p. 1



# OAR Box 

# 1778 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 51 ) ll-B-2 6
Docket Number: 

# A-90-0 6

Printed 10/28/20089:50:53 AM

Sheet 51 of 276P. 2

• * »
. II-B- 2 6 UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y REGIO N V
DATE : MA R 2 5 198 3

SUBJECT : ps D Applicabilit yfo ra Powe rPlan t

Lif e Extensio n Projec t f 

# rriTv

. %J \f\

FROM : Davi d Kee , Directo r Ai r and Radiatio n Divisio n TO : Geral d A

. Emison , Directo r Offic e o f Ai rQualit yPlannin g an d Standard s Wi> ^ ^

I a m requestin g quidanc e o n a Preventio n o f Significan t Deterioratio n (PSD ) applicabilit ydetermination

. Wisconsi n Electri cPowe rCompany(WEPCO ) intend s t o renovat e it s Por t Washingto n plant

. Th e Wisconsi n Departmen t o f Natura l Resource s (WDNR

) ha s aske d i f th e Unite d State s Environmenta l Protectio n Agency(USEPA

) consider s thes e renovation s subjec t t o th e requirement s fo r a "majo rmodification " i n th e Federa l PS D regulation s i n 4 0 CF R 52.21

. A physica l chang e o rchang e i n th e metho d o f operatio n o f a majo rstationar y sourc e i s subjec t t o PSD

. However , a n increas e i n th e hour s o f operatio n o r th e productio n rat e i s no t considere d a physica l chang e o rchang e i n th e metho d o f operatio n [se e 4 0 CF R 52.21(b)(2)(iii)(f)]

. WEPC O believe s th e renovatio n projec t i s merel ya n increas e i n productio n whic h i s no t subjec t t o PS D regulations

. WEPC O operate s fiv e coal-fire d boiler s a t th e Por t Washingto n plant

. On e boile rha s bee n shu t dow n fo r3 year s du e t o a cracke d stea m drum

. Th e other s hav e no t bee n abl e t o operat e a t ful l capacit ydu e t o degradation

. Som e o f th e boiler s hav e suffere d mor e degradatio n tha n other s a s illustrate d below :

Uni t 1 Uni t 2 Uni t 3 Uni t 4 Uni t 5 Generato rNameplat e

(megawatts )

8 0 8 0 8 0 8 0 80 198 6 Summe r Capabi l (megawatts )

49. 0 69. 0 78. 0 57. 0 75. 0 ity * -Year o f Initia l operatio n

193 5 194 3 194 8 194 9 195 0

* Fro mInventor yo f Powe r Plant s i n th e Unite d State s 1986
. Administratio n Energ yInformatio n



## U ^ '.Qft i

EP A FOR M 1320- 6 (RE V 3-76 1P. 3

Th e renovation s ar e intende d t o restor e th e boiler s t o thei rnameplat e capacitie s an d t o allo wthe m t o operat e unti l 2010

. Plantwid e capacit ywoul d increas e abou t 40 percen t abov e curren t level s t o 40 0 megawatts

. Net emissio n increase s o f sulfu rdioxide , particulat e matter , an d possibl yothe rpollutant s woul d b e "significant. " Capita l expenditure s wil l b e require d t o restor e th e los t capacit ybecaus e majo rboile rcomponent s wil l b e replaced

. W e ar e requestin g concurrenc e wit h ou rdeterminatio n tha t th e WEPC O renovation s ar e no t exemp t fro m PS

D regulation s unde rth e provision s o f 4 0 CF R 52.21(b)(2)(iii)(f)

. W e conside rthi s exemptio n t o b e onl yfo rincrease s u p t o th e productio n rat e tha t th e sourc e ca n operat e a t withou t alterin g equipment

. I n othe rwords , a n increas e i n productio n rat e i s exemp t bu t a renovatio n tha t increase s th e productio n rat e i s no t eve n thoug h th e renovatio n restore s los t capacity

. Althoug h th e Por t Washingto n plan t ma yhav e bee n abl e t o operat e a t 40 0 megawatt s i n th e past , degradatio n ha s cause d operationa l limitation s tha t hav e restricte d thei rpotentia l t o emit

