p. 1



# OAR Box 1865
Prepped by Charmelle Mathews



# Document

Number: 

# 198 ) F R12-6-198 7

Docket Number: 

# A-83-2 7

Printed 12/3/20083:22:25PM

Sheet 198of 198P. 2



# r A-63-Z.7

Wednesda y Decembe r 16 , 198 7



# Par t I I 

# Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc

y
4 0 CF R Part 6 0 Standard s o f Performanc e fo r New Stationary Sources ; Industrial Commercial-Institutiona l Stea m Generatin g Units ; Fina l Rul eP. 3

* „ ~ /•> 4782 6 Federa l Registe r / Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r 16 , 198 7 /

Rule s an dRegulation s
ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENCY
4 0 CF R Par

t 6 0 [AD-FRt-3276-4 ] Standard s o f Performanc e fo r Ne w Stationary Sources ; Industrial Commercial-Institutiona l Stea m Generatin g Unit s AGENCY : Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y (EPA)

. ACTION : Fina l rule

. SUMMARY : Standard s o f performanc e unde r Subpar t D b o f 4 0 CFRPar t

6 0 limitin g emission s o f

sulfu r dioxid e (SO2 } fro mcoal

- an doil-fire dindustrial

commercial-institutiona l stea m generatin g unit s an dparticulat e matte r (PM ) fro moil-fire dindustrial

commercial-institutiona l stea m generatin g unit s wer e propose di n th e Federa l Registe r

o n Jun e 19,198 6 (5 1 F R 22384)

. Today' s actio n promulgate s thes e standard s unde r

Subpar t D b an d als o revise s emissio n testin g procedure s unde r Metho d1 9 o f

4 0 CFRPar t

60 , Appendi x A

. Standard s o f

performanc e limitin g emission s o f

nitroge n oxide s (NO x ) an d P M fro mfossil

- an dnonfossil-fuel-fire d industrial-commercial-institutiona l stea mgeneratin g unit s wer e promulgate do n Novembe r 25,198 6 (5 1 F R42768)

. Th e complet e tex t o f Subpar t D b integratin g th e requirement s fo r SO2 , NO x , an dP M i s include di n today' s notice

. Thi s combine dtex t i s provide da s aconvenienc e t o th e reade r an di s not

arepromulgatio n o f

th e previousl y promulgate dstandard s fo r NO , an dPM

. A n outlin e o f th e specifi c addition s t o Subpar t

D b resultin g fro m today' s actio n i s provide di n th e administrativ e sectio no f th e preamble

. Thes e standard s implemen t sectio n 11 1 o f th e Clea n Ai r

Ac t an dar e base d o n th e Administrator' s determinatio n tha t industrial-commercial-institutiona l stea mgeneratin g unit s cause , o r contribut e significantl y to , ai r pollutio n whic hma y reasonabl y b e anticipate dt o endange r publi c healt ho r

welfare

. Th e intende deffec t

o f thes e standard s i s t o requir e al l new , modified , an d reconstructe dindustrial-commercial

institutiona l stea mgeneratin g unit s t o reduc e emission s o f

SO 2 an dP M t o th e level s achievabl e b y th e bes t demonstrate dsyste mo f continuou s emissio n reduction , considerin g costs , nonai r qualit y healt han denvironmenta l impacts , an denerg y requirements

