I. N Wv-n:n MINATIfJ N DISCUSSIO N

Ar e Asphal t Plant s whirl . u;» : li e Drye r bri m I'n.X'a. s subjec l L o USPS ? 60.9 0 Ye s T i e possibilit y o f hydrocarbon s i n ti e exhaus t gase s raise s som e questio n concernin g applicatio n o fa bag-lous e to thi s typ e o f plant , li e oil s coul d possibl y coa t an d plu g ti e hags . Ther e is , however , nothin g whic h preclude s a|iplicatio n o f a ventur i scrubber .
1- 2

1- 3

1- 4 Interna l Mcmorandii n

(Wilso n t o llevine . Regio n 1 , 11-4-74 )

Interna l Memorandi m (Wilso n t n Wassersmj , Regio n III , 12-5-74) .

(Jo e Holme s turn R»«|ei ' Gorski , Regiix i V , 2-21-75 ) l i e Narragansot t Improvemen t Compan y 60.9 0 lia s replace d a rotar y dryer , a mix in g lower , includin g screenin g systu n storag e bins , a weig h lo|i|ie r an d mixe r an d als o liv e existin g electrostati c precipitato r wit h a fabri c filte r dus t ci> l lector , i s thi s ini t subjec t t o NSI'S ?
Ar e asphal t plant s nountu l o n truck s ("Asphalt-Mobile " plants ) subje.r t t o Nil's ? Ye s Sinc e thi s facilit y lia s replace d nearl y al l o f th e canpnnen t part s whic h compris e a n asphal t concret e plant , an d thes e part s accoun t fo r mos t o f th e emission s associate d wit h suc h a facility , i t i s equivalen t to th e installatio n o f a ne wsource .

60.9 0 Ye s

I s a n existin g |o i t.ihl e .i:.|bal t plan t subjec t lo-NSI' S i l il . Ir.ins ler s OWIH; | sl i i| > au l leloc.ites ? 60.9 0 N o T i e backgroun d documen t (APTD-1352c ) a t pag e 11 9 indicate s ther e i s n o justificatio n for no t in - cludin g portabl e plant s unde r th e standard . Initially , performanc e test s stoul d b e oondicte d c n eac h affecte d facilit y unti l ti e Regiona l Offic e i s reasonabl y confiden t tlia t Asplialt Mohil e plant s ar e consistentl y achievin g con p i ianc e wit h NSPS . Onc e consisten t conp l ianc e i s assuiurt , performanc e test s ma y b e waive d i n accordanc e wit h Sectio n 60.8(h)(4 ) o f NSI' S

Se e pag e 931 0 o f Marc h 8 , 197 4 Federa l Register .P.8 7



# s i

i S £ -



### S r i £ 3 1 

# 4 6 

# fl aTS *

J J i s o * a3

s i d "2 . n i £ 5 S. U £— i> 6

JJ

• a W . w a . 2 —

. P f o 2

. c 4 J 1* 1 a U Q l • * a

m ffl U 0 at . £ 4 1 aa a 0 C < 9 g i 

## t-- i St? * ffl ^ ID • —_t Ca (f l C *C Q C 

## ci2 F^ ^ 5 .fwJSE.i - »ti^fis b 

## §= : tTic.c n o 

## d f SI* * £. 5 v o i o c 2 b 3

- . . 5 « 5

1 - , % * C

c a C



# "i i- 1 

# - t.a : i ^ i a o J xJ ~ Z

—i . a ; * J a U XJ Z J 2 '• " S —
c XJ ir. ^ I S e 3 * •

——c/

i 0 1
I T !


# Si 1 

# a-l i
0 i «1

H 9 E * i

C U * a .



### s « j i e — d i u £ XJ . cj i w aJ

S t a 

# *ish 8

17 1 a —< N < N C N 

### e c

1 5 S 8 3 •Jl X 1 1 

# i t

%2
-X XJ L "i ? ( N • S • * C l - • l a K O < I B a P

U 3) a O U £ C D 

# I s

jj» —* o

e- *


## g & g g * g € ^

B fi * 4 j « u tl ) S u —* J
_£

o E cc* *

^ a e

V & 1" l 0

1 e

—- a t o o —c C * 5 C C | 8 u- s

—K O 0 U

XJ K jz c

u « u 2. 2 "* M

K ° a • ? "• * o* i 

### [JJ» 5 * 

## 8 Bj*£. 3 t^ l i s = S «-« «S««Jt( i »Ja.» . ffl U - /

—4 1 £ — f M —5 c 

### " 9 5 

# s • s . « ffSj|

—>a ^ j . II ) -> • . u i . 

# sir s cS - 

### ^ "i :*

• 6 —i i C i ) - I .

W S! 

## ? 1 ^ | - i - 5 .= •§ £ *s " x -• r « ^ " fi * B 

## i a a . - .a J . ± 1 0 II 1 . c3 C •£ • € —J 

## 5 f

=

I N p a O N ^ 

### o aB 

## F
L a 3 

## v 8 m 

## 8 I S

XJ

•3 V J

• t M Sa ' 

# s V


### • ^ 0



# = EH*

5 0 ! "

3 0 ! tJ£

xJ

—c J < ~ —w

V I 

### <

ra > L . I 4 1 = M — 

# L

### ai* : RM--tKI*K> : fJtlKS'l'-ICN AiriLTIJ ) w-niiATic N rt-TKR MINKTIC N DISCUSSIO N

1- 9 lette rt o Tfcmn g brothers , Inc . (T . I feu rlso n t o J . Ibdley ) 1 Apri l 7 6 Smn e a s 1- 6 Se e 1- 6

1-1 0 lette rt o Industria l

Asrlwil t(W . Pierc e to M . Masters ) 1 9 Octobe r7 6 !«iii e a s 1- 6 Se e 1- 6

1-1 1 Mem

o t o R-VI I (E . Reic h t o E . Stenlienson ) 2 1 Ma r7 7 (a ) I f a n existin g as|hal t60.1 4 concret e plan tIVIG a n Increas e (e)(4 ) i n emission s du e l o I li e recyclin g o f as|iial tanr

l ther e ar e n o physica l change s t o tli e plan t necessar y t o accomodat e Ui e us e o f recycle d aspliat tmaterial , doe s th e plan tleocni e 6ulije»: tt o NSI'S ? (b ) I f a n existin g asptial torncret e 60.1 4 plan tha s a n increas e I n anis e lo ti s du e t o tli e recyclin g o f asphalt , an t tlier e ar e fliysica l change s necessar y t o th e plan tt o accrum>kil e th e us e o f recycle d asiilicil tmaterial , iloe u tli e plan theoun e subjec tl o NSI'S , Suljar tI ? N o ""Hi e evistln g facilit y wa s designe d t o aucumudat e tha talternativ e use " (recycle d asphalt) .

\te s I n thi s cas e th e abov e exceptio n doe s no tappl y

( c ) Mus taplan tvahlc h i s (resentI y oiveio l l y NSI' S otmtiiin e l o nve t NSI' S viiil e iccyc l ii» | as|ihalt ? (<l ) Ho w tJ«Kil. l f«- i fonimic o test e I ccuttlm-ta l fo rapl.m l wliid i i e recyclin g i'isf4»fil 1 7 6O.9 0 Me s

Performanc e test s Shoul d b e conducte d vhil e

processin g recycle d material s i n th e norma l imnne ra to ra!ov e norma l productio n rate , bu t preferabl y a tdesig n capacity .

o o o ocx»* : RIJ'lJII-NCT : QUES T U N AEKHLTEI ) RMGMIATh N TER -

MINATIO

N DISCUSSIO N

1-1 2 Men o t o R-X (E . Heid i

t o R . inner ) 2B SE P7 0 I s on e perfoniianc e tos tru n performe d o n a n as|lial tomicret e plan twit h a n a|irurentl y a<1«)iiat e contro l devic e sufficien tt o determin e oonp l ianc e wit h NSI'S , Suljar t1 7 60. 3 H } Ti e sourc e shoul d h e require ! t o conduc tperfor - manc e test s i n accordanc e wit h th e requlranent a o f 4 0 CF R60. 8

1-1 3 lette rAlalam aAK J (Reic h t o Tliunas ) 1 7 Au g 7 9 I s a n asphal tplan twhic h convert s fra n alot-mi x productio n t o a cold-mi x proluctlci i subjec tt o 16PS 7 60.91(a ) N o Cold-mi x asphal tfacilitie s ar e no tsubjec tt o NSPS . Ibweve rth e plan twoul d b e require d t o mee tth e standar d anytin B i ti s operate d a s a hot-mi x plant .

## ai* ; RH-KKIM-t : QUIXSTU N AFFBLTET ) KttJUIATlO

M ITI.TER

MINATItf

. DISCISSIO N

J- 1 Interna l Memoranlitt i

Farme rt o Steven s lO/B/7 4 Wil l ti e stea m generato rt o li e Installe d a tahydrogenat.io n facilit y b e subjec tt o NSI' S fo r fue l ga s tr»i*xie tio n devices ? 60.10 0 h b Th e function s o f th e plan tapparentl y ar e dif feren tfra n thos e o f apetroleu m refiner y (Sectio n 60.101(a)) . I n addition , th e uni twoul d no tfal l wrie rstea m generato rstandard s (Subpar tD ) becaus e ti e hydrogenatic n unit' s off-gase s wer e no tproduce d "fo rtli e pirpos e o f creatin g usefu l heat" .

J- 2 Gul f

niiladelphi a refinery . Dorte rt o Steven s 11/21/7 5 Ar e ga s pilo tlight s for ane w oil-fire l petroleu m prc»?3 8 heate rsubjec tt o $60,104 ? 60.10 4 N o Thes e pilot s constitut e les s tha n 0.5 to f th e hea t releas e Corth aunit . I twa s no tth e inten to f th e regulatio n t o cove r6uc h insignifican t sources . Pilo tlight s ar e no tconsidere d t o b e combustio n sources .

