### ROSEBUD ENERGY CORP. 

## Suite 200 1087 \Vest River Street

Boise, Idaho 83702 Telephone (208) 344-3570 Telecopier (208) 344-3984 

# March 11, 2009 Ms. Laurel Dygowski U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 8 1595Wynkoop Street Denver, CO 80202-1129 Dear Ms. Dygowski: I am in receipt of your letter requesting stack and emiSSion information about the Colstrip Energy Limited Partnership (CELP) facility located in Colstrip, Montana. I have gathered the data to answer your request. The data is contained in a spreadsheet attached to this letter. Please note that in some cases where there was no data available, we have estimated data, and have noted such estimates. Please contact me or Scott Siddoway at Rosebud Operating Services, Inc. (208-344­ 3570 ifyou n fu data.

STATEMENT OF CERTIFICATION

Title:
Date: ------+---It......-....,;,--=---==---+--------_

### 1 

## Requested Information Response Source Notes Part I: General Facility Data 11. Name ofFacility 

# IRosebud Power Plant 

# I I 2. Complete streetaddress offacility:

a. StreetAddress: 18 Snider Subdivision Rd. b. City: Colstrip c. State: Montana d. Zip: 59323 e. County: Rosebud County 

### 3. Facility Contact Scott Siddoway

a. Name: (First, Last) b. Title: Engineer c. Telephone number: (208) 344-3570 d. Fax number: (208) 344-3984 e. E-mail: scott.siddoway@rosi-boise.com


### Part II: Boiler Emission Unit Data

1. Emission Unitname: EU1 (Circulating Fluidized Bed Boiler)

a. Type of Boiler:

-­ Circulating Fluidized bed Combustion b. Make: Tampela Keeler 2004 operating permit renewal c. Model: Twin Cyclone 2004 operating permit renewal d. Model Year

-­ 1988 2004 operating permit renewal e. Year Installed: --'--_._-'­ 2004 operating permit renewal f----­ 1989-1990

f. Expected Equipment life 30 Years**~nit** is currently operational: (yes/nc;» Yes

e- if NO: i: Date offinal operation:**~i:** Will unit be operated in future: h. Maximum Unit Capacity (MWgross/net): 43 MW Gross 

### I 38 MW Net 

### 2. BoilerOutlet Information Does unit share exhaust stack? no Which units is it shared with?**~_Maximum** BoilerVolumetric Flow Rate (acfm): 234,257 Jan 2008 stack test c. Maximum BoileroutletTemperature (F): 315 Jan 2008 stack test d. Boiler Exhaust Moisture (%): 9.43 Jan 2008 stack test**~Stack** Height (ft): 200' 2004 operating permit renewal f. Stack Diameter (ft): 8'4" 2004 operating permit renewal g. Maximum Hourly Gross Heat Input (MMBtu/hr): 516 Data from 11/20106 letterfrom DEQ to CELP h. Annual Hours ofOperation: 8300 hours peryear i. Design Percent Load (Capacity Factor): 95% j. 

### 2001-2003 Max 24-hravg uncontrolled PM emissions (Ib/hr): 617.8 Estimated fromAP-42 1.1-4 (9/98)

### ~001-2003 Max 24-hravg uncontrolled NOx emissions (Ib/hr): 181.7 Estimated fromAP-42 1.1-4 (9/98) 

# I. 2001-2003 Max 24-hr avo uncontrolled S02 emissions (Ib/hr): 2486.1 Estimated from coal S content

### 3. Existing Pollution Control Equipment a. PM Control Technology Information

f----­ i. Type of PM Control Technology: ii. Make/Model of PM Control Technology: Filter Fabric Baghouse Brandt Environmental Corporation tiii. Year installed: 1989 iv. Installed Cost ofControl Device ($): Unknown Cost ofthe Baghousewas included in the cost ofthe boiler. Individual cost ofthe v. Direct Annual Cost ofControl Device ($/yr) $120,000 peryear

-­ baghouse is unknown, but could be estimated if necessary. vi. Expected life ofequipment: 30 years vii. Relevant sizing information: 9 cell; 272 bags/cell; 237,000acfm 2004 operating permit renewal viii. Design control efficiency (%) 99.6% ix. 

### 2007 Average Controlled PM Emissions (Ib/hr) 3 Jan 2008 stack test January 2008 stack testwas a retest ofa test performed in 2007 b. NOx Control Technology Information

-­ The CFB boiler is a relatively low emitterof NOx dueto a lowerfiring temperature

c-­ i. Type of NOx Control Technology: CFB Boiler compared to standard pulverized coal boilers. The unit does not, however, contain any ii. Make/Model of NOx Control Technology n/a post-combustion control technologies. iii. Year installed: n/a iv. Installed CostofControl Device ($): n/a v. Direct Annual CostofControl Device ($/yr) n/a

-­ vi. Expected life ofequipment: n/a

-­ vii. Relevant sizing information: n/a

-­ -­ viii. Design control efficiency (%) 

## IX. 2007 Average Controlled NOx Emissions (Ib/hr) n/a 250lbs/hr --­**gMS-aa~**

-­

--­ b. S02 Control Technology Information

i. Type ofS02 Control Technology: Limestone injection to CFB Boiler --f--­ The limestone injection control technology is a part in the operating process ofthe CFB ii. Make/Model ofS02 Control Technology n/a

-­ f----­ -­ boiler. It is nota separate "add-on" device, but itdoes succeed in controlling S02

-­ iii. Year installed: 1989 1--­ __ emissions atthe permitted control efficiency. iv. Installed Cost ofControl Device ($): n/a - feature ofCFB boiler v. DirectAnnual Cost ofControl Device ($/yr) $1,679,000 --1--­
--­ vi. Expected life ofequipment: 30 years vii. Relevant sizing information: 5.5 tons/hr limestone (44,352 tons for 2007)

-­ viii. Design control efficiency 

### (0)0) not less than 79% ix. 

### 2007 Average Controlled S02 Emissions (Ib/hr) 310lbs/hr CEMS data**~.** 

### Fuel Information
Based on a fuel firing rate from the 2007 PM testand the heating value from the 2002 fuel analysis Average ofas-received values from 2002 fuel analysis Based on a fuel firing rate from the 2007 PM testand the heating value from the 2002 fuel analysis Average ofas-received values from 2002 fuel analysis Average ofvalues from 2002 fuel analysis List Each Type of Fuel Used: Coal and Refuse Coal

f-­ Amountof Fuel Used (Ibs/hr) 72700 2007 PM test

f--­ Heating Value of Fuel (Btulfb) -­2002fuel analysis 8073.3**~aximum** Fuel Firing Rate (ton/hr) 36.35 2007 PM test

f-----­ Sulfur Contentof Fuel (%S Wt.) 1.71%­ 2002 fuel analysis

### ~h Content of Fuel (%A Wt.) 15.58% 2002 fuel analyses

.­ Year of Data ifNot2002, reason for not using 2002 2007 forfuel firing rate, 2002 fuel firing rate

-­ information notavailable; all others 2002 info