. Ou runderstandin g i s tha t a n increas e i n actua l emission s u p t o th e potentia l t o emi t woul d b e exemp t unde r4 0 CF R 52.21(b)(2)(iii)(f ) bu t a n increas e i n th e potentia l t o emi t woul d not

. I hav e attache d letter s fro m Mr

. Dal e Zieg e o f WDN R date d Novembe r9 , 1987 , an d Februar y5 , 1988 , an d fro m Mr

. Mar k Steinber g o f WEPC O date d Marc h 17 , 1988

. Thes e letter s compris e th e Stat e an d company' s reques t fo ra n applicabilit y determination

. W e reques t you rconsideratio n o f thi s applicabilit yissu e becaus e boile rlif e extensio n project s appea rt o b e o n th e increas e nationwid e an d you rdeterminatio n her e ma yimpac t numerou s othe rprojects

. I f yo u hav e an yquestions , pleas e contac t m

e o rBil l MacDowel l o f m ystaf f a t FT

S 886-6043

.

Attachment sP. 4



### Stat e o f Wisconsi n \ DEPARTMEN TO F NATURA L RESOURCE S Carroll D. Besadny Secretary BO X 792 1 MADISON , WISCONSI N 5370 7 Novembe r 9 , 198 7 IN REPL YREFE RTO : 453 0

Mr . Stev e Rothblatt , Chie f Ai r and Radiatio nBranc h" - ' 7 ' > U.S . Environmenta l Protectio nAgenc y 23 0 Sout hDearbor nStree t Chicago , I L 6060 4 ' ' "-••••. . # :

Dea r Mr . Rothblatt : O nSeptembe r 14 , 1987 , th e Burea uo f Ai r Managemen t receive da cop y o f th e Jul y 8 , 198 7 lette r fro m Thoma s J . Cassid y

o f Wisconsi nElectri c Powe r Compan y (WEPCO ) t o Jacquelin e K . Reynold s o f th e Publi c Servic e Commissio n(PSC ) o f Wisconsi nconcernin g th e propose drenovatio no f Unit s 1 throug h5 a t WEPCO 1 s Por t Washingto npowe r plant . Thi s lette r wa s forwarde dt o ou r agenc y fro m th e PS C afte r som e staf f discussion . Perhap s yo u recal l tha t Uni t 5 a t WEPC O - Por t Washingto nha s bee nou t o f servic e sinc e January , 198 5 du e t o ligamen t crackin g i nit s rea r stea m drum . O nSeptembe r 16 , 1985 , th e Wisconsi nDepartmen t o f Natura l Resource s receive d a PS D permi t applicatio nfro m WEPC O t o construc t a pressurized , fluidize dbe d combustio n(PFBC ) boile r t o repowe r th e existin g Uni t 5 turbine . Thi s applicatio nwa s deeme dt o b e complet e o nMarc h28 , 1986 . Th e PS D permi t wa s neve r issue dbecaus e th e applican t coul dno t agre e wit hth e permittin g authoritie s (DN Ran d EPA ) o ncertai npermi t languag e an d consequentl y requeste dtha t th e permit s remai nunissue db y th e agencies . Th e Burea uo f Ai r Managemen t ha s recentl y verifie dtha t th e facilit y i n questio n(Uni t 5 a t WEPC O - Por t Washington ) ha s i nfac t bee ncarrie do nth e Wisconsi nAi r Emission s Inventor y throughou t it s perio do f in^operation . A s yo uknow , s . 144.391(4)(b)2. , Wis . Stats. , provide s tha t th e resumptio no f operatio no f a sourc e afte r a perio do f closur e i s a nexemp t modificatio n 1 . i f th e existin g equipmen t wa s continuousl y include di nth e sourc e inventor y

a s a nexistin g sourc e covere db y th e SIP , 2 . i f th e specifie dchang e doe s no t caus e o r exacerbat e th e violatio no f a n ambien t ai r qualit y

standard , an d 3 . i f th e specifie dchang e doe s no t caus e o r exacerbat e th e violatio no f a n ambien t ai r qualit y

increment .P. 5

Mr
. Stev e Rothblat t - Novembe r 9 , 198 7 2
.
Th e Burea u ha s no

w als o projecte d tha t th e resumptio n o f operatio n o f (th e repaired ) Uni t 5 a t WEPC O - Por t Washingto n wil l neithe r caus e no r exacerbat e th e violatio n o f a n ambien t ai r qualit ystandar d o r increment