J - 3 lette rt o Regio n IV

B . Italian ! t o T . Harriso n 7/20/7 6 Whe n shoul d petrolei m refiner y hydro-jo i su l titl e continuou s monitorin g system s l e installe d unde rNSI'S ? 60.105(a)(4 ) I n atimel y manne rafte rspecification s ar e issue d forSectio n 60.105(a)(4) .

J- 4 lette ri n Rag io n I V D . Heal s t o M

. Uiff y 3/21/7 7 IT o NSI' S fo rflui d catalyti c crackin g mil s appl y t o Ashlan d Oil' s residua l oi l converte r fchich wil l hav e annxiinni i onpa cit y o f 20 0 U.l/.lo y a n I ani tles s tha n I lb/h ro f

jtirticulates ? Subpar t J N O NSP S fo

r flui d catalyti c cracking unit s wer e neve r envisioned t o cove r 20 0 hbl/day units . I f large r sla e residua l oi l converte r inlt s wer e built . It I s likel y tha t they

woul d b e abjec t t o NSPS .

T J C OP.9 1



# 5 C O



# ± 3 

# i l
1 1

5

ft 

## ? ! 5 A . z 

## 2

©

w I B 

### Sc i 

# I s

0 £ IN - 

# 1

. d I U f> I

r s 

### i . g O e

1 • 3



# : 2

C g

~ » • 

### & 

# 3 t x £V J 

# = £ Q J U O I S
a W 5 j j 

# , 2

w 

# I
*J —4 C a M 

# I

a 

# I !

• c 0 

# s

J (V . CS S



## , 2
5 " 5 c XJ V



### " E e


# s i

u 0 r > 

# 5S ^ 4 1 . ^



### - I "

* 5 •C



## 5 

# s

a f » a — Si C 

# i s

2 *

—c v



## 5 =
0 ^ 3 » ^ *• »- * r - 

# §* * 

# |8f c 

# 815' ' i M a M 4 J • I o u B > t i " 7 2 , 

# -ss f * E. £ . 

# • 

# 1* 8 " C o 

# II *

Jf c^ a1-S . 9-B I . 0 0 0 0 

# |^> e SSji S

a

S i 

### c 

# s

-it •H o

4 ) -~ i • J £ I S Z COO - 4 1 5 xJ- h 4 1 a . 2 « S 5 _

0 

### 3 6 2 " 5 C > . 

# 1
4 1 

# ? • 

# H 

# li 

# 1 1

I S w A
- 

## 5

>a S 

# I S

* '
- 

# r s V J t ; 

# il l

c y 

### 1 3

—u


### r" J 

# 5 3

XJ r - k . L aP a

•5(in* ; Uin-Jt-KNCI . OHKaTltt J AFITXTM I HHaiiATinr , 

### rariratMINAT10 N DISCUSSIO N

J - 9 Men

u t o Ifcsjio n I I K. I*.'ic h t o G . Hir e Ia n t e 11/2/7 7 Hi y arefiner y l« ' grante d a waive rfro m tli e !>> 2 an d HM S monitorin g provision s o f Suhior tJ ? 60.111 5 (a)(J ) N o A tth e tin e tha tthi s reques twa s made , ther e wer e n o provision s forgrantin g waiver s fra n NSI'S .

•I - 1 0 Men

u t o Regio n I I K . Reic h l o C . Mar c 1ant e 11/9/7 7 I s aplan twliid i processe s paraxyleu e Iro n mixe d xylene s subjec tt o NSI'S , Subpar tJ ? 60.101(a ) Ye s Th e mixe d xylene s constitut e petroleu m derivative s

J-l l ' Mem

o t o Regio n I I K. Reic h t o K

. Giaccon e B/ l 7/7 8 I s a n ST>2 continuou s monitorin g syste m whic h monitor s th e slack s o f tw o crud e oi l heater s usin g asampl e trans|or t1 in cfra n eac h stac kan d aouimn n sn-^ analyze r an d electroni crecoido racceptable ? 60.10 5 (a)(3 ) Ye s Th e syste m describe d abov e wil l b e acceptabl e a s lon g a s eac h stac ki s sample d ever y 1 5 minute s an d bot h stack s ar e teste d simultaneousl y durin g Ui e continuou s monito rperformanc e specificatio n test .

J-1 2 Mem

o t o Regio n VI (K . Reic h t o II . Hergman 10/3//H ) a ) Drie s refiner y generate d natura l ga s constitut e luu l gas ? 60.101(d )
b ) Ar c|roces s lieater s whic h ar e Sirfipar t. 1 capabl e o f

burnirr

j fue l gas , bu tno t actuall y use d t o hu m I in- 1 gas , subjec tt o NliPS , {.uhpar l J ? Ye s
N O I f

a tsom e futur e tim e th e fue l i s switche d to fue l gas , tlie n ti e proces s heater s wil l b e subjec t t o NSPS , Subpar tJ .

.1-1 3 Mem

o t o Regio n VI K . Ifeicl i t n II . Hergma n 9/26/7 8 I O liutau e .m l pio|viii cl.l< : fraction s constitut e fue l gas': ' 60.101(d ) Ye s Thes e gase s ave generate d b y apetroleu m refiner y irocecr . unit .

C O

## cane RtTERtNC K 0L&SI.IC N AFFECTED RUGUIATIGN CCTUt HINATIO N 

### DISCUSSIO N

J-1 4 Ha n (E . Raic h t o

M . Itxipa r7/17/79 ) Doe s th adefinitio n o f petroleu m refinery , forpurpose s o f NSPS , includ e toppin g plants ? 60.10 1 teaToppin g plant s i n apipelin e ar e use d for distillatio n and th e distillatio n proces s i a clearl y covere d unde r4 0 CF R60.101(a ) i "Patroleta * refinery " man s an y facilit y engage d in producin g gasoline , kerosene , distillat e fue l oils , residua l fuo l oils , lubricants , o rothe r product s throug h distillatio n o f petroleu m o r throug h redistillation , crackin g o rreformin g o f unfinishe d petroleu m derivatives .

J-1 5 Kem

o (Raic h t o Sydnor ) 3/19/D O Doe s Subpar tJ appl y b o solven t refine d coa l plants ? 60.100(a) , ODndi - I n th o SH C I prccctui , wtmr

u II « vn.i l li ; i'iui.l^.1 , (b ) tiona l I roote d ;*%} tlu n flltrrnl , th e produc tdoe s ro t (0.101(b ) ' fal l unde rtli e definitio n o f |ulrolcu n n. ti!c f

ir.e d a t$60.101(b ) an d th e plan twoul d rotcon e uido r tit - <k.fInlti<* i o f

|v*tin1eu n refinery . Tb o SI C I t proces s generall y utilize s anor e lyplc.i l re f iniu j proces s wit h th e fina l produc taliquid . Thi s produc twoul d fal l aide rUi e definitio n a f petroleu m i n 560.101(b) . Therefore , i f an y o f th e affecte d facilitie s mentione d i n $60.100(a ) ar e usu d i n th e process . Subpar tJ woul d cpply .

T J CO c o

### CODE REFERENC E QUESTIO N AFFECTE D

REGULATIO

N DETER MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N
T UMem

o (R e i c h t o Miller ) 1/2/8 1 A

smal l petroleu

m refinery , to b

e constructedshortly , wil l contai na refle xdrum . The dru m wil l Intermit tentl y releas e a smal l amount o f gas , whic hwil l b

e vente d t o a boile r fo

r destruction . Woul d th e boile r b

e considereda fue l qa s combustio

n device , an

dth e sourc e subjec t t o th e monitoring provision s o f Subpar t J ? 6ft.101 , 60.10 5 Sinc e of f qa s i s heln g vente dto a fue l qa s combustiondevice , th e sourc e is subjec t t o Subpar t J an

dmus t fulfil l th

e monitorln

q requirement s i

n$60,105 . Becaus e o f th e lo w concentrationo f H2 S i nth e proces s qas , it i s appropriat e t o allo w a n alternative metho

do f monitorln

q inthi s cas e provided tha t complianc e i s demonstrate dan

dth e quality

o f th e proces s qa s o r som

e othe r paramete r doe s no t chanq e siqnlfIcantl y

enoug ht o jeopardiz e compliance . Ye s

C OCOD

E REFERENC E QUESTIO N APFBCTT O REGULATIO N DETER - MINATIO N 

### -j=lT Memo(Relc ht o Kohnert )

7/7/8 1 Doe s Subpar t J appl y t o a ne w

boile r Installe dt o replac e th e refinery' s two existin g boilers ? 4 0 CF R60 , Subpar t J 

### Yes

•3=i r Mem o (ReldTTo —

Wagoner ) 1/22/B 2 Hj S i s strippe dfro m fue l ga s t o mee t the NSP S fo r a ne w

boiler . I f the ll 2 

### S i s returne dt o th e fue l ga s suppl y

o f a n existin g fue l ga s combustio ndevice , woul dthi s constitut e a modificatio nand subjec t th e existin g devic e b o NSPS ? 

