VIA ELECTRONIC SUBMITTAL

September 8, 2010

Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Mailcode 6102T Attention Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0295 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20460

Re: Comments on EPA’s proposed Standards of Performance for Stationary Compression Ignition and Spark Ignition Internal Combustion Engines (Docket ID Number EPA- HQ-OAR-2010-0295)

Dear Docket Clerk:

Trinity Consultants, Inc. (“Trinity”) is pleased to provide the following comments on the Environmental Protection Agency’s (“EPA’s” or the “Agency’s”) proposed revisions to the New Source Performance Standards (“NSPS”) for Stationary Compression I gnition Internal Combustion Engines, which was published in the Federal Register on June 8, 2010. 1 As an environmental consulting firm specializing in air quality issues, Trinity has an interest in the de velopment of this and other NSPS, as well as in how EPA interprets the applicability of these standards. In this regard, we submit the following specific

comments:

1. Treating all temporary replacement engines as stationary engines is a reversal of EPA’s historical regulation of nonroad engines.

Trinity is primarily concerned with EPA’s preamble discussion of the regulatory status of temporary replacement engines, not with EPA’s proposed em ission standards or regulatory text. Specifically, Trinity is concerned that EPA’s statements regardi ng the status of portable engines that temporarily replace stationary engines will, at best, cause conf usion on the part of regulators and the regulated community alike; at worst, EPA’s statements could result in a de facto prohibition on the use of temporary portable engines in some jurisdictions. Trinity thus urges EPA to clarify its statement and explain that the same position it adopted in 2006, when the Agency promulgated NSPS Subpart IIII,

remains in effect.

In particular, Trinity is troubled by the fi rst several sentences of the following passage:

Portable engines that replace existing sta tionary engines on a temporary basis are considered stationary engines. This provis ion allows the permitting authority to count the emissions of the temporary unit in the emission from the stationary source, as it would for the permanent unit. This prevents sources from avoiding the counting of such units in its projected or actual emissions. EPA agrees with comments that with regard to

1 75 Fed. Reg. 32,612. 12770 Merit Drive

, Suite 900

, Dallas

, TX 75251 U.S.A.  ( 800 ) 229-6655  Fax ( 972 ) 385-9203 Offices nationwide  trinityconsultants. c o mDocket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0295 Page 2 of 5 September 8, 2010

temporary replacement engines, which are generally portable and moved from place to place, it is most appropriate that these engin es, though considered stationary, should be allowed under the NSPS to meet requireme nts for mobile nonroad engines. These sources are not under the long-term control (or in many cases the short-term control) of the local source, and, therefore it is appropriate to hold them to the requirements for similar sources that are mobile in character. EPA also notes that under the pre-existing general provisions for 40 CFR Part 60, the fact that an engine moves from place to place does not, by the sole basis of that movement, make the engine a “new” engine for the purposes of the NSPS.

75 Fed. Reg. at 32,616 (emphasis added).

While Trinity agrees with most of this passage, par ticularly the policy of allowing portable engines to meet nonroad engine emission standards, it does not ag ree with the statement that portable engines that replace existing stationary engines on a temporary b asis are considered stationary engines. This represents a reversal of EPA’s historical treatment of portable engines and would lead to results contrary to the Agency’s likely intentions.

EPA has traditionally distinguished between nonroad a nd stationary internal combustion engines on the basis of engine mobility and residence time, and it has generally treated portable engines that remain in a particular location for less than 12 months as nonroad engines. See 59 Fed. Reg. 31,306, 31,311 (June 17, 1994). EPA has made clear that sources cannot game the system by constantly relying on portable engines to avoid regulation (e.g., federal New Sour ce Review and/or Title V operating permit program), and hence has made clear that “if an engine is repl aced by another engine within the 12 month period, the replacement engine should be considered in calculating the consecutive time period.” Id. But this has not been applied in the context of when a portable engine replaces a permanent stationary engine on a temporary basis, such as for maintenance, repair, or unexpected failures that cause the engines to be offline for a temporary period. Indeed, in addressing this very issue in 2006 when promulgating Subpart

IIII, EPA stated:

EPA agrees that the engines themselves that are used for temporary replacement of stationary engines are nonroad engines and are not covered by stationary engine regulations, as long as they meet the definition of nonroad engine and if they are not used beyond the residence limitations in paragraph 2(iii) on the nonroad engine definition in

40 CFR 1068.30.

Response to Comments on Proposed Standards of Performance for Stationary Compression Ignition Internal Combustion Engines , EPA Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0029 at 166 (emphasis added).