. Therefore , th e Stat e o f Wisconsi n wil l no t vie wth e renovation s a t th e Por t Washingto n plan t t o actuall ymodif yanyo f th e boilers

. Furthermore , th e capita l expenditure s fo r th e repair s t o Uni t 5 amoun t t o onl y3 X t o 5 % o f th e fixe d capita l cos t o f a comparabl e brand-ne wboile r system
. I t i s ou r understandin g tha t althoug h th e PFB C projec t wa s no t actuall y permitted , th e complet e applicatio n a s o f Marc h 28 , 198 6 se t PS D baselin e fo r Ozauke e Count yfo r TSP - W e ar e unsur e a s t o th e statu s o f th e PS D baselin e fo r SO? ? fo r thi s county , however
. WEPC O agree d t o restric t th e tota l plan t S0 2 emission s vi a a permi t s o tha t the ycoul d tak e credi t fo r th e shutdow n o f th e ol d No
. 5 boile r (and it s S0 2 emissions ) an d thu s ne t ou t o f PS D revie wfo r S0 2 fo r th e propose d fluidize d be d boiler

. Bu t thes e restriction s wer e neve r enforceabl e becaus e th e permi t wa s neve r Issued
. Doe s thi s mea n tha t th e PFB C project' s complete , applicatio n file d wit h th e DN R i n fac t se t PS D baselin e fo r bot h TS P an dS0 2 ? Pleas e advis e u s a s t o th e applicabilit yo f th e variou s PS D regulation s t o th e WEPC O - Por t Washingto n powe r plan t a s the ycarr you t thei r renovations

. Sincerely ,

^

_ Donal d F
. Theiler , Directo r Burea u o f A1 r Managemen t DFT:dl/9362 W Enclosur e

cc : Dal e Zieg e - AM/ 3 Alle n Hubbar d - AM/ 3 Ralp h Patterso n - AM/ 3 Marci a Penne r - LC/ 5 Mar k Steinber g - Wisconsi n Electri c Powe r Compan y Roge r Dodd s - Wisconsi n Electri c Powe r Compan yP. 6



# r Wisconsin

Electric

POWER

COMPANY 23 1 W MICHIGAN , P.O
. BO X 2046
. MILWAUKEE , W l 5320 1 

### £ MASTE R FIL E COP Y

(414)277-234 5 

### Jul y 8 , 198 7

(



# c —3 CO 

# ***** k "

* % • •••; >



### u > •.<•- > : o Mrs . Jacqueline K . Reynold s Secretar

y t o th e Commissio

n Publi c Servic e Commissio no f Wisconsi n Pos t Offic e Bo

x785 4 Madison , Wisconsi n5370 7
Dear Mrs . Reynolds : Pursuan t t

o Sectio

n196.4 9 o f th

e Wis . Stats , an

d Sectio

nPS C 112.05(l)(b ) o f th e Wis . Admin . Code , Wisconsi nElectri c Powe r Compan y (Applicant ) make s appli catio nfor authority

t o renovat e unit s 1 throug h5 an d commo nplant facilitie s a t it s Por t Washingto nPowe r Plant locate d i nth

e city o f Por t Washington , Ozauke e County , Wisconsin . Renovatio nwil l involv

e replacements , modifications , an d addition s a t th

e generatin

g plant .
I . Descriptio

no f Projec t Applican t propose s t o perfor m major renovatio

nmaintenanc e o

nPor t Washingto

n Powe r Plan t unit s 1 throug h5 an d commo nplant facilities . Thi s projec t i s th e resul t o f evaluation s performe d b y Applican t an