### 560.14(e) , Stixpar t J 

## TB " MSOSSIC N
Th e provision s o f 6ubpar t J ar e applicabl e to any

new,'modifie do r reconstructe dfue l ga s combustio ndevice . A fue l ga s aonbustio ndevice , define d a t $60.101(g) , include s ar y boiler s usedto ocntxis t fue l gas . Therefore , installatio no f the boiler , afte r th e effectiv e dat e o f th e regulation, constitute s oonstructio no f a new sourc e an dsubject s th e boile r to provision s o f Subpar t J , providin g it s fue l sourc e continue s t o b e refinery fue l gas . Tli e exemptio na t $60.14(e)(4 ) provide s tha t us e o f a nalternativ e fue l o r ra w materia l i s not , i nitself , considere da modificatio ni f th e sourc e i s capabl e o f accomodatin g thi s fue l o r raw material . I nthi s case , th e existin g combustio n devic e i s already

capabl e o f burning fue l gas .P.9 6



# e g

0 xJ U ) k l M



## S g 

## | g , 1 3 t * **" * fio t u * —

•u a 

# *'f l

<

B 0

O O O

. 6 v £ a O I O 

## S o 

## ~ 8 s i « 0 t a o s c . u - y u > . e t c £ E 41

_W ^ cN t

y i o u —C m 

## -?.?* . 8 I D U t£ u

C M 

## 6 * 

# I I § 8 

# I - * ~ C a W — . UU £ Q • a U 5 ( V 3 

## ""88*^ 0
6 >a"5 J * . 2 3 b » ^ 3 — *J

9 Q,b«ir t 

# dril l

4) - I k l - I . H 

## 8 .8 2 8-5 tf l —* n S p <"* u 5 i n w o X« « wv H£ ^
e - piil ! Jt r (SU E S- n £UQ.kkw« s t l 

## >a" S 3 S* o 2 n

_wTO u C n a u e - p e io pi t u
* • * 2 •• •"•

< " » c o



### ~ au 

## &• § J 5 e o C 5 oi S 

# li-i

.

C V C ' vw, g

T ! P ->

*



## 8 : S'S' o •8. H 

## » 8 3 

# I * 

# s " s 1 8

# e
t l ( «

« C " O i> 2

### COD E Dat e o f Respons e QUFSTTC N AFFECTE D REGULATIO N nPTFR MINATIC N DISCUSSION
d ) Wha t i s tb

e Inten t o f S60.105(a)(4) ? It s Inten t i s t o allo w monitorin g o t ll 2 

### s concentratio no f th e fue l ga s far a conbustlo ndevic e whic hremove s H^ S prio r t o burning , a s a nalternativ e t o SO , monitoring . Fo r a eourcehavin g severa l carioustio

ndevice s whic hbur na canno n fuel , H 2 

### S monitorin g ma y b e performe da t on e poin t wher e the Hj S concentratio ni s representativ e o f al l feedsupplies . Wher e Gourc e contro l method s d o no t conform t o the provisions , alternativ e monitorin g requirement s ace provide da t 560.105(a)(3) . Continuou s monitor s fo r SO j shoul db e Installe dan

doperationa l prio r t o performanc e testing . Continuou s monitor s fo r H 2 

### S shoul db e installedlna timel y manne r afte r specification s ar e issued . e ) Whil e performanc e specification s for ll 2 

### S CEM s renal n unpromulgated , wha t i s EPA' s polic y regardin g th

e implementationo f S60.105(a)( 3 and4) ?

T l C O ^ 1P.9 8



# 5 

# {•fas . : !' •
! §

IW• « < U JB O S V a O £0 1 

# «5 U fifths

JJT J 8 " J J S B k a 9

!t^fi* i 3 D

B ^ > 

### B 

### 8" c 

## 8 = E

### - *

3 Qtil^l O

ft)— a W
. W 

# 3f l



# 8

• 9

### an: RU-'Utt-no : o t I I w r I I w AITtCTU I RtXUIATIC N nCTKRHINATIC N DISCUSSION

K- l Interna l Memo , Regio n VI .

(Wllm i t o Itoyle ) 8/12/7 4 I f arnirml astorag e tank s ar e 60.11 0 ODnrii dianga l t o stor e crud e oil . I s 60.2(h ) tiona l tha tconsidere d a "modification" ? Tlies e tank s ar e subjec tt o NSP S onl y i f the y wer e no tdesigne d prio rt o An a11 , 1973 , t o accomo - dat e th e storag e o f crud e oil .

K- 2 lette rb o Exxo n (M . Tricho n

t o F . Westphal ) 12/30/7 5 a ) I s a causti cstorag e tan k subjec tl o NSI'S ? 60.1Kb , d . Cbrrii e , f, ) tiona l .I f th a causti cI s no ta petroleu m liquid , petro - leu m hydrocarbon , o rcondensate , th e causti ctan k i s no taffected . b ) to a storag e vesse l fo r petroleim i liquid s greate rtha n 40,00 0 gallon s subjec tt o NSI'S ? 60.110(a ) Tfe s

K- 3 Mem

o i n Regio n V I (A . Harriso n to N . Radford ) 4/6/7 8 Ikie s relocatio n o f storag e tank s constitut e mul l f

icatlo n ir»le rNSrS ? 60.14(e)(6 ) N o Relocatio n o f existin g facilitie s doe s no tconsti - tut e nodifIcatlo n unde rNSPS .

K- 4 Men o i n Regio n V I

(A . Ihrrlao n t o V . lajiness ) 7/14/7 8 I S a petrole.n i liquid s storag e vesae l a ta drillin g am i |roi1uc tlo n facilit y subjec tt o NSPS 7 60.110(b ) No Thi s subpar tdoe s no tapply t o storag e vessel s for petroleum o rcondensat e stored , processed , and/o r treate d a ta drillin g an) production facilit y prio rt o custod y transfer .

T J CO CO

### aeaTic M Mracre o

RtniATIO H IKTHt M NATIO N OIBCUniC H
"EP I Latta rIRalc h to Vlanic )



### 6/ia/a o t^trolau al adaflna d a a"th a aul aoi l rantvad Arc n th a eart h an d th aoll adarlva d fro ata raanda . ahal e and coal* , roc U apurpoaa a o f U C ragulatloia . doe e faatrolau aInclud e oll aton—1 I n th aooal-ookin g procaaa— ooa l ta rand lt arefine d ooa l ta rolla ? 

## ltt.U U Ito lh adefinitio n o f patrolcu aa acurrantl y uead I n federal VO

C ragidtJon adoe ano tlnclul e ooa l ta r and lt arefine d ooa l ta rolla . th aorigina l lntan to f

th adefinitio n ta tt o enaur * coverage ) at ooa l gasificatio n an d liquefaction . I C I t\m a<t<—fftantl y datenalne d tha tooa l ta ro rooa l ta r oll aar e algrtltlcan tcontributor * t o ai r pollULlon , VfK

Ma y ragulat * th

—a ttha ttl— .



# • IOOO E REFERENC E QUESTIO N AFFECTE D REGULATIC N DETEP MIMATIC N DtSCUSSIC N



### Ka- 2 Lette r (Heid i t o Goldberg /

Raher ) 8/26/8 1 Wbul d th e Installatio n o f piping , ptr p o r mixe r t o a storag e tan k i n conjunctio n wit h a produc t storag e chang e (whic h Increase s missions ) caus e th e tan

k t o becam e subjec t t o th e NSPS ? S6<U«(e) . SUipar tK

a Conditional 

### I s ther e ad e minimu s Subpar tK a Increas e threshold , I.e . on e ton/year , belo wUilc h th e NSP

S woul d no tappl y t o a non-exemp tstorag e change ? No Providin g tha temissio n Increase s ar e th e resul to f

th e produc tstorag e change , th e Installatio n o f

pipin g and/o rpumps woul d no tsifcjec tth e tan kt o Subpar tKa . Th e switc h i n produc ti s exempte d b y S60.14(e ) becaus e th e existin g tan ki s capabl e o f

accommodatin g a n alternativ e fuel . Th e pipin g an d pump s ar e Inconsequentia l becaus e thi s equipmen t i s no tconsidere d par to f th e affecte d facility , th e tank . However , th e cas e o f th e froduc tchang e an d Installatio n o f amixe rwoul d subjec tth e tan kto Subpar tKa . Becaus e th e produc tchang e require s blending , th e tan kI s no t considere d capabl e o f accomodatin g th e alternativ e fuel . Also , th e mixe rI s considere d par to f

th e affecte d facility . Thu s th e Increas e I n emission s resultin g fro m th e change s I s con s idere d a modification . Fo rstorag e tanks , missio n factor s ar e use d t o approximat e emissions , missio n factor s d o no tprovid e th e necessar y precisio n to discer n whethe rther e wa s a n Increas e o f

on e ton/year. Increase s ar e determine d o n akg/h rbasis , s o tha taon e ton/yea rIncreas e woul d resul tI n a n emissio n differenc e whic h coul d no t practicall y b e approxlmatie d o n a n hourl y basis .



# JCM * RWUfl-JJU K0UI-2>TI0 N AFFULTU ) DCTKR - DISCUSSIO N RHGIJIATKJ

N M1NATI0

M
Ir- 1 Men o t o ftegio n I I I s a secondar y lear l smelte rSubpar tL tee Sinc e hea tl a bein g reflects ! of f o f th e refrac - (E . Heic

h t o P . Ciaccune) whic h utilize s a rotary kil n tor y linin g Int o th e charg e i n orde rt n meltIt , 1/12/7 8 subjec tt o Nb°l*S ? the rotar y kil n l a essentiall y th e sane a a a rotatin g reverberator y furnace .