. EFFECTIV EDATE : Decembe r 16,1987

. Unde r sectio n 307(b)(1 ) o f

th e Clea n Ai r Act , judicia l revie w o f th e action s take n b y thi s notic e i s availabl e only b y

th e filin g o f

apetitio n fo r

revie w i n th e U.S

. Cour t

o f Appeal s fo r

th e Distric t

o f Columbi aCircui t

withi n 6 0 day s o f today' s publicatio n o f

thi s rule

. Unde r sectio n 307(b)(2 ) o f

th e Clea n Ai r

Act , th e requirement s tha t

ar e th e subjec t

o f today' s notic e ma y no t

b e challenge d late r i n civi l o r

crimina l proceeding s t o enforc e thes e requirements

. Incorporation by reference: Th e incorporatio nb y referenc e o f certai n publication s i n thes e standard s i s approve db y th e Directo r o f th e Offic e o f th e Federa l Registe r

a s of Decembe r

16 , 1987

. ADDRESSES : Docket

. Docke t numbe r A

83-27 , containin g informatio n use di n developmen t

o f th e standards , i s availabl e fo r

publi c inspectio n betwee n 8:0 0 a.m
. an d3:0 0 p.m
. Monda y throug h Frida y a t

th e Centra l Docke t

Sectio n (LE-131) , Sout hConferenc e Center , Roo m4,40 1 M Stree t

SW. , Washington , D C 20460

. A reasonabl e fe e ma y b e charge dfo r

copying

. FO R FURTHE R INFORMATIO N CONTACT : Mr

. Fre dPorte r

o r Mr

. Walte r Stevenson , Standard s Developmen t Branch , Emissio n Standard s an d Engineerin g Divisio n(MD-13) , U.S

. Environmenta l Protectio nAgency , Researc hTriangl e Park , Nort hCarolin a 27711 , telephon e (919 ) 541-525 1 o r (919 ) 541-5264

. SUPPLEMENTAR

YINFORMATION : Th e followin g outlin e i s provide dt o ai di n readin g th e preambl e t o th e fina l regulation

. I

. Summar y o f Standard s A

. Applicability B

. Sulfu r Dioxide Standard s C

. Particulat e Matte r

Standard s II

. Summar

y o f Change s t o Propose d Standard s A

. Sulfu r Dioxid e Standard s B

. Sulfu r Dioxide Complianc e Provision s C

. Particulat e Matte r

Complianc e Provision s D

. Reportin g Requirement s III

. Summar

y o f Impact s fro

mth e Promulgate dStandard s IV

. Publi c Participatio n V

. Significant

Comment s an dChange s t o th e Propose dStandard s A

. Applicabilit

y B

. Basi s o f Standar d C

. Standar dfo

r Sulfu r Dioxide D

. National Impact s E

. Cos t o f th e Standar d F

. Performance/Reliability o f Demonstrate dTechnologie s G

. Secondary Environmental Impact s H

. Emissio nCredit s I

. Emerging Technologie s VI

. Administrativ e A

. Outlin e o

f Addition s t o Subpart

Db B

. Revisio n o

f Metho d1 9 C

. Relationshi p o

f Subpart Db to Operationa l Guidanc e an dPlan s t o Develo p Standard s fo r Municipal Wast e Combustor s D

. Docket E

. CleanAir

Ac t Procedural Requirement s F

. Office o

f Managemen t

an dBudget Review s G

. Regulator

y Flexibilit

y Ac t Complianc e Background

Information Documents. Becaus e o f

printin g an ddistributio n costs , onl y alimite dnumbe r o f th e backgroun dinformatio ndocumen t (BID ) fo r th e promulgate dstandard s wer e printed

. Distributio n o f thes e document s t o industrie s i s bein g coordinate db y industr y trad e associations

. Companie s wishin g t o revie w th e BID shoul d contac t thei r representativ e trad e association

. I

f th e trad e associatio n doe s no t hav e acces s t o th e BID , acop y wil l b e provide dfo r

th e us e o f

thei r membership

. I

. Summar y o f

Standard s Standard s of

performanc e fo r

ne w source s establishe dunde r sectio n 11 1 o f th e Clea n Ai r

Ac t reflect : * * * applicatio n o

f th e bes t technological syste mo f continuou s emissio n reductio n whic h(takin g int o consideratio n th e cos t o f achievin g suc hemission s reduction , an y nonai r quality healthan denvironmental impac t an denerg y requirements ) th e Administrato r

determine s ha s bee n adequatel y demonstrate d(Sectio n 111(a)(1))