d it s consultant , Bechte l Easter n Powe r Corporatio

n(Bechtel) . Th

e assessmen t b

y Bechte l i s included i nth e Plan t Availability

Stud y (PAS) , a cop

y o f whichwa s previousl y submitte

d t o th

e commission . Thi s projec t ha s beenestablishe d t o manag e implementatio no f selecte

d PA S recommendation s ove r a four-yea r period . Th e facilitie s tha t wil l undergo renovatio ninclude th

e turbine-generators , boilers , mechanica l an d electrica l auxiliaries , an d th e commo nplant suppor t facilities . Generally , th e renovatio

nwork item

s include

d i nthi s applicatio n ar e thos e tha t woul d normall y occu r only onc e o r twic e durin

g a unit' s expecte

d lif e cycle . A

listin g o f th

e wor k item s for eachuni t an

d fo r th e plant commo

n facilitie s i s attached a s Exhibi t A . The work item s are intended t o b e complete

d durin g th e perio d 198 8 throug

h1991 . Renovationi s necessar y t o allo

w th e Por t Washingto

nunit s t o operat e beyon d thei r currentl y

planned retirement date s o f 199 2 (unit s 1 an d 2 ) an d 199 9 (unit s 3 , 4 an d 5 ) a s described inAdvanc e Pla n4 . PA S recommendation s fallin g int o th

e categor

y o f repetitiv

e maintenanc e that are normall y

performe

d durin g schedule

d equipmen t outage s d o no t requir e specifi c commissio

napprova l and , accordingly , ar e no t include d inthi s application . Further , PA S recommendation s fo r th e upgradin

g o f th e WPDE S wast e wate r treat ment syste

m an d installationof 2 2 k V bu s faul t protectio nequipmen t ar e alread y inprogres s du

e t o need .P. 7

(

(



# c Mrs . Jacqueline K . Reynold s

Jul y 8 , 198 7 Pag e 2
II . Projec t Cos t an d Financin

g Applican t estimate s th e tota l gros s cos t of th e renovatio

nmaintenanc e wor

k t o b e $83,843,000 , detailed a s follows :

Ite m Amount Capita l an

d Remova l Cost s Uni t 1 $ 7,026,00 0 Uni t 2 8,432,00 0 Uni t 3 7,710,00 0 Uni t 4 6,718,00 0 Uni t 5 5,186,00 0 Commo nFacilitie s 10,542,00 0 Subtota l $45,614,00 0 Associate

d Maintenanc e Cost s 36,052,00 0 AFUD C Charge s 2,177,00 0 Tota l Estimated Gros s Projec t Cos t $83,843,00 0
Th e cos t estimat e i s base d o nperformin

g th e work items ove r the four-yea r period , 198 8 to 1991 , utilizin g successiv

e nine-mont houtag e period s fo r th e fiv e units . Th e cos t of th

e projec t wil l b

e me t fro

m interna l source s and/o r fro m th e issuanc e an

d sal e o f securities . III . Purpos e an

d Necessit y

o f Projec t
Th e Por t Washingto

nPowe r Plan t consist s o f fiv e simila r generatin g unit s with pulverize

d coa l fire

d boiler s providin

g stea m t o turbine-generators . The tota l designed nameplat e capability o f th e plan t i s 40 0 MW . Sinc e bein

g place d i nservic e durin g th e perio d 193 5 t o 1950 , th e overal l capabilit y o f th e fiv e unit s ha s decrease d du e t o age-related deteriorationo f equipment . The curren t tota l plan t ne t capabilit y ha s decline

d b y 40% . Th e singl e larges t proble m relate s to uni t 5 whichha s bee nout o f servic e sinc e Januar y 198 5 pendin g resolutio

no f a crackin

g proble

m inth e boile r rear stea

m drum . I nMarc h1983 , Applican t initiate d a Plan

t Availability

Stud y t o asses s th

e physica l conditio

no f th

e pulverize

d coa l fire

d generatin

g unit s a t th

e North Oak Creek , SouthOak Creek , an d Port Washingto

npowe r plants . The stud y confirmed , wit hrespec t t o Por t WashingtonPower Plant , tha t extensiv e renovatio