X I t o

### COD E REFERENC

E QUESTION AFFECTE D REGULATIO

N DETER MINATION DISCUSSIO N


### L- 2 Mem

o (Reic h t o Geiselman ) 1/5/8 1 A

rotar y kil nsubjec t t o NSP S I s controlled b y tw o baghouse9 . A proce s baghous e control s chargin

g an d smeltin g emissions , an da separat e sanitar y baghous e control s tappln

q emissions . Test s o f th e proces s baghous e sho

w a violatio

no f th

e NSPS . D o emission s fro

m th e sanitar y baghous e nee dto b e determined ? 60.122 }

60.123(b ) N

o Emission s fro m th e sanitar

y baghous e d o not have t o b

e tested , an

dshoul d no t b

e combine dwit hth

e emission s fro

m th e proces s baghous e I norde r t o determine complianc e wit hth e particulat e standard . Thi s is base

do ntw o factors . The tes t dat a use

di ndevelopmen t o f th e standard di dnot include.emission s dat a fro m an y sanitar y baghouse . Also , thi s decision aqree s wit h560.123(b) , whichstate s that "particulat e samplin g shal l b

e conducted durin g representativ

e period s o f furnac e operation , includin q chargin

g an dtapping. " Hence , th

e standar

dapplies ; to th

e emission strea m bein g ductedthroug

hth e captur e devic e tha t lead s t o th e proces s baghous e during al l phase s o f furnac e operation , bu t doe s not appl y

to an y emissionstreams being ductedthroug hothe r captur e device s durin g tapping .a i * RIKHO-NC K 

### uunsrwN AFFHCrU ) RBGIJIATK

N IKTKRM l NA T IO N DISCUSSIO N

M- l Interna l Maiorandi m Boc k

t o Barry , (4/10/74 ) l b ti e foJera l NSP S appl y t o a plan ttin tuse s nustl y oone r art ] bras s irejul s t o pr o luc e billet s Eru n vAiict i oon« rtubin g i s made ? 60.13 0 N o O i pag e 4 5 o f volum e on e o f

th e backgrour d docu I men t(APTIV-1352a ) I ti s state d tha t"th e standard s | d o no tappl y to . . .bras s o rbrone afoundr y opera - \ v tions. " Th e plan tI n qjestlo n appear s t o h e mor e ' afoundr y tha n asecondar y bras s o rbrona aingo t plant . M- 2 Interna l Memorandum

Wilson-Mille rRegio n I . (12/20/74 ) •I s th e leonat d C . Manrtel tAsso ci atea , 60.13 0 Inc . facilit y i n Pi-ovlilenre,R..I. , subjec tt o NSiS ? It o Th e describe d facilit y i s no tsttojec tt o NSP S becaua ath aelectri car cfurnace s wer e constructe d prio rto Jun e 11 , 1973 , an d th e aldltlo n o f a n ai r pollutio n contro l syste m b y Itsel f woul d no tmak e th e facilit y sUrJec tto th e standard . I n th e even tther e ha s bee n amodification , o rsubstan - tia l reconstructio n o f th e furnace s sinc e 6/11/73 , th aonl y standar d o f performanc e th afacilit y woul d b aarfvjec tto I s Sectio n 60.132(b) . vhlc h doe s no tInclud e aconcentratio n limit .

T l U lCt* * RI-FUtt-KCb ' OUKSCK N 

### ArVHur m RtJGtMATHJ

N i*:n:R MINATIO

N DISCUSSIO N

N- l Men o t o R-I V (E . Reic h t o

T . Uil*,s ) fl/11/77 Ar e O-IIOPfurnace s subjec t t o NSI-S , Ailrar tN ? Subpar tN N o Sinc e th e NSP S cnf>lo y Bes tAvailabl e Contro l Technolog y Core n 1 salon s oontrol . to rake O-DO P furnace s subjec tt o NSP S woul d impl y tha tti n 5 0 mg/dac m NSP S particulat e emission s standar d woul d represen tBAC T fo r0-DO Pfurnaces . Recen t tes tdat aha s show n tha tQ-DOPfurnace s are abl e to mee tamor e stringen tonisslc n standar d whe n usin g BACT . taorde rto preven tu s Aran incor - rectl y implyin g tha tth e NSP S Subpar tN onisslon a standar d represent s BAC T forth e Q-BOPfurnace , th e Q-BO Pfurnac e wil l no tb asubjec tt o Subpar t 

### N . Thi s typ e o f

facilit y wil l I s subjec tt o a muc h nor e stringen ts tarn lar d unde rpreventio n o f significan tdeterioratio n (BACT ) and/o rmde rth e ne wsourc e revie winterpretativ e rulin g (IAER) , a s applicable . Revise d i se e update'N- 2

N- 2 lette rt o AAPC C (J . Fanner t o T . Owen

) 11/0/7 8 a ) I s ti e O-0O Pproces s Sulipar tN o f stee l prodtictic n a

n affecte d sourc e inde r4 0 CF

R60 , Sib par tN? » b ) Wha tportio n o f

ti e pro - 60.14 4 ductic n cycl e shoul d Ilk* les t enconftass ? Arctli o rnrulcMn feriud s l«,'tw«.-tr > oxy<|et ) blou u sain>le l o rar e tlies e |xrii«l o cxclmlu d tri m th e tes t[<L-riod? \te s A Q-BO Pfurnac e i s a n affecte d facility . Thi s was state d explicitl y i n th e preambl e to th e BOP F opacit y atandar d the n i twa s promulgate d o n Apri l 13 , 197 8 (4 3 F R15600) . The regulatio n states i Fo rmetlo d 5 , th e samplin g fo reac h ru n shal l centim e foran integra l iuntie r o f cycle s wit h tota l duratio n o f a tleas t6 0 minutes . Tho samplin g rat e shal l h aa tleas t0. 9 dscm/h r(0.5 3 dscf/mln ) excep ttha tshorte r samplin g times , v*e n necessitate d b y proces s variable s o rothe rfactors , ma y b e approva l b y th e Mninistrator . A cycl e shal l star ta tth e begin nin g o f eithe rU e scra p prehea to rth e oxyge n ble w an d shal l terminat e Immediatel y prio rt o tapping .

T l b >C U * REFERENC E 0»IKI7|-K M AFFECTE D PETER - DISCUSSIO N RHUWATIf H H1NATIO N

N- 2 A cycl e start s a t th e be g I m l i n o fth e scra p pre — (cmt. ) hea t I n th e furnac e vessel , or , whe n ther e i s n o scra p prehea t i n th a furnace , i t start s a t th e beginnin g o fth e oxyge n blow . A cycl e terminate s immediatel y prio r to tapping . Typically , ti e hirrrlov n (fo r mel t sampling ) i s a perio d o flo wmissions . A sourc e migh t b e tempte d to exten d thes e period s undul y durin g a performanc e tes t I n orde r to dilut e th e tota l (missions , vhic h ar e measure d o n a mas s concentra tio n basi s unde r th e standard . Suc h circumventio n o fth e standar d i s preclude d fcy sectio n 60.8(c) , whic h read s t Performanc e test s shal l b e conducte d unle r suc h condition s a s th e Administrato r shal l specif y t o th e plan t operato r base d c n repre - sentativ e performanc e o f th e affecte d facility . c ) toe s th e inclusio n o fscra p .I t shoul d h a expecte d to decreas e ti e emissio n prehea t an d ho t meta l ciiaixj e concentration . increas e o r decreas e ti e anlssio n concentratio n a s nyrwo l t o sanfilin g onl y (l e tixytju i blo w pe r ial ? •Pleas e not e tha t thi s supersede s determinatio n N- l date d 8/11/77 .

T lC M * REFERENC E QUEST-IM 4 AFFECTE D RI M 1 1 A TIO N l«TER MINATIC N DISCUSSIO N

O- l Interna l MaroranJix n

(Wilso n t n Storlazzl , R-l , 6/19/74 ) Fo r th e pirios e o f|erfonnatic e testing , lo wBlioul d th e unifosi - tio n o fsewag e sludg e l e segregate d int o primar y sludg e an d otlie r material s (e.g . grit , grease , screenings , etc.) ? 60.15 0 Gbndi - Referenc e NO . 4 liste d c n pag e 6 1 o fVol . 1 o f th e tiona l hackgroiBi d documen t (APTD-1352a ) Indicate s tha t a

typica l fee d mixtur e fo r a sewag e sludg e Incinera - t o r Include s suc h material s a s grease , scum , grit , screenings , supplementa l fuels , et c

0 - 2 Interna l Mcmorarrlu n

(Wilso n t o Oevine , R-I , 7/5/74 ) Sam e a s E- 4 

### Se e E- 4

0 - 3 Interna l Menoranhm ,

(Wilso n t o Devine , fk»j»o n I , 7/24/74 ) I s th e Kllllngly , Connecticu t 6O.IS 0 sewag e sludg e incinerato r subjec t 60. 1 t o rei'S ? 60.2(1 ) \fe a OOnstructlo n o fth e Kllllngl y treatmen t plan t "oonnenced " afte r Jun e 11 , 1973 .

0- 4 Menu , (R . Dupre y t o

Norma n Erxninsto n 2/27/7 6 a ) D o KBP S cove r grit , scum , an d 60.15 0 Yea wast e lim e sltrlg e burne d i n (l e fur nac e alon g wit h thu > sevoy e sludge ? b ) D o NSI S cove r inclierator s use d 60.15 0 N o **ioll y fo r ti e pur|x>e e o freactiva - tin g lin e slinVje ?
c ) n o NSP S rixpiir e Installatio n o f60.153(a ) N J a coi l iiiiKm s nutlt m iix j ilsvic e fo r (I ) mxiiturii»j , rccY>nlii>| , ati l storin g d.il< t <« i sewtHj c slt»l>| o <Ji.ui(o l l o t i e furrkict; ? Flo wrat e measurement s mus t h e mad e o fal l suc h itputs .
Wher e non-recoverabl e wast e lim e i s aonbine d wit h sewag e sludg e i n a sewag e sludg e incinerator , th e stanlar d i s applicable . Th e purpos e o fth e monitorin g devic e i s to measur e sludg e inpu t t o th e furnac e durin g O e complianc e test .