. Fo r convenience , thi s wil l b e referre dt o a s "bes t demonstrate dtechnology. " A. Applicability Th e ne w sourc e performanc e standard s (NSPS ) bein g adopte dtoda y appl y t o al l new , modified , o r reconstructe dstea mgeneratin g unit s wit hahea t

inpu t capacit y greate r

tha n 2 9 M W(10 0 millio n Btu/hour ) fo r whic h constructio n i s commence dafte r Jun e 19,1986 , excep t

fo r electri c utilit y stea m generatin g unit s covere db y 4 0 CFRPar t 60 , Subpar t

Da , o r stea mgeneratin g unit s covere dunde r

4 0 CF RPar t

60 , Subpar t J (Standard s o f

performanc e fo r petroleu mrefineries)

. Th e definitio n o f "stea mgeneratin g unit " include s al l device s tha t

combus t fue l an dproduc e steam , ho t

water , o r

hea t othe r fluid s whic har e use da s hea t transfe r media

. Th e owne r

o r operato r o f an y stea m generatin g uni t

tha t i s capabl e o f combustin g greate r

tha n 2 9 M W(10 0 millio nBtu/hour ) o f

fue l mus t

submi t certai n informatio n a s require db y th e Genera l Provision s (4 0 CFR60.11) , includin g notificatio n o f th e dat e o f initia l uni t

startup , an dmus t

maintai n certai nfue l us e records

. Sulfu r dioxid e contro l requirement s ar e establishe dfo r

stea mgeneratin g unit s whic hcombus t

coal , oil , coal/oi lP. 4

Federa l Registe r

/ Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r 16 , 198 7 /

Rule s an dRegulation s 4782 7

mixtures , o r

coa l o r oi l wit han y othe r fuels

. Particulat e matte r

emissio n limit s ar e establishe dfo r

stea mgeneratin g unit s combustin g oi l o r

mixture s o f

oi l wit h an y othe r

fuels

. Th e P M standar dbein g adopte dtoda y fo r

oil-fire dstea m generatin g unit s supplement s P M emissio n standard s adopte do n Novembe r

25,1986 , fo r

stea mgeneratin g unit s combustin g coal , wood , municipa l soli dwaste , o r

fue l mixture s containin g an y o f thes e fuel s (5 1 F

R42768)

. B. Sulfur Dioxide Standards (1 ) Stea mgeneratin g unit s combustin g coal , eithe r

alon e o r i n combinatio n wit h othe r fuels , ar e require dt o achiev e a9 0 percen t reductio n i n potentia l SO2 emission s an dmee t

a n emissio n limi t

of 52 0 ng/ J (1. 2 lb/millio n Btu ) hea t input , excep t a s note dbelow

. (2 ) Stea mgeneratin g unit s combustin g oil/eithe r

alon e o r i n combinatio n wit h othe r fuels , ar e require dt o achiev e a9 0 percen t reductio n i n potentia l SO 2 emission s an dmee t

a n emissio n limi t

o f 34 0 ng/ J (0. 8 lb/millio n Btu ) hea t input , excep t a s note dbelow

. (3 ) Stea mgeneratin g unit s combustin g coal , oil , o r

amixtur e o f

coa l an doil , wit ho r withou t othe r fuels , tha t

hav e a Federall y enforceabl e permi t limitin g th e combustio n o f

coa l an doi l t o 3 0 percen t o r les s o f th e maximu mannua l stea m generatin g uni t

hea t inpu t capacity , ar e exemp t fro mth e percentag e reductio n requirement , bu t