no f th e fiv e unit s an

d th e plan t commo

nfacilitie s i s neede d i f operationo f th e plan t i s to b e continued . The stud

y indicate

d a nee d t o perfor

m certai nmajo r maintenanc e i nth e near futur e an

d conclude

d tha t th

e Por t Washingto

nPowe r Plan t i s capabl e o f generatin g a t it s designe

d capabilit y

unti l yea

r 201 0 i f renovatio no f th

e unit s i s under taken . Operatio

nunti l year 201 0 represent s a lif e extensiono f th e unit s fro

mP. 8

(

(



# c Mrs . Jacqueline K . Reynold s

Jul y 8 , 198 7 Pag e 3 thei r planne

d retiremen t dates . Renovatio ni s als o expecte

d t o improv

e plan t availability , capability , an d hea t rate . Assessment s resultin g fro m th e Plant Availabilit y Stud y wer e use

d t o determin

e th e scop e o f renovatio

nmaintenance . Inparticular , th e examination s o f equip men t inuni t 3 wer e use d a s th

e basi s fo

r wor k scope s i nth

e other fou

r units . A s th e renovatio

noutage s dtxur , a detaile d examinatio

no f equipmen t wil l als o b e performe

d inunit s 1 , 2 , 4 an d 5 . Shoul d inspectio nrevea l th

e nee d fo r unanticipated repai r tha t woul d hav e a significan t impac t o nth e renovatio

n project , th

e impac t wil l b

e evaluate

d befor e proceedin

g wit hth

e repair . Appli can t wil l advis e th e commissio

no f an y suc hunanticipated significant repairs .
I nadditio

nt o th e renovationmaintenance , regularl y performed maintenanc e wor k i s necessar

y t o assur e tha t th

e plan t wil l continue t o provide satisfactor y service .
IV . Effec t o f Projec t o nCos t o f Operatio

nan d Reliabilit y

o f Servic e Applican t believe s th e propose

d projec t i s th

e prope r alternativ e t o discharge it s obligatio

na s a publi c utility . Renovatio no f the facilitie s wil l improv e th e efficienc

y an d maintai nth

e reliabilit

y o f Applicant' s service . I t wil l no t provide facilitie s i nexces s o f presen t an d probabl e futur e requirements . Whe n place d inoperation , th e propose

d projec t wil l no t resul t i nannua l cost s disproportionat e to th e servic e valu

e o f th e work t o be performed .
V . Descriptio

nan d Cos t o f Property Bein g Retire

d
A descriptio

nof th e propert y

t o b e retire

d an d it s gros s boo

k cos t wil l b

e submitte

d to th e commissio

nupo ncompletio

no f th

e required engineerin g work . VI . Descriptio

no f Alternative s Alternative s t

o th e proposed projec t considere d b y Applican t ar e a s follows : Alternativ

e 1 - Retir e al l unit s at th e plant durin

g th e 198 8 t o 199 0 tim

e period . Alternativ

e 2 - Promptl y

renovat e unit s 3 , 4 an d 5 , resultin

g inthei r lif e extensio

nto th

e yea r 2010 , an

d retir e unit s 1 an d 2 immediately . Alternativ

e 3 - Promptl y

renovat e unit s 3 , 4 an d 5 , resultin

g inthei r lif e extensio n to th e yea r 2010 , an

d dela y renovatio

no f unit s 1 an

d 2 . The thre e alternative s wer e rejecte d becaus e th

e lif e cycl e accumulate d discounte

d revenue requirement s for eachwer e greater tha ntha t for th

e propose

d renovatio

n project . Als o considere

d a s a technologica l demonstratio nprojec t wa s replacemen t of th e uni t 5 boiler wit

ha pressurize

d fluidize

d be d combustion(PFBC ) boile r an d renovatio

no f th e balanc e o f th

e uni t 5 equipment . A napplicationfo

r th e uni t 5 projec t wa s file

d wit hth

e commissio

no nOctobe r 17 , 1985 . Renovatio no f th e remainin

g fou r unit s an

d commo nplan t facilitie s wa s planned t o b e carrie

d ou tP. 9



### Mrs . Jacquelin e K. Reynold s ( Jul y

8 , 198 7 ^ Pag e 4

a s describe dherein . Carryin g ou t o f th e PFB C projec t wa s contingen t o nobtainin g fundin g commitment s fro m source s externa l t o Applicant , includin g Clea nCoa l Technolog y