T l 0 0C M *

O- S REFERENC E CIITCITN M AFFECTED n m 1 1 A T K M DETER MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N

Mtn n (R . Wilso n b o J . HTkMuld ) 5/4/7 6 Same a s f)- 2 Se e 0- 2 An optiona l prorate d standar d 'base d o n th e percentag e o f

eac h wast e consume d wil l b e accept able . Th e 20% opacit y standar d forsludg e applie s a tal l time s excep tdurin g malfunction , startup , o rshutdown . Th e sourc e ooul d conceivabl y qualif y fo rales s stringen topacit y standar d unde r 60.11(e) . •OPTIONAL STANDAR

D - (Sewag e Sludg e Std. ) (ISludg e Consuned ) • (Municipa l Refus e Std. ) (%Refus e Consumed )

0- 6 Mem

o (Actin g Director , DSSE l o J . McDonald ) 8/12/7 6 a ) I s agrit/ooars cscreening s incinerato rsubje-e tt o th e particulat e sewag e treatmen t plan tMil's ?

b ) Shoul d inonitorin j au l |«_-r formanc e testin g I tlosct l u n ti e tota l dr y solid s in|xi to f gri t am i screenings ?
c ) Woul d a yrit/crmi's e scrurnlng s incinerato rb e suliji-c tt o tIK * |ki i ticid.it cincim i •Uo i tn;it ; - Sub|>ai tE i i i l In n mil : 1 ) not e 1

1 ki n S n Ion s |«' i ili y o f we t;«>

l ids ? 2 ) mm. - I K m Sl l ton s p.- r<kiy o f il l y :» l id:; ? 60.15 0 Ye s

60.15 3 60.15 4
60.51(b ) Ye s

N o I n ti e Jun e 11 , 1973 , Federa l Register , sewag e

sludg e i s define d a s th e wast e by-produc to f mwicipa l sewag e treatmen tprocesses , includin g an y solid s remove d i n an y uni toperation s o f suc h treatmen tprocess . Eve n Doug h thi s definitio n wa s remove d whe n ti e regulation s wer e promulgated . I ti s ou rfeelin g tha tthi s definitio n supplie s th e inten to f

ti e fina l promulgation .

Subpar tE wa s designe d to cove rIncinerator s burnin g mor e tha n 50% municipa l typ e waste . Qrlt / coars e screeninj s ar e no tconsidere d municipa l typ e wastes .

T l C O

# av e REFERENC E QUESTIO N AFFECTE D REGUIATIO N 

### DETER MINATIO N DISCUSSION

0- 7 Mem

o (G . Steven s to T . Lyttle ) 10/11/7 6 I s ti e we tai roxidatio n (Zbapro ) |«rocea afu rsludj creductio n considere d ascwugo slukj e incinerato rsubjec tt o NSI S o r NESIIAPs ? 60.15 0 N o 

### Ne tai roxidatio n l ano ta n Incineratio n process .

0- 8 tette r(C . McCutche n t o H . Kwcn ) 1/3/7 7 Mus tparticulate s fro aplum e su|i>retiSor ab e Include d In th e allowabl e limi tfo rsludg e incinerators ? 60.15 2 Ye s 

### The NSP S standar d o f

1. 3 lb/to n o f

dr y sludg e wa s establlslie d a s atotal aula s io n limit .

0- 9 Haao I n Regio n X

(C . Gauldin g to M

. Hooper ) 4/18/7 7

O-1 0 Hom

o (Reic h t o Jacobs ) 12/29/8 0 I s asewag e sludg e incinerato r whic h wa s constructe d betwee n Jim e 11 , 197 1 are ! Marc h 8 , 197 4 subjec tto NSP

S eve n thoug h th e promulgate d star tlard differ s from ti e propose d standard ? 60.15 0 Ye s Sinc e th * chang e I n questio n neithe raffecte d th e 60. 1 rentero rtyp e o f facilitie s srfejec tt o NSP S no r th e stringenc y o f

th e emissio n standard , th e uii t I s aUrjec tto NSPS .

Th e Papillio n Cree kHate r (dilutio n Contro l Plan t ha s tw o identica l flui d be d Sludg e incinerator s tfiich hav e me tth e NSP

S emissio n limitation . On

e o f th e Incinerators , uni t321 , wa s teste d a tarat e o f

15,00 0 pound s pe rhou r(pph) , bu t th e operato rno

wwishe s to charg e th e uni ta t20,00 0 pph . Shoul d anewperformanc e tes t b e require d a tth e Increase d chargin g rate , fo rthi s unit ? 560.8 | Subpar t O f $11 4 o f th e 

## CA A Con d



## N o engineerin g judgemen tsuggest s tha tIncreasin g

th e sludg e loa d rat e o f wi t32 1 t o 20,00 0 pp h woul d b e reasonabl y expecte d to resul tI n com pliance , an d henc e anewperformanc e tes twide r S60.8(c ) nee d no tb e required . Severa l factor s suppor tthis i (1 ) Th e equivalen tuiit , whic h burn s th e sam e compositio n o f

sludge , wa s teste d a tasludg e loa d rat e o f

22,00 0 pp h an

d metth e standar d wit h
• wid e margi n o f

compliance . (2 ) Uni t32 1 ha s se tth e standard , eve n thoug h a t• lowe rrate . (3 ) Th e lo wvolatil e solid s conten to f th e sludg e use d i n th e uni t32 1 performanc e tes tcause d les s efficien tburnin g tha n woul d occu rI f th e curren t typ e o f sludg e i s burned . (4 ) Th e owne rha s agree d tha tth e as h loadin g no texcee d th e as h loadin g rat e durin g th e wil t 32 1 performanc e test . Thi s alon e i s insufficien t to ensur e meetin g th e standar d becaus e th e pressur e dro p acros s th e scrubbe rmus tb e con trolle d a s well . Specifyin g sludg e an d as h loadin g limit s o ra typ e o f sludg e to b e burne d ar e no trequirement s **ilc h mus tb e me tI n orde rforwil t32 1 t o avoi d conductin g aperformanc e test , bu tfailur e to mee t thes e condition s wil l lesse n th e justificatio n for believin g thi s Incinerato ri s i n compliance . Additionally , th e Nebrask aPE C and EP

A ar e fre e to requir e a n additiona l performanc e tes ta tan y tim e a tth e Increase d loadin g rate , base d o n $11 4 o f th e Clea n M rAc tan d 4 0 CF R60.8(a) .

## cu * REFERENC E OH I 1ST IO N AFFECTE D RHntllATHl N DETER MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N

P- l 

### lette ri n Regio n I X (R . O'Obrmel l t o R . Sl'evwright ) 8/17/7 7 

### a ) Woul d afue l swlti h fru n ga s 60.163(c ) am i oi l t o ora l a tan existin g or>|>pe rsinel te rconstitut e a mnlificatio n w»le rNSIS ? b ) Woul

d th e coa l handlin g 60.250(a ) equipnen tnecessar y t o accctuplis h thi s fue l switc h b e subjec tt o NSPS ? N o

W» s 

### Ti e regulatio n state s " A chang e i n th e fue l can huste d i n areverberator y furnac e shal l no tb e considere d anoi l floa tio n unde rthi s part. "
Therma l dryers , pneumati cooa l cleanin g ojulpment , ooa l processin g an

d oonveyin g equipnent , ooa l storag e systems , an

d ooa l transfe ran ] loadin g system s locate d i n acoa l preparatio n facilit y whic h processe s mor

e tha n 20 0 T/da y an d wa s oonstructa d afte rOctcre r24 , 1974 , wil l b e sub jec tt o NSPS . SubpartY.

# [

OI * REFERENCE QUESTIO N AFFECTE D DETER - DISCUSSIO N RIEUIATIO N MINATIO N
Q - l Mar a (l> . Bel l t o O . Stevens ) D o NSP S fo r zin c smelter s appl y 60.17 1 Yea A roaste r i s define d as an y facilit y i n whic h a 5/12/7 6 t o roaster s a t a n electrolyti c lin e sulfid e or e concentrat e charg e i s heate d i n zin c smelter ? th e presence o f ai r to eliminat e a si<y>l f lean t portio n (mor

e tha n 10%

) o f th e sulfu r containe d i n th e charge .U l * REFERENC E UIKSTIl N 

# t^xim, MHJW R O N DISCUSSIO N

S- l Man o t o Regio n II I

(E . Reic h t o S . Wassersug ) 1/19/7 8 Wha ti s areasonabl e |ercen to f t i e tin e t o exjec tviolation s o f tKVS considerin g al l eniasio n tes tdata ? Subpar tS NSPS ar e expecte d to h e me ta tal l time s excep t durin g period s o f

startup , shutdown , o rnai f mo - tion . W

ahav e th e discretion , however , to requir e aretes to f

afacilit y fchich fall s aaonplianc e tes tdi e to wha tappear s t o b e randa n variabilit y i n anis e ions .

T l 

## 3

### DETERMINATION S n f APPLICABILIT Y



### roo E REFERENC E I T- I | Mem o (Reic h t o

Devine ) 11/16/82 . QUESTIO N AFFECTE D REGULATIO N DETERMINATIO N DISCUSSIO N Ar e researc h an d d e ~ v e F o p me n t facilitie s subjec t t o 4 0 CF R 60 , Subpar t T , th e NSP S fo r Wet-Proces s Phosphori c Aci d plants ? 4 7 F R 2675 0 N o EP A propose d (4 7 F R26750 ) NSP S fo r Suhp a t o exemp t pla n capacit y

o f 1 5 o r les s o f eq u feed . Thi s c u exemp t rnsear c facilitie s and bu t woul dno t commercia l un i o nJun e 21 , 198 2

t o revis e th e rt s T , II , V

an dW t s wit ha desig n ton s pe r da y ivalen t P2O 5 tof f woul d handdevelopmen t pilo t plants , affec t any ts .

T l

### a i * REFERENC E QUESTIO N AFFECTE D REailATIc N DETERMINATIO

N DISCUSSIO N

X- l MOI D t o Itejio n VI I



### (E . Iteic h t o E . Rephenson ) 8/11/7 7 a ) tX > NSP S appl y t o granula r tripl e siferpbosfliat e storag e facilitie s ubid i ar e in tlocate d a tmanufacturin g plants ? b ) .I f ti e granula rtripl e si^errltosrhat e containe d i n a storag e facilit y i s mur e tita n 1 0 day s old , ma

y performanc e testin g l e waive d unde r60.8(b)(4) ? 60.241(a )

60. 6 (b)(4 ) Ye s

Yts s 

### Th

e regulatio n doe s no tspecif y asl » cutof f no r doe s i tstat e tha tthes e facilitie s mis tb e locate d a tth e sam

asit e a ath e manufacturin g facility . Mostfluorid e mission s fro m granula rtripl e superphospliat e occu rI n th e firs t1 0 day s followin g manufacture .