mus t mee t certai n emissio n limits

. Coal-fire dstea m generatin g unit s ar e subjec t t o a n emissio n limi t

o f 52 0 ng/ J (1. 2 lb/millio n Btu ) hea t input

. Oil-fire dstea m generatin g unit s ar e subjec t t o a n emissio n limi t

o f 13 0 ng/ J (0. 3 lb/millio n Btu ) hea t input

. (4 ) Stea mgeneratin g unit s combustin g coa l an dusin g a n emergin g SO 2 contro l technolog y mus t

achiev e a5 0 percen t reductio n i n potentia l SO 2 emission s an d mee t a n emissio n limi t

o f 26 0 ng/ J (0. 6 lb/millio n Btu ) hea t

input

. (5 ) Stea mgeneratin g unit s combustin g oi l an dusin g a n emergin g SO 2 contro l technolog y mus t

achiev e a5 0 percen t reductio n i n potentia l SO 2 emission s an d mee t a n emissio n limi t

of 17 0 ng/ J (0. 4 lb/millio n Btu ) hea t

input

. (6 ) Stea mgeneratin g unit s locate di n noncontinenta l area s (Hawaii , th e Virgi n Islands , Guam , America n Samoa , th e Commonwealt hof

Puert o Rico , an d th e Norther n Marian aIslands ) ar e exemp t fro mth e percentag e reductio n requirement s bu t

mus t mee t certai n emissio n limits

. Coal-fire dstea m generatin g unit s ar e subjec t t o a n emissio n limi t

of 52 0 ng/ J (1. 2 lb/millio n Btu ) hea t input

. Oil-fire dstea m generatin g unit s ar e subjec t t o a n emissio nlimi t of 13 0 ng/ J (0. 3 lb/millio n Btu ) hea t input

. (7 ) Fluidize dbe dcombustio n (FBC ) stea mgeneratin g unit s combustin g coa l refus e mus t

achiev e a n 8 0 percen t reductio n i n potentia l SOj emission s an d mee t a n emissio nlimi t

o f 52 0 ng/ J (1. 2 lb/millio n Btu ) hea t

input

. (8 ) Duc t burner s operatin g a s par t o f a supplementary-fire dcombine dcycl e syste mi n whic hles s tha n 3 0 percen t o f th e tota l hea t

inpu t t o th e stea m generatin g uni t

i s fro mth e combustio n o f coa l o r oi l i n th e duc t

burne r ar e exemp t fro mth e percentag e reductio n requirement s bu t

mus t mee t certai n emissio nlimits

. Coal-fire dstea m generatin g unit s ar e subjec t t o a n emissio n limi t

o f 52 0 ng/ J (1. 2 lb/millio n Btu ) hea t input

. Oil-fire dstea m generatin g unit s ar e subjec t t o a n emissio nlimi t

o f 13 0 ng/ J (0. 3 lb/millio n Btu ) hea t input

. (9 ) Stea mgeneratin g unit s combustin g ver y lo w sulfu r

conten t oi l ar e exemp t fro mth e percentag e reductio n requirements , bu t

ar e subjec t

t o a n emissio n limi t

of 13 0 ng/ J (0. 3 lb/millio n Btu ) hea t input

. (10 ) Continuou s SO 2 emissio n monitorin g i s require dfo r al l coal

- an d oil-fire dstea mgeneratin g units

. Th e SO 2 emissio n dat acollecte dthroug h continuou s monitorin g ar e use dt o determin e complianc e wit hth e standard s o n acontinuou s basi s throug h th e us e o f

a30-da y rollin g averag e emissio nrat e an dpercen t reductio n leve l calculate deac hday

. Al l continuou s emissio nmonitorin g system s (CEMS ) ar e subjec t

t o th e qualit y assuranc e requirement s i nAppendi x F , Procedur e 1 (5 2 FR21003 ; Jun e 4,1987)

. Metho d6B stac k

samplin g i s allowe d bot ha s a nalternativ e SO 2 monitorin g metho dan dt o supplemen t CEM S dat a t o mee t th e minimu mdat arequirement s (7 5 percen t

o f stea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g hour s durin g astea m generatin g uni t

operatin g day)