fund s fro

m th e Unite dState s Departmen t o f Energ y (DOE) . Du e t o inabilit y

t o obtai nfund s fro

m DOE , Applican t cancele dth e PFB C projec t ando nMarc h10 , 198 7 withdre w it s applicatio nwit hth e commissio nfo r authorit y t o construc t th e demonstratio nproject . I t wa s the ndecide dt o includ e uni t 5 wit hth e previousl y

planne dprojec t fo r renovatio no f unit s 1 t o 4 . VII . Entitie s Affecte db y Propose dProjec t No othe r entit y

i s affecte db

y th e propose dproject . VIII . Environmenta l Screenin g Informatio n Pursuan t t o Sectio nPS C 2.90(3)(z ) o f the Wis . Admin . Code , a nenvironmenta l impac t statemen t i s no t require dfo r thi s project . Therefore , screenin g informatio n i s no t bein g submitted . IX . Floo dHazar dExposure/Impac t

(



# c Por t Washingto nPowe r Plan t i s no t i no r nea r an y designate dfloodplai no r floodwa y area . Ver y trul y yours ,

Thoma s J . Cassidy

' Executiv e Vic e Presiden t si p Attachment s
cc : Chairma nCharle s H . Thompso n Commissione r Mar y

Lo uMunt s Commissione r Georg e R . Edga r Ms . Chery l Pofah lP.1 0

Hr__i_ 

### Stat e o f

Wisconsi n

Februar y 5 , 198 8 \ 

## DEPARTMEN T O F NATURA

L RESOURCE S

Carroll D. Besadny Secretary 

## PFCEIVE D I

N BO X 792 1 MADISON , WISCONSI N 5370 7 REPL Y REFE R TO : 453 0 

### CF 9 0 9 1988 Mr . Josep hPaisie , Chie f Technica l Analysi s Sectio n*v v Ai r and Radiatio nBranc h(5AR26 T U.S . Environmenta l Protectio nAgenc y 23 0 Sout hDearbor nStree t Chicago , I L 6060 4 '-•.•':3.'jr » Brancf l •TAft«# M V

Dea rMr

. Paisie : Pursuan t t o ite

m 8 o f th e U.S . EPA

- WDNRPS D delegatio nagreemen t o f Novembe r 13 , 1987 , ou r agenc y

seek s concurrenc e o nou r interpretatio no f sectio n4 0 CF R 52.2 1 a s i t relate s t o th e propose drenovation s a t Wisconsi nElectri c Powe r Compan y (WEPCO ) - Por t Washington . Th e issu e a t handi s th e applicabilit y o f PS D revie w

t o thi s utilit y

boile r lif e extensio nproject . Do nTheiler' s lette r o f Novembe r 9 , 198 7 t o Stev e Rothblat t presente dou r vie w o f Wisconsi nla

w governin g majo r sourc e modifications . Th e Wisconsi n Departmen t o f Natura l Resource s ha s determine dtha t neithe r th e propose d renovation s o f th e unit s a t th e Por t Washingto npowe r plan t no r th e resumptio n o f operatio no f Uni t 5 ar e subjec t t o ne w sourc e revie w

unde r th e Wisconsi n SIP . Th e Novembe r 9 lette r als o indicate dtha t th e repair s t o Uni t 5 wil l amoun t t o onl y