T lCOD E REFERENC E QUESTIO N AFFECTE D REGULATION DETER MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N

Y- l tette r(Jac kRava n t o

J . Cbope ro f

Al . Ai r Pollutio n Contro l amission ) 10/4/7 6 D o NSPS appl y t o tlos e facilitie s viiic h sim|>l y stor e o rloa d ooa l withou tperformin g an y o f ti e processe s liste d i n th e definitio n o f

ooa l preiaratio n plants ? 60.251(a ) N o Onl y source s Whic h break , crush , screen , clea n o r dr y larg e anount s o f ooa l wer e Intende d to b e covered .

Y- 2 Mon o t o Regio n VI I

(E . Raic h t o D . Townley ) 2/24/7 7 a ) Ar e ooa l unloadin g operation s 60.25 1 N o covere d b y NSPS Co rooa l pre - paratio n plants ? b ) l aequipnen tuse d t o transfe r60.25 1 N o ooa l fro m unloadin g operation s t o storag e covere d b y KGP S forooa l preparatlu i plants ?


### c ) Ar e cfe n storag e pile s subjec t60.251(h ) tto t o NSP S fo rooa l preparatio n plants ? Bjuipnen tuse d to unloa d ooa l doe s no tfi tth e definitio n o f

an y affecte d facilit y forooa l preparatio n plant s I n Subpar tY . Equipmen tuse d to transfe rooa l fro m i n loa d in g operation s t o storag e doe s no tfi tth e definitio n o f an y affecte d facilit y forooa l preparatio n plant s i n Subpar tY . ' Ope n storag e pile s ar e specificall y exemp twide r 60.251(h) .

Y- 3 Mem

o t o Regio n II I (E . Reic h t o F . Alpiser ) 12/12/7 7 • to aooa l deweterin g syste m tAilo h i s deslgnu l t o dcvote rora l witlou t havii g aga astrea m con e int o direc tcontac twit h "ti e ooa l subjec tt o NSPS , Sulfar tY , Sectio n 60.252(a) ? 60.251(e ) N o Suc h auni tdoe s no tfi tth e definitio n o f therma l drye ri n Sectio n 60.251(e) .

Y- 4 Latte r(Reic h to Kixwcll )

12/28/7 9 MOuld th e therma l drye r portio n o f

ti e coa l pre - paratio n plan tNSP S appl y t o ne w coa l dryer s i n vhic h coa l i s iidirectl y heated , suc h & s aBearc e drye rvher e hea ti s transferre d to th e coa l throug h ameta l shell ? 60.251(e ) N o I n thi s case , th e inne rdrye rtiix j i s heater ! b y o i l burner s ai d thi s hea ti s transferre d throug h th e meta l shel l to th e ooal . Sinc e th e hca;t cga s 6trea.i i i s no ti n direc tcontac twit h th e coal , thi s i s no tconsidere d atherma l drye rarc ) woul d 

### no tnee d to meetNSPS.

T l 0 )CXI * REFERENCE O "ES T ICN AFFECTE D

RHJOIATIO N l*TER MINATIC N DISCUSSIO N

AA- 1 Wils h t o Pa l I a n letter ,

11/6/7 5 toes Par t6 0 a^l y t o electri c ar cfurnace s i n astee l fo«»idry? 60.27 1 No Sectio n 60.271(a ) expressl y exclude s furnace s fro m vhlc h th e nolte n stee l i s cas tint o th e shap e ct finisha l products , suc h a s i n afoundry .

AA- 2 OT E Sylvania ; Salem , Mass .

(DSS E Directo r bo lUinan ) 2/22/7 6 a ) Ooul d scra p iro n b e oileti - 60.271(a ) N o tuto d fo rpreroduco l iro n le i let s t o eion * a n EA

F fro m NSIS ? b ) I f n o flu x material s ar e 60.271(a ) lb s aiVla l t o th e EAF , nn y I tb e exemp t fro m NSPS ? Scra p iro n I s no ti n th e form o f prereduce d iro n pellets . Th e furnac e i s merel y acrucibl e wit h n o flu x material s adde d to th e process . Onl y EAF s t o vhlc h flu x material s ar e adde d durin g th aproces s wer e con s 1 de ra l I n th e developmen to f N5PS .

AA- 3 ton e Sta rSteel , Dallas ,

Tex . (DSS E Directc* - t o Knudson ) 4/22/7 6 May a n FAF wit h astea m hydr o syste m fo renissio n contro l us e a n alternat e manual cniission a testii q netho l c n ayearl y lasts ? 60.273(a ) Cbrrll - I f i ti s datennine d b y inspectio n tha tth e stea m tlona l hydr o systo n necessitate s a n alternat e no n 1 to rin g

method , the n th e annua l enissio n tes twoul d b e acceptable . A tth e tim e o f th e performanc e test , th e sourc e i s require d to monito ral l parameter s critica l to th e performanc e o f th e contro l syste m o f th e affecte d facility . Th e sourc e shoul d the n b e require d to continuousl y monito rthes e para meter s an d to kee p appropriat e record s forEP A inspection .

AA- 4 Mem

o t o Regio n VI I (R . Shlgeliar at o D . 8/3/7 H I s a n alternat e testin g llirgt ) procudur e acceptabl e fo rtestin g

2 ne wMK.1T

N stee l electri car c furnaces ? 60.8(b ) fee Th e alternat e testin g metho d tha tMOO Rstee l suggeste d wil l b aacceptabl e i n thi s case .

Omtac tthi s offic e i f detail s o n th e alternat e metlo l ar e desired .UJH : KIFHIFMC K (JIKiTIO N AFFICI11 ) RFDUI.ATIC

N DETKK

MlNATIO

N DISCISSIO N

AA- 5 Kom

o (!;oic h t o Glaccone ) 

### 12/13/79 . a ) I n orde rt o determin e i f areconstructio n ha s occurred , whatI ton s o f

equipmen tar e considere d par to f

an EA F facility ? b ) Woul d increasin g transforme r capacit y b e a modificatio n unde r NSPS ? 60.270(a )

60.1 4 60.14(e)(2 ) No

c ) Shoul d th e cos to f auxiliar y equipnen tb e considere d viie n makin g a reconstructio n determi nation ? d ) Ar e cost s to b e considere d . cumulativel y wtie

n makin g a reconstructio n determination ? 60.15(b )

60 . I S N

o

Ye s A

n EA F consist s o f

th e followin g item s o f equip ment : shell , tiltin g platform , furnac e super structure , roo f

lif tan d swin g apparatus , furnac e tiltin g gear , an d dus thandlin g system . Th e transforme ri s considere d a n auxiliar y com ponent , no tpar to f

th e affecte d facility . Increasin g capacity , eve n i f omission s increase , woul d no tb e considere d a modificatio n unde r $60.14 . I n addition , wde r560.14(e)(2 ) a 3 amended (4 3 F

R34347) , an increas e i n ti e produc tio n rat e a ta n existin g facilit y wil l ro tb e considere d a modificatio n i f tha tincreas e ca n b a accorplishc d wit)ou ta capita l expenditur e o n th e facility . • Reconstructio n r e fer e onl y to th e replacemen to f conponent s o f

a n existin g facility , vhic h doc s no t includ o auxiliar y components . Allowin g facilitie s to replac e component s on e a ta 'time , withou tsubjectin g th e facilit y to NSPS , woul d circunven tth e inten to f th e regulatio.n s aid th a Clea n Ai rAct . Th e reconstructio n defini tio n a t$60.1 5 doe s no tconside rtim e limitation s fo rreplacemen tconponents .

" » WWI I i im\mmm~r**rV9mmi*m ,IHI»»H I . IIJW^ . 

# JCOD E REFERENC E QUESTIO N AFFECTE D REGUIJvriO N DETER MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N

AA- 6 Memo (Reicht o Watman ) 5/3/8 1 Opacit y standard s arc$60.272(a)(3 ) establishe dfor emission s 560.274(c) , (f ) exitin g fro

m a sho p anddu e solel y

t o the operation s o f an

y EAF(s) . Sectio n60.272(a)(3)(iii ) state s tha t thes e opacit y standard s appl y

onl y durin g period s whe nflo

w rate s andpressure s ar e bein g established . Wha t i s th e purpos e o f th

e provisio n andwhe nd o the opacit y standard s apply ? Th e opacit y limitation s a t $60,27 2 (a)(3 ) ar e for fugitive sho pemissions , no t primar y

emission s exitin g fro m th e contro l device . Sinc e i t i s difficul t t o attribut e fugitive emission s t o a specifi c facilit y o r operation , andth e onl y

facilit y

insid e th e sho psubjec t t o NSP S i s the EAF , i t woul db e difficul t t o sho w tha t opacit y

violation s cause dspecificall y b y th e EA

F ar e occurring . Th e inten t o f 560.272(a)(3)(ill ) wa s t o avoi dthi s problem

b y requiring tha t opacit y standard s h e me t onl y whe nflo

w rate s andpressure s ar e being establishe d unde r 560.274(c ) and(f) . Procedure s fo r determinin g flo w rate s o r pressure s ar e establishe d onl y whe nan owne r o r operato r i s require dto demonstrat e compliance , i.e. , durin g performanc e testing whe nthe source s o f fugitiv e emission s ca nbe mor e accuratel y determined . Dall y record s o f captur e ai r flo w rat e an dpressur e i nthe fre e spac e ar e used , rathe r thanopacit y readings , a s a mean s o f insurin

g carfjliance . I f a maxiim m pressur e an

dminimu

m flo w rat e (establishe ddurin g the performanc e test ) ar e no t maintained , anothe r performanc e tes t ca nbe required .