. Fo r

unit s firin g lo w sulfu r

coa l o r oi l withou t

a n SO 2 contro l technology , fue l samplin g an danalysi s procedure s ar e allowe da s a n alternativ e t o CEM S o r Metho d6B

. Quarterl y reportin g o f

al l 30-da y rollin g averag e emissio nrate s an dpercen t reduction , a s applicable , i s als o required

. (11 ) Excep t

a s provide dbelow , al l coal

- o r oil-fire dstea mgeneratin g unit s mus t conduc t a ninitia l 30-da y complianc e test

. (12 ) Stea mgeneratin g unit s combustin g onl y oi l an dtha t hav e a Federall y enforceabl e permi t limitin g th e combustio no f

oi l t o 1 0 percen t

o r les s o f th e maximu mannua l stea mgeneratin g uni t hea t inpu t capacit y ar e no t

require d t o perfor ma ninitia l 30-da y complianc e tes t bu t mus t perfor ma ninitia l 24-hou r complianc e test

. C. Particulate

Matter Standards Fo r stea mgeneratin g unit s firin g oil , eithe r alon e o r i ncombinatio n wit h othe r fuels , th e particulat e matte r emissio nlimi t

i s 4 3 ng/ J (0. 1 lb/millio n Btu ) hea t input

. Th e opacit y limi t

fo r stea mgeneratin g unit s firin g oil , alon e o r i ncombinatio n wit hothe r

fuels , i s 2 0 percen t

opacit y (0

- minut e average ) wit hon e 6-minut e excursio npe r

hou r u p t o 2 7 percen t opacity

. Th e opacit y standar dapplie s a t al l time s excep t

durin g period s o f startup , shutdown , o r

malfunctio n a s provide db y th e Genera l Provision s (4 0 CF R60.11(c))

. Performanc e test s t o determin e complianc e wit hth e particulat e matte r emissio n limit s ar e conducte dusin g Metho d5 , 5 B (5 1 F

R42839 ; Novembe r

26 , 1986) , o r 17

. Metho d5 B i s use dt o tes t we t scrubbin g systems ; otherwis e Method s 5 an d1 7 ar e used

. Metho d3 i s use dfo r ga s analysi s an dMetho d1 fo r th e selectio no f

samplin g points

. Metho d9 i s use dt o determin e complianc e wit hth e opacit y standard

. Th e stea mgeneratin g uni t owne r o r operato r ma y elec t

t o us e th e opacit y monito r t o determin e complianc e wit h th e opacit y standar dunde r th e Genera l Provisions , a s amende d(5 2 F R9778 ; Marc h26,1987)

. Continuou s opacit y monitorin g i s require dfo r al l stea m generatin g unit s excep t a s provide dfo r b y th e Genera l Provision s ( § 60.11(b))

. Exces s emission s (opacity ) report s ar e require dt o b e submitte do n a semiannua l basis

. II

. Summar y o f

Change s t o Propose d Standard s A. Sulfur Dioxide Standards Th e fina l standard s retai nth e 9 0 percen t reductio nrequirement s for SO a emission s tha t

wer e include di nth e propose dstandards

. However , base do n comment s receive dafte r proposal , certai nsituation s wer e identifie dwher e th e impact s o f

achievin g a9 0 percen t reductio nwer e judge dt o b e unreasonable

. Emissio n limit s remai n applicabl e i nal l cases
. Unde r th e propose dstandards , SO a percen t reductio nrequirement s wer e no t applicabl e t o mixed-fuel-fire dstea m generatin g unit s (unit s firin g mixture s o f coal/woo do r

coal/municipa l waste ) tha t ha da n annua l coa l capacit y facto r o f 3 0 percen t

o r less

. Unde r

th e fina l standards , thi s exemptio nfro mpercen t reductio n requirement s ha s bee n expande dt o cove r

al l lo w capacit y facto r stea mgeneratin g unit sP. 5



### 4782 8 Federa

l Registe r/

Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r 16 , 1987 /

Rule s an dRegulation s

combustin g coa l o r

oil , includin g bot h mixed-fuel-fire dapplication s an dfossil

fuel-fire dapplication s (unit s tha t combus t onl y coa l o r

oil)