3-5 % o f th e fixe dcapita l cos t o f a comparabl e (bu t brand-new ) boile r system . Similarly , th e propose drenovation s fo r eac ho f Unit s 1- 4 wil l requir e a nexpenditur e o f fa r les s tha n50 % o f th e replacemen t cos t o f a new boiler . Therefore , th e renovation s fo r eac huni t wil l no t constitut e "reconstruction" , s o tha t th e provision s o f Ne w Sourc e Performanc e Standard s (NSPS ) wil l no t apply . Routin e maintenance , repai r and replacemen t d o no t constitut e majo r modification s t o a sourc e (4 0 CF R52.21(b)(2)(iii)(a)) . Th e Department' s investigatio nint o th e WEPCO-Por t Washingto nsituatio nha s concentrate do nth e natur e o f th e renovation s propose dfo r th e fiv e unit s (boilers) . Becaus e o f ou r limite dexpertis e inutilit y boile r maintenance , we hav e consulte d Wisconsi nPubli c Servic e Commissio n(PSC ) engineerin g staf f fo r assistanc e i n evaluatin g th e planne dmaintenanc e activities . Alle nHubbar do f ou r ne w sourc e revie w

staf f ha s als o discusse dth e lif e extensio nprojec t a t th e Beckjor dPowe r Statio nnea r Cincinnat i wit hTom Tucke r o f th e Southwester n Ohi o Ai r Pollutio nContro l Agenc y (S0APCA) . Utilit y boile r lif e extensio nprojects , suc ha s th e WEPCO-Por t Washingto n plan t restoration , ar e o f kee ninteres t t o PSC . A lette r summarizin g PSC' s thought s o nth e Por t Washingto nprojec t and ho w i t fit s i nwit hWisconsin' s utilit y Advanc e Plan s i s i nprocess . SOAPCA' s Mr . Tucke r indicate dthat th eP.1 1



### Mr . Jo e Paisie , Chie f - Februar y 4 , 198 8 t Beckjor drenovations , whic hlik e thos e propose dfo r Por t Washingto nsimpl y restore dboile r capacit y whic hha dbee nlos t du e t o th e norma l agin g o f utilit y boilers , wer e determine dt o b e exemp t fro m PS Dbecaus e the y represente dIncrease s inth e productio nrate s o f source s whic har e limite di n capacit y b y a SIP . Suc hincrease s ar e specificall y exempte dfro m

PS Drevie w b y 4 0 CF R52.21(b)(2)(iii)(f) . I t i s th e opinio no f DNRtha t th e renovation s a t WEPCO-Por t Washingto nar e simila r t o thos e a t Beckjor dan dar e indee droutin e I nnatur e fo r a utility . Therefore , lik e a t Beckjord , a PS Dpermi t i s no t require do f WEPC O fo r undertakin g th e propose dplan t lif e extensio nactivities . Wha t i s you r vie w

o f ou r interpretatio no f th e applicabilit y o f th e PS D regulation s t o th e WEPCO-Por t Washingto nrenovations ? W e believ e tha t yo u wil l agre e tha t WEPC O ma y procee dwit hthi s lif e extensio nprojec t withou t a PS Dpermit . (I f EP A

staf f nee dfurthe r informatio nt o evaluat e thi s situation , w e woul dappreciat e i t i f the y woul dtel l u s wha t informatio ni s needed . To o ofte ninth e pas t peopl e hav e jus t sai d"mor e informatio ni s needed " withou t specifyin g th e exac t natur e o f tha t missin g information. ) Sincerely ,

Dal e Ziege , P.E . Sourc e Revie w

Uni t Engineerin g & Surveillanc e Sectio n Burea uo f Ai r Managemen t DZ:AH:jmc/2725 E
cc : Donal dTheile r - AM/ 3 Alle nHubbar d- AM/ 3 Da nJohnsto n- AM/ 3 To m Steid l - LC/ 5 Marci a Penne r - LC/ 5 Wol f Klasse n- SE D Jef f Berge r - SE D Ji m Leveranc e - Wisconsi nPubli c Servic e Commissio n Stev e Bric k- Wisconsi nPubli c Servic e Commissio n Da nDash o - Wisconsi nPubli c Servic e Commissio n Mar kSteinber g - WEPC OP.1 2