T l C O

### DETERMINATION S o f APPLICABILIT Y

COD E REFERENC E OUESTIO N AFFECTE D REGULATIO N DETERMINATIO N DISCUSSIO N 

### nn- i Mem o (Roic ht o Deals) , 9/10/8 2 A Kraf t Pul pMil l ha s thre e existin g batc hdigester s whic h ar e vente dt o on e blow tank . Th e company

ha s propose dth e additio no f a ne

w digeste r whic h wil l als o b e vente dt o th e existin g blo

w tank . How

doe s th e Kraf t Pul pMil l NSPS , 4 0 CF R60 , Subpar t F)F) , appl y t o thi s mod i fication ? «r>n.2Hl(d) ; 60.2H0(a ) Th e NSP S fo r Kraf t Pul pMill s define s th e affecte dfacilit y a nth e "digeste r system" . Thi s include s "eac hcontinuou s digeste r o r eac hhatc hdigeste r use dfo r th e cookin g o f woo dinwhit e liquor , an dassociate d flas htank(s) , blow tank(s) , chi p steamer(s) , andcondenser!s). " Se e 4 0 CF R60.281(d) . Fo r the modificatio ni nquestion , th e affecte dfacilit y (subjec t t o th e 5 pp m TR S standard ) woul dinclud e th e ne w hatc hdigeste r an dtha t par t o f th e existin g blow

tan k associate dwit hth e new digester . Fo r example , i f al l o f th e digesters , bot hne w an dold , hav e th e sam e capacit y

andar e operate dequally , on e quarte r o f th e blow tan k emission s ar e subjec t t o th e 5 pp m standard .

T l h oOOD E REFERENC E aCSTIO N CT> 1 Mem

o (Reic h t o Dutton ) 

### 6/19/8 0 AFFECTE D REGUIATIC

N Di d constructio n o n Guardian's " fla tglas s furnac e commenc e c n o rbefor e \Axi e 15 , 1979 , th e proposa l dat e o f

th e glas s furnac e standard ? 60.2(g ) 60.2(1 ) DETER

jgNATIC N "Tta " DI5CU5SIG N
Th aIssu e i s whethe rGuardia n entere d Int o contractua l obligation s to buil d th e furnac e before'An a15 , 1979 . Guardian' s document s sho w apurchas e orde rfor aglas s furnac e 10/25/7 9 bu t Guardia n assert s tha talette ro n 2/16/7 9 wa s a contractua l obligation . Thl e letter , b y itself , l adifficul tt o accep ta aabindin g contractua l obligatio n forth e constructio n becaus e I t authorize s desig n rathe rtha n constructio n o f th e furnace . Furthermore , th alette rdoe s no tappea r to represen tafina l an d bindin g agreemen tdi e to reference s to alate rpurchas e agreement , fina l 1 - catio n o f

contrac tdetails , an d afln apric e onl y afte rspecification s and daslgn s ara finalized .

T l h o

### ai * REFERENCE OUES'MD N AFFECTE D RHJUIATIO N DETER MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N

r»>- l lette rt o Anlianse r

Dusc h (J . Earne rt o J . Stei n 9/8/78 ) Ar e maltlrt ) plant s crwera l b y NSPS , Suljttr t1)1)? Subpar tD D tto M e di d no tInvestigat e thi s industr y an ) d b no t hav e th e necessar y informatio n t o determin e tha t th e standar d slral d be .

ro roCOD E REFERENC E QUESTIO N AFFECTE D REGULATIO N DETERMINATIO N DISUCSSIO N


### Lette r(Reic h t o Lambert ) 4/13/8 2 DD- 2 Woul dth e additio no f 800,00 0 bushel s o f storag e capacit y

bring a nexistin g 800,00 0 bushe l grai nstorag e elevato r unde r Subpar t DO ? Tb e standar dinclude s a siz e cutof f o f on e millio n bushels . 

### $60,30 1 YE S I f a n expansio n projec twoul d brin g th e permanen tstorag e capacit y o f agrai n elevato rabov e th e NSP S cutoff , th e standar d woul d appl y t o an y affecte d facilitie s tha tar e constructe d o r modifie d a s par to f

tha tprojec to ran y futur e project .

DO- 3 Mem o (Reic ht o thitmore ) 5/20/B 2 A propose dgrai nstorag e 560.301(b ) YES facilit y

wil l b e fille d vi a truck s whic hwil l dum p int o portabl e augers . I s thi s subjec t t o NSPS , Subpar t 

### DD ? Sectio n 60.30 1 (b ) define s th e ter m grai n elevato ra s an y "plan to rinstallatio n a twhic h grai n i s inloaded , handled , cleaned , dried , store d o rloaded. " Th e regulation s appl y t o afacilit y performin g on e o rmor e o f thes e operations . Sinc e th e facilit y a tissu e i s involve d i n loading , unloadin g an d storage , i ti s subjec tb o th e standard .

h oCOD E REFERENC E a»ES T IO N AFFECTE D REGULATIO

N DETER

MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N
QG- 1 Mem

o to Regio n I V 

### (E . Reic h to T . Globe ) 4/4/7 8 a ) lb s constructio n oommenced CO.2(1 ) o n ga s turbin e ml t6 befor e Octobe r3 , 1977 ?

b ) lla aconstructio n oaimence d o n 60.2(1 ) ga s turbin e tnlt a7 an d 8 befor e Octobe r3 , 1977 , i f

operatio n wil l no toccu rixiti l a alon g a s al x year s later ? A s aresul to f substantia l oanpllanc e wit h th e contrac tned e prio rto Octobe r3 , 1977 , for197 9 deliver y o f

uni t6 , an d expenditur e o f fund s unde r l t aterms , txil t6 i s a n existin g sourc e forO e purpose s o f

NSPS . K i thi s an d simila rcases , informatio n shoul d b a ' requeste d Indicatin g »h y acontrac twa s le ta o fa r i n advanc e o f

th aprojecte d deliver y date . Ther e ma y b e justifiabl e reasons , suc h a aaplanne d operatin g interrelationshi p o rastandar d indus tr y practice . I f

I tappear s acontrac twa s signe d to circumven tth aapplicabilit y o f NSPS , th e sourc e l ano tconsidere d to hav e acontinuou s program whic h was Initiate d to eoiplet e construc tio n withi n areasonabl e time . 1E=1 Latte r(Raic h t o RoeabaRy J

3/5/8 0

OU- 3 tette r(Reic h t o Uml )

6/13/8 0 A turbin e tha tl aoperate d onl y to raplac e abloc ko f powe rtha tl ainterrupte d qusllfle aa s a n "emergenc y ga s turbine" . Ho

wfrequentl y ca n thi s lntsrrifitia n occur ? 

## W.33 1

Wha ti s acceptabl e a s am i to rIn g an d recordin g system s forseatin g th acontinuou s monitorin g re - quirement s o f

thi s standard ? 160.334(a ) ThaInterruption'mus tno tb aafreguan to rroutin e occurrenc e and aua tb e abor ttan a(e.g. , onc e c r twic e ayea ran d lastin g afe wday s a tmost) . Additionally , • chang e I n locatio n o rownershi p o f aturbine , tha twa s a n emergenc y ga s turbine , tahlc h wil l b ause d forothe rreasons , wil l b a subjec tto th e NSPS , i f constructio n at

th a turbin e ouwiienoa

J afte rth e proposa l dat e (10/3/77) . Thi s woul d als o appl y to aga a turbin e tha twa s originall y prchasa d a e a n emergenc y turbine , bu tl atha n operate ) forothe r
Th e continuou s monitorin g require ) nee ) no tb a• continuou s char trecorder , bu tcoul d b e withi n a dat aacquisitio n syste m an d printe d ou ta tdiscret e intervale . Thes e Interval e shoul d no tbe , utde r an y clrcumstancee , an y lea s frequen ttha n ever y 1 5 minutes .

GG-4 Mem

o (Johnso n t o Need ) 12/11/B 0 Alyesk aoperate s tw o Identica l ga s turbine s a tPum

p Statio n No . 2 subjec tt o NSPS . On e o f turbine s ha s bee n performanc e tested , an d complie d wit h th e emissio n limits . Wil l EP A agre e to waiv e th e testin g requirement s fo rth e secon d turbine ? 60.8(b) i Te aA waive rca n b e grante d I f th e sourc e owne ro r Subpar tO

G operato rha s demonstrate d "t o th e Administrator' s

satisfactio n tha tth e affecte d facilit y i s i n complianc e wit h th e standard" . I n thi s case , bes t engineerin g judgemen tsuggest s th e secon d turbin e woul d mee tth e standar d because t (1 ) a n identica l turbin e operate d a tth e sam e sit e an d usin g th e same fue l metth e standar d (2 ) th e turbin e meetin g th e standar d di d s o wit h alarg e margi n o f

compliance , havin g NO , emission s o f

45. 6 ppm, compared to th e standar d o f

15 0 ppm .

