1 

# Nebraska Regional Haze /BART SIP Submittal Shelley Schneider NDEQ Air Quality Division Administrator April 12, 2012

# Overview
• Nebraska State Implementation Plan

– Regional Haze & B est A vailable R etrofit T echnology (BART) 

### • Baseline Emissions vs. Projected Emissions

– SIP Effectiveness 

### • Summary of BART Determinations

– OPPD

– NPPD 

### • Remainder of Haze SIP 2

# 2002 Baseline Emissions

3

# 2018 Emissions – Projected As controlled by SIP

4

# Nebraska SIP Effectiveness • Overall Emission Reductions due to NE SIP

– VOCs 16,804 tons ( ↓ 12%)

– NOx 110,459 tons ( ↓ 43%)

– SO2 1,620 tons ( ↓ 1.7%)

– PM10 143,673 tons ( ↓ 30%)

– PM2.5 28,010 tons ( ↓ 28%) 

## • Reductions achieved primarily through implementation of BART 5

# Impacts on Visibility – Pre Control

6

# What’s a deciview dV ?

Badlands Baseline Conditions 20% worst 17.14 dV 20% least 6.91 dV Natural Conditions 20% worst 8.06 dV 20% least 2.32 dV 7 1 deciviews 10 deciviews
15 deciviews 10 deciviews
17 deciviews 7 deciviews

# BART Requirements • BART Process

– Presumptive levels must be met for electric generation units (EGUs) unless otherwise justified based upon statutory factors

– Statutory factors are considered in the analysis: cost effectiveness, existing controls, remaining useful life, degree of visibility improvement, and

8

# BART Determinations

9

# OPPD BART Summary
• PM determined to be insignificant, current controls adequate • Presumptive level of control for NOx

– Cost effectiveness • $135/ ton NOx removed (10,181 tons) • $1,380,000 cost of control • $ 6,751,613 average cost/ dV of improvement

– 0.228 dV improvement 

### • Low NOx burners w/ over - fired air deemed appropriate 10

# OPPD BART Summary
• Presumptive level of control for SO2

– Cost effectiveness • $1,636/ ton SO2 removed • $34,720,000 cost of control • $85,747,879 average cost/ dV of improvement

– 0.408 dV improvement

– Causes of Haze Study – lack of evidence supporting need for SO2 control 

### • NDEQ determined that high costs for amount of visibility improvement did not warrant additional SO2 control 11

# NPPD - GGS BART Summary
• Units #1 & #2 • PM determined to be insignificant, current controls adequate • Presumptive level of control for NOx

– Cost effectiveness • $198/ ton NOx removed (14,956 tons) • $2,960,000 cost of control • $ 4,464,555 average cost/ dV of improvement

– 0.663 dV improvement 

### • Low NOx burners w/ over - fired air deemed appropriate 12

# NPPD - GGS BART Summary

13 

### • Presumptive level of control for SO2 - Scrubbers

– Cost effectiveness - Scrubbers • $2,935 ton SO2 removed • $123,933,694 (annualized) cost of control • $146,667,093 annual cost/ dV of improvement

– 0.845 dV improvement 

### • NDEQ used $40,000,000/ dV as threshold for reasonableness • Presumptive control is wet or semi - dry scrubbing

– Both require substantial amounts of consumptive water

# NPPD Water Demands

14 

## Gallons /Min (dry) Gallons /Min (wet) Acre - Feet per Year (dry) Acre - Feet per Year (wet) NPPD 2,007 2,402 3,238 3,877 Industry Average 1,280 1,652 2,065 2,666151617

# NPPD - GGS BART Summary

18 • Presumptive level of control for SO2 – Dry Sorbent Injection

– Cost effectiveness – Dry Sorbent Injection • $2,058 ton SO2 removed • $81,958,000 (annualized) cost of control • $95,189,314 annual cost/ dV of improvement

– 0.861 dV improvement • NDEQ used $40,000,000/ dV as threshold for reasonableness • Landfill requirements would quadruple – 400,000 tons of waste per year

– Shortening life span of current landfill – Hazardous waste??

– Lost revenue from fly - ash • Water is used to wash trona mills – 5 gallons/min

# NPPD - GGS BART Conclusion

19 

### • Water Resources within the river basin are scarce

– Moratorium in place on new uses of water

– Unique circumstances exist related to water resources in this region of the state 

### • DSI poses substantial other environmental impacts related to waste

– Visibility benefit while greater than 0.5 dV is smaller than 1.0 dV • These small gains in visibility do not warrant the high costs and excesseive waste generated 

### • Continue to use low sulfur coal

# Remainder of Haze SIP

20 

### • Demonstration of Consultation with States • Long Term Strategy

– Federal Measures • CAIR/Clean Air Transport / Cross State Air Pollution Rule

– Mobile Source Related Standards

– Air Toxics Standards

– Federal Construction Permit Program

– Fugitive Dust Regulations

– Open Burning 

### • Commitment to Periodic Emission Inventories & Plan Revisions