^ 

# Wisconsin Electric

POWER

COMPANY 23 1 W
. MICHIGAN , P.O
. BO X 2046 , MILWAUKEE , W l 5320 1 (414)221-234 5



### Marc h 17 , 198 8
Mr
. Davi d Ke e Directo r o f Ai r an d Radiatio n Divisio n U.S
. Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y 23 0 Sout h Dearbor n Stree t Chicago , I L 6060 4
Dea r Mr
. Kee : PORT WASHINGTONRENOVATIONPROJEC T Wisconsi n Electri c un d Headquarter s staf f i s lette r fro

m th e Wisco n determinatio n tha t ph y fro mou r Por t Washing t requirement s unde r the ication. " Th e two ba s lette r wer e the "rout i exemptio n an

d th e "pr o exemption

. erstand s tha t EP ARegio n V

an d EP A currentl yreviewing the February5 , 198 8 si n DN R requestin g concurrenc e on DNR' s sica l an

d operationa l change s resultin g o n renovatio n projec t wil l no t trigge r PS D Stat e an

d Federa l definitio n o f "modif

e s fo r the exemptio n state d i n the DN R n e maintenance , repai r an d replacement " ductio n rate/hour s o f operatio n increase "

Th e issu e presente d i n thi s instanc e i s whethe r th e change s contemplate d b

yWEPC O wil l fal l withi n on e o f thes e exemption s t o the PS D "modification " definition

. W e understand tha t the revie w b

yRegio n V

an d Headquarter s presentl yfocuse s o n th e "routin e maintenanc e an d repair " exemption

. Since , a s yo u ar e aware , tim e i s o f the essenc e i n beginnin g the Por t Washingto n project , w e believ e tha t EP Acoul d ac t mor e quickl yi f the agenc ywer e t o focu s o n the "productio n rate/hour s o f operatio n increase " exemption

. Tha t exemptio n provide s tha t " a physica l chang e o r chang e i n th e metho d o f operation " i s no t a "modification " i f th e change s bring abou t "an increas e i n the hour s o f operatio n o r i n th e productio n rate " tha t i s no t prohibite d b yan y"federall yenforceabl e permi t condition. " Se e 4 0 C.F.R
. Sec
. 52.21(b)(2)(iii)(f)

. Th e Por t Washingto n plan t consist s o f fiv e unit s designe d wit h a maximu mcapacit yo f 8 0 M W each
. Al l o f thes e unit s ha d bee n operate d i n the pas t a t thei r maximu mdesign capacity

. I n the earl y1980s , the unit s a t th e plan t bega n t o deteriorat e t o the poin t tha t the compan yconclude d severa l unit s shoul d no t continu e t o be operate d a t maximu mdesign capacity

. Th e purpos e 

# I P MAR 2 1 

## 198 8P.1 3



### Pag e 2 Marc h 17 , 198 8
o f the planne d renovatio n projec t i s t o allo w al l unit s t o be reliabl yoperate d agai n u p to , bu t no t above , thei r design capacit yo f 8 0 M

W each
. At no time ha s a federall yenforceabl e permi t conditio n existe d tha t limit s the operatio n o f an yo f the unit s t o les s than the design capacit yo f 8 0 M W o r limit s the hour s o f operatio n o f the units

. Unde r thes e circumstances , we believ e tha t the planne d renova tio n projec t fall s directl yunde r th e productio n rate/hour s o f operatio n increas e exemptio n o f th e "modification " definition

. Accordingly , th e Regio n ca n concu r wit h DNR' s determinatio n withou t having t o reac h an yissue s o f firs t impressio n potentiall yraise d b ythe "routin e maintenance " exemption

. I loo k forwar d t o talking t o you r staf f (an d t o anyon e i n th e OAQP S Staf f involve d i n reviewin g the DN R request)
. O f course , w e wil l follo w your lea d a s t o the mos t efficien t wa yo f resolvin g thi s matte r an d wil l quickl yrespon d t o an yrequest s yc u ma yhav e fo r additiona l information

. Pleas e hav e you r staf f cal l me a t (414)221-215 7 wit h an y question s theyma

yhave
. Thank yo u fo r your consideratio n o f thi s matter
. Sincerely ,

Mar k P
. Steinber g Superintenden t Ai r Qualit y cj o
cc : Mr
. D
. Dash o - PSC W Mr
. D
. Theile r - DN R