# j i CODE REFERENC E QUESTIO N 

### AFFECTE D REGULATIO N DETER MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N



# I . OG-

5 Mem

o (Reic h to Reed ) 12/17/8 0 Chugac h Electri coperate s aga s turbin e i n Alask asubjec tt o NSPS . Thi s turbin e i s virtuall y Identica l to anothe rturbin e i n Michiga n vblc h ha s bee n beste d an d me tNSPS . The differenc e betwee n th e tw o turbine s i s tha tth e Chugach uni ti s adua l distillate / natura l ga s machin e whil e th e Michiga n ini ti s adistillate-onl y machine . Hil l EP

A agre e to waiv e th e testin g requirement s fo rth e Chugach turbine ? 60.8(b) ; Subpar tG

G Yes A waive rca n b e grante d i f th e sourc e owne ro r operato rha s demonstrate d "t o th e Administrator ' s satisfactio n tha tth e affecte d facilit y i s i n complianc e wit h th e standard" . I n thi s case , bes tengineerin g judgemen tsuggest s th e Chugac h turbin e woul d mee tth e standar d becaus e i (1 ) avirtuall y Identica l turbin e locate d i n Michiga n me tth e standar d (2 ) th e Chugach turbin e wil l us e natura l ga s a s aprimar y fuel , wit h distillat e a s emergenc y back-u p only . Tb e Michiga n turbin e mottli e standar d usin g onl y distillate , whos e N0 „ emission s ar e higher . OG- 6 Utte r(Raic h b o Mulllken ) 12/29/B 0 I s amanufacture ro f ga s turbine s considere d a n owne ro roperator , and henc e subjec tt o Subpar tGG ? 60.2(f) i Conditiona l Owne ro roperato rI s defined , a t4 0 CF R60.2(f) , 60.330 ; Ye aa a"any perso n wh o owns , leases , operates , con 60.332(h) ! trols , o rsupervise s a n affecte d facilit y o ra Slll(e ) o f

stationar y sourc e o f whic h a n affecte d facilit y th e CA A i s apart" . A ga s turbin e i s a n affecte d facility , inte r4 0 CF R60.330 . Fo rpurpose s o f Subpar tGG

, EP A consider s th e manufacture ra s th e origina l owne ro roperator , and henc e sdbjec t to th e standard . Th e exemptio n a t4 0 CF R60.33 2 (h ) i s onl y acase-by-cas e exemptio n fo rthos e turbine s engage d b y manufacturer s i n researc h an d development . Onc e amanufacture rha s sol d aturbine , th e manu facture ri s n o longe rconsidere d th e owne ro r operato ro f

tha tturbine , and woul d n o longe rb e subjec tto th e provision s o f Slll(e ) o f

th e Clea n Ai rAc tfo rtha tturbine .-4"—.U-*. 1 .!.—i..*r ? P.2 6



## b 8 

# f i

Kis s E JU

S 5 ;fc; i «

j E n

£^ T<m

C - ! 

### B r" I 

# 323 ! , • - 3

I — < e
_ i s 

### I c 2 o «



# s 

# 1 fi 

# 6 4 - 

# I

4 

# is»l?flI|gil- 8 

# S Q - M 8 J H J * ui l J C H XJ 

### £ [2H 3 

### I C M 

### a t | .**. £ g||&c | -«? •««*>• « G A u g L o > H . w

- . >,rx

m 5 I

M r4 ~l

X. S * U



### o o V C V O 

### • S 

# iaafj

e



## 8* 3 2 L .J5-S 5 »l« p 8" 5 Muu.iiii o wb l 0* 0 J 3

•i i l Q

. o 

# jfSitajJ f i 

# iiffjfi l

« 0 •3 *••3 $ = S ** "

~ "D u —<

0 0 4 ) > < V —3 1 J

S $ * 5 !B i> £ C D 5- < _IOUC«U'DCI
- .o n j a 5 3 qi b J m J* J i 3 b l i l 3 ^ H « s —a i coiCwoSo o Situi^^ulOunixf^nHli C C —v V 5 * J t l 0 l i V 0 W Q. £4-iL«lilQ.lI0u J u-nui- " DtHiuajCj i Q «• " 8 " l-> - f 4 V U to xx a. E l*utv«PBS&)ilx2%ZSiHl.t35z'ii- x

w w 

# 6P.2 7 

# 1
IS * 

# li s 

# u l 1 8 N 

## S 

# r £ 1 1 8 t

S • • ^ g

v•• * tt) " O • i — i)4«3li O 

# ScTi-i^ S | J £ § 

# a * ' C

f a O •" * • 

## ""83 8 3 —u a ;



# * i S8S*S| ' "

8 e _"



### 8 

# 5 8 

# |ql*SSI £ 

# I ? I 

# e 3 s



# _= XJ IO« « * > 

# 6


# 3f* 5 

# jlt t B^ 1 « 5 r t n

ton u u i < E ^ 1 

# = i-2883r , 

# g * 8

_5& B *> J * ft

_ « K



# 8 i. 

# I

M t

O tx t u tt) 1

0 

## L2ri C ° i S ft £ 0

u u __ 

# £5-P S i-es&i i



# SI

~ i n u — 0 1 £ M xl xl — 

# s.sSsS.tig l

S T 

# 6

### DETERMINATION S o f APPLICABILIT Y

COD E REFERENC E OUESTIO N AFFECTE D PEGULATIO N DETERMINATIO N DISCUSSIO N EP Aha s previousl ydetermine d (se e summar yGG-6 ) tha t th e manufacture r o f a n NSP S affecte d ga s turbin e i s considere d th e origina l owner/operator . Thus , testin g o f th e ga s turbine s a t th e manufacturin g sit e i s acceptabl e providin g EP Ai s notifie d o f suc h test s an d tha t th e test s ar e conducte d unde r th e sam e condition s a s th e turbine s ar e t o b e operate d a t thei r fina l destination
. Thes e condition s includ e fue l quality , fue l flow , an d inle t ai r flow . EP Ama yb e abl e t o approv e suc h a procedure , bu t woul d nee d t o d o s o o n a n individua l mode l an d fue l qualit y basis
. EP Ai s no t i n a positio n a t thi s tim e t o establis h wha t significanc e level s th e compute r simulation s woul d hav e t o mee t fo r approval . Eac h suc h submissio n shoul d h e addresse d t o th e Director , Offic e o f Ai r Oualit yPlannin g an d Standards . cr,- i n Lette r (Reic h t o Solt) , 9/22/H2 . a ) Wil l EP A accep t performanc e test s conducte d a t th e manufacturin g site , rathe r tha n th e owner/operator' s site ? 60.R(h)(3 ) Ye s

h ) Ca n EP Awaive , o n a cas e h y cas e basis , th e requiremen t fo r performanc e test s wher e a manufacture r ha s demonstrate d throug h th e us e o f historica l dat a an d compute r projection s tha t th e NO , emission s fro m th e propose d turbin e applicatio n fal l wel l withi n th e Subpar t G G NO x 

### standard ? 60.8(b)(4) ; Subpar t G G Ye s

Condi t iona l

### COD E REFERENC E QUESTIO N AFFECTED

REGULATIO

N DETER MINATIO N DISCUSSIO N
MM- 1 Lette r (Reic h t o Dicker ) 3/3/8 1 Doe s Subpar t MM ,

Standard s o f Performanc e for Automobil e an

d Light-Duty

Truc k Surfac e Coatin

q Operations , appl y t o a truck-bod

y manufacture r whos e primar

y product s ar e walk-i n va nbodie s an

d specialt y

bodies ? 60.390(a ) N o As provide da t 560.390(a ) th

e standar

d applie s "to th

e followin

g affecte

d facilitie s i

nan automobil e o r light-duty truc k assembl y

plant i eac hprim e coat operation , eac hguid e coa t operation , an d eachtopcoa t operation. " B y th e phras e "automobil e or light-dut y truck assembl y plant, " FP

A intende

d t o cove r plant s that construc t th

e chassi s an

dthe nad dth e body , engine an

dothe r components . EP A di d not inten

dt o cove r an

dth e standar

ddoe s not cover custo

m shop s designedonl y to buil dspecialty

o r walk-i nva

nbodie s on chassi s alread

y assembledb

y th e customer .OU» : REI'I'HMUC K 

### (iiKs-rrr w AFrTJCTM l PHJIIATIl W DKTKK
HINATOT N DISCUSSIO N
lll(d ) Munrt t o Mcufn n II I

(I: . Ifcicl i t o II . Ifcim ) 4/17/7 H Ar e nitrorjcn-|>l>i).';|il»)rus intas.siin ) (NIK ) for t 1 1 ize r plant s subjec t to tl* ; reqiu'runenl s o l suctio n 111(d ) o fth e Clea n Ai r Act ? CA A 111(d ) N u NI' Kfertilize r plant s ar c no t intende d to b e subjec t t o Sectio n 111(d) .P.3 1



## i 5 

## i i



# 2

—t o

V b 

### > 

## & tJS f . 5 0 

## P a l I S I S

3,b r i s 9 ftftr* £ m. « ^ 

# 2 l 2 is^l»U i IKJB.*. *

« = fi « f

S SJ- 2 o i i « £

## g fi g 

## * S

- * JO " <

0 3 0


# illf1111 1 8 8 • s-S82c , 

## 8 " 

# BeSi-»ie 3 

# :***: • n

58-sibg l 

# ills 1 

# !! !

1 1

1 ' I


### I I —I B

I I 

## I ! *- , £ b 3 ~ i f - r 

## 2 g S 3 - J5

I S *

—J J xl <xl •<" ! 0 1 0

—b b g ) ^ ^ I F

b b 

# i s
0 m as



## > _ft XI 

# f*f r R § <s -

• n g " c' 2 5 — i 1 

### y 8 1 ^ b

— . b * J o 

## E

# I S 8 5 b J ) b X xx wJ J £

_ 

# Sg r

» f t 

### 8 = ft


## 5§2 g S±g J i i 5 Q 

## 4 b . 2 - ^



## > — 0 — 

# Us

f M 

# iP.3 2


# Protectio nAgenc y (EPA )
Statemen t O f Intent andPurpos e

Thi s certifie s tha t

th e record s describe do nthi s formhav e bee n microfilme di nth e regular course , o f

busines s a

t th e U
. S
. Environmenta l Protectio nAgency , inaccordanc e withth e standard s se t

fort hin4 1 CF R101-11.506
. Th e silve r origina l microfil mha s bee nplace dinsecur e storage
. The record s affecte db

y thi s conversio nare regulator y material s supportin g EP A action s unde r th e Clea nAi r Ac t (CAA)
.

Dat e 

# Wfl(oCf

i