. A s wit hth e propose dstandards , t o qualif y fo r thi s exemption , th e uni t

mus t hav e a n annua l coa l an doi l capacit y facto r o f 3 0 percen t o r les s an daFederall y enforceabl e operatin g permi t

tha t limit s annua l coa l an doi l combustio n t o 3 0 o r les s o f annua l rate dcapacity

. A n exemptio n fro mth e percen t reductio n requiremen t

ha s als o bee n include di n th e fina l standard s fo r stea m generatin g unit s locate di n noncontinenta l area s (Hawaii , th e Virgi n Islands , Guam , America n Samoa , Puert o Rico , an dth e Norther n Marian a Islands)

. Fluidize dbe dcombustio nunit s firin g coa l refus e ar e require dt o achiev e a n 8 0 percen t reductio n i n SO 2 emissions

. Thi s les s stringen t

provisio n wa s no t include di n th e propose dstandards , bu t wa s adde dt o th e final standards

. Th e fina l standard s als o includ e a provisio n exemptin g stea mgeneratin g unit s combustin g ver y lo w sulfu r oi l fro mpercen t

reductio n requirements

. B. Sulfur Dioxide Compliance Provisions Th e propose dstandard s require dal l stea mgeneratin g unit s t o conduc t a30

- da y performanc e tes t

durin g initia l startup

. Th e fina l standard s includ e th e 30-da y performanc e tes t requiremen t

fo r mos t stea mgeneratin g units , bu t permi t a24-hou r

performanc e tes t

fo r oil-fire d stea mgeneratin g unit s tha t hav e a Federall y enforceabl e permi t limitin g combustio n o f

oi l t o 1 0 percen t

o r les s o f th e maximu mannua l hea t inpu t capacity

. I n th e propose dregulation , SO 2 emissio n monitorin g an dcalculatio n o f 30-da y rollin g averag e emissio n rate s an dpercen t

reductio n level s woul dhav e bee n performe di n accordanc e wit h Metho d1 9 an dMetho d19A

. Th e final standar dspecifie s onl y on e method , Metho d19

. Metho d1 9 ha s bee n modifie dt o incorporat e certai nrelevan t portion s o f

Metho d19A , an di s bein g republishe da s par t

of today' s action

. Th e revise dMetho d1 9 include s SO2 , NO„ , an dPM calculatio n procedure s an daddresse s bot hstea mgeneratin g unit s usin g SO 2 contro l device s a s wel l a s unit s combustin g lo w sulfu r complianc e fuels

. Metho d1 9 ha s als o bee n revise dt o includ e fue l samplin g an danalysi s procedure s fo r determinin g SO 2 emission s fro mstea mgeneratin g unit s firin g complianc e fuels

. Qualit y assuranc e procedure s fo r CEM S ar e se t

fort hi n 4 0 CFRPar t

60 , Appendi x F , Procedur e 1

. Appendi x F wa s promulgate do n Jun e 4,198 7 (5 2 F R 21003 ) an dapplie s t o CEM S installe d unde r today' s standard s t o monito r SO 2 emissions

. C. Particulate Matter

Compliance Provisions Th e particulat e matte r

complianc e provision s remai n th e sam e a s thos e promulgate do n Novembe r 25,198 6 (5 1 F R42768) , a s amende db y th e additio n o f Metho d5 B a s acomplianc e metho d fo r "wet " stack s alon g wit hMethod s 5 an d1 7 fo r

"dry " stacks

. Metho d5 B wa s promulgate do n Novembe r 26,198 6 (5 1 F R42839)