EPA’s current statement is an unequivocal reversal of its longstanding position, at least as applied in the context of subpart IIII.

Trinity is concerned that by trea ting portable engines that temporar ily replace stationary engines as stationary sources, EPA could effectively prohibit th eir very intended use as a temporary replacement. The value to a source of a portable engine is its ability to be moved quickly to a site to replace a stationary engine that has unexpectedly malfunctioned or is in n eed of repair. These events are infrequent, but when they happen, time is of the essence. An entire facility’s operations can be at stake. These events also tend to be short-lived; once the maintenance, repair or pe rmanent replacement is made, the stationary engine is returned to service and the portable engine is remove d from that location. A number of state and local agencies acknowledge this type of use and have a categorical pre-construction permitting exemption forDocket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0295 Page 3 of 5 September 8, 2010

nonroad or portable engines, as long as the engine m eets the definition of nonroad engine under 40 CFR 1068.30 (excluding para graph (2)(ii) of that definition) (e.g., Massachusetts). If temporary replacement generators were considered stati onary sources and subject to NSPS IIII, albeit with limited requirements, a number of state and local agencies would potentially require pre-construction approval based on the fact that the engines are subject to an NSPS standard (e .g., Colorado and Oklahoma). Moreover, if portable, temporary replacement engines are regulated as stationary sources, it might not be possible for such engines to be placed into service without first obtaining a state construction permit, a process that can take several months. Obviously, this would be of little value to sources in need of temporary, emergency replacement.

Moreover, in states and local jurisdictions that re quire permitting and ambient air quality demonstration for all “stationary sources,” it might not even be possibl e to permit larger portable, temporary replacement engines in light of the national ambient air quality standard (“NAAQS”) for nitrogen oxide (“NO

x ”). Meeting the 1-hour NO

x NAAQS for large engines often requires substantial stack heights for air dispersion purposes. Thus, the regulation of port able, temporary replacement engines as stationary sources would mean that portable engines would have to be equipped with or have the ability to be tied into the existing stacks before they could be permitted and used. Again, this could result in an effective ban on portable temporary replacement engines at many s ources. This is not in the best interest of any

stakeholder.

EPA does not need to treat portable engines that replace stationary engines on a temporary basis as stationary engines to meet its policy goal of en suring that sources cannot circumvent their permitting obligations through the intentional substitution of portable replacement engines. EPA’s existing definition of nonroad engine already pr ohibits this type of behavior. See 59 Fed. Reg. at 31,311. Thus, a facility cannot avoid triggering unde rlying permitting thresholds (e.g., 100 tons per year for Title V purposes) by intentionally shutting down its stationary engine and instead running a portable replacement engine. Instead of treating all portable replacements as stationary engines, EPA, at the very least, should clarify that portable engines that temporarily repl ace stationary engines that are undergoing verifiable repair or maintenance are not considered stationa ry engines. Facilities that could not verify the “legitimacy” of the temporary replacement would have to consider their portable engines as stationary sources for emission calculation purposes. This appro ach would at least recognize the purpose and need for temporary engines.

2. Emergency engines should be allowed to pa rticipate in demand response programs for 60 hours per year as part of normal emergency use.

Trinity is concerned that limiting emergency engine operation to 15 hours per year as part of an emergency demand response program is too restrictive to ensure the reliability of the nation’s electrical grid. We believe that emergency demand response programs are initiated infrequently and only when necessary to avoid brownouts and blackouts. Thus , EPA should not arbitrarily limit the hours an emergency generator can participate in such programs. Alternatively, the limit should be raised from 15

to 60 hours.

Emergency demand response programs ha ve been developed by many companies that manage the electric grid throughout the United States. These emergency demand response programs are rarely initiated, but when they are, they are done so by the transmissi on system operators to prevent brownouts and blackouts due to insufficient supply of power to the grid. Owners and operators of emergency generators participating in emergency demand r esponse programs do not supply power to the grid; all power is used at the individual facility. By utilizing selected owners and operators of emergency engines in the emergency demand response program, transmission sy stem operators are able to prevent rollingDocket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0295 Page 4 of 5 September 8, 2010

brownouts and blackouts from occurring. Without em ergency demand response programs, there will be a greater frequency of rolling blackouts in which case a ll emergency engines within the region would be engaged because of a loss of power, versus a select s ubset of emergency generators being called by the Independent System Operators to maintain the inte grity of the grid. EPA acknowledges the need for emergency demand response programs in the proposed revisions to the Standards of Performance for Stationary Compression Ignition and Spark Ignition Internal Combustion Engines:

You may operate your emergency stationary ICE up to 50 hours per year in non-emergency situations, but those 50 hours are counted towards the 100 hours per year provided for maintenance and testing. The 50 hours per year for non-emergency situations cannot be used for peak shaving or to generate income for a facility to supply power to an electric grid or otherwise supply power as part of a financial arrangement with another entity; except that owners and operators may operate the emergen cy engine for a maximum of 15 hours per year as part of a demand response program if the regional transmissi on organization or equivalent balancing authority and transmission operator has determined there are emergency conditions that could lead to a potential electrical blackout, such as unusually low frequency, equipment overload, capacity or energy deficiency, or unacceptable voltage level. The engine may not be operated for more than 30 minutes prior to the time when the emergency condition is e xpected to occur, and the engine operation must be terminated immediately after the facility is notified that the emergency condition is no longer imminent. The 15 hours per year of demand response operation are counted as part of the 50 hours of operation per year provided for nonemergency

situations. The supply of emergency power to anothe r entity or entities pursuant to financial arrangement is not limited by this paragraph (d)(4), as long as the power provided by the financial arrangement is limited to emergency power.

Proposed 40 CFR 60.4211(f)(4) and proposed 40 CFR 60.4243(d)(4) (emphasis added)

Emergency demand response programs are only instituted in cases of true emergencies, and recent history suggests that the emergency generato rs will be rarely called to partic ipate in emergency demand response programs. Thus, Trinity recommends that the hour restri ctions be eliminated or alternatively that draft rule 40 CFR 60.4243(d)(4) be updated to read “... owners and operators may operate the emergency engine for a maximum of 60 hours per year or the amount of time required by the Independent System Operator tariff, whichever is less, as part of a demand response program...” It is also recommended that the EPA eliminate the requirement that the hours op erated in emergency demand response programs be counted towards to 50 hours of operatio n per year in nonemergency situations.

One significant benefit to participants in these program s is the ability to control the transition from power being provided by the utility to power being provided by the emergency generators on site. When the power from the local utility is interrupted, automatic switchgear systems at a facility automatically transition the building load to emergency generators. However, in this uncontrolled situation, there is typically a momentary loss in power to the facility an d to the services the facility provides. This loss can result in interruptions of critical services. By participating in emergenc y demand response programs, owners and operators are able to control and monitor the transition of the building load, ensuring the continued, seamless quality of service.

Trinity recognizes that the proper lo ng term solution to address the burden on our nation’s energy grid is the addition of base load power generation to the syst em. A newly installed natural-gas fired turbine has much lower emissions per MW of power generated than diesel-fired engines. However, it will take years for the utilities to add the needed generating capacity to the grid, due to the extended amount of time required to site the stations, obtain the necessary c onstruction and environmenta l approvals, and build the stations. As the peak energy demand continues to increase, emergency demand response programs areDocket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0295 Page 5 of 5 September 8, 2010

necessary to bridge the gap between our country’s cu rrent energy needs versus the available supply of

power.



### * * *

For the reasons set forth in this letter, Trinity requ ests that EPA clarify that portable engines that replace existing stationary engines on a temporary basis are not themselves stationary sources under the Clean Air Act, and that owners and operato rs can operate in emergency dema nd response programs for up to 60 hours per year.

Trinity appreciates this opportunity to provide comments on this proposed rule and hopes that these comments will be integrated into the final rule in a manner that will make it more flexible, less burdensome, and promote good environm ental and energy policy. At your request, we would be happy to provide additional information. I can be reached at (253) 867-5600 or jmitche l@trinityconsultants.com.

Sincerely,



### TRINITY CONSULTANTS

Jack Mitchell

Senior Consultant