. D. Reporting Requirements Th e reportin g requirement s remai n essentiall y th e sam e a s thos e proposed , wit hon e exception

. Becaus e th e Appendi x Fqualit y assuranc e requirement s fo r

CEM S hav e bee n promulgated , quarterl y report s require d unde r Appendi x Far e no w require dt o b e submitte da s par t

o f th e quarterl y report s submitte dunde r thi s regulatio n wher e CEM S ar e used

. III . Summar y o f

Impact s Fro m th e Promulgate d Standard s Th e projecte dnationa l impact s associate dwit hth e fina l standard s ar e summarize di n Tabl e 1

.

TABL E 1.—NATIONA L IMPACT S

Ai rEmissio n Reductions : Sulfu rDioxide , thousan d tons/yr...

. Particulat e Matter , thousan d tons/yr

. Liqui d an d Soli d Waste s Generated : Liqui d Wastes , millio n cuti cft/yr...

. Soli d Wastes , thousan d tons/yr.....

. Energ yImpacts : Increas e i n Natura l Ga s Use , tril

lio n Btu/yr

. Cos t Impacts :
yr

. Averag e Cos t Effectiveness , $ / ton

. Incrementa l Cos t Effectiveness , $/ton

. IFCA M

130-36 0 9-24

. _ Negligibl e Negligibl e 110-31 0

5-5 0 40-13 0 0 „ Sale s

dat a

14 0 3

5 3 27 0 0

12 0 89 0 1.40 0
Projecte dnationa l impact s associate d wit hth e standard s ca n var y considerabl y dependin g o n th e approac h use dt o estimat e thes e impacts

. Th e origina l approac huse db y th e Agenc y start s wit hestimate s o f th e growt hi n nationa l energ y consumptio n projecte d b y th e Departmen t

o f Energy

. Thes e projection s ar e use dt o estimat e energ y consumptio n i n ne w industrial

commercial-institutiona l stea m generatin g units

. Thes e energ y consumptio nestimates , alon g wit h projection s o f

futur e fue l prices , serv e a s input s t o acompute r

model , know na s th e "Industria l Fue l Choic e Analysi s Model " (i.e. , IFCAM)

. Base do n thes e inpu t assumptions , IFCA M project s apopulatio nof ne w stea mgeneratin g unit s distribute db y geographi c area , uni t

size , an doperatin g leve l base do n historica l patterns

. Fo r eac hprojecte dne w stea mgeneratin g unit , th e tota l cos t

associate dwit heac h typ e of fue l tha t coul db e fired , includin g th e cost s t o compl y wit hstandard s limitin g S0 2 emissions , i s calculate dan d th e lowes t

cos t alternativ e i s selecte d fo r compliance

. Th e result s ar e the n aggregate dt o yiel destimate s o f nationa l impact s associate dwit hstandard s limitin g SO 2 emissions

. Usin g thi s approach , "fue l switching " fro mcoa l o r

oi l t o natura l ga s ca n occu r i nrespons e t o standard s limitin g SO 2 emissions

. Fo r

example , i n th e absenc e o f SO 2 standards , i t

ma y b e les s expensiv e t o combus t

coa l o r oi l tha n natura l gas
. Wit hSO 2 standards , however , i t

ma y b e les s expensiv e t o combus t natura l ga s tha n coa l o r oil

. Whe nfue l switchin g occurs , i t result s i n lowe r cost s an dgreate r

SO 2 emissio n reductions

. Th e typ e o f

fue l projecte db y IFCA M t o b e firedi n eac hne w stea mgeneratin g uni t a s wel l a s th e likelihoo dof fue l switchin g occurrin g i n respons e t o standards , depend s primaril y o n relativ e fue l prices

. Give nth e uncertaint y i n projecte dfue l prices , anumbe r of differen t fue l pric e scenario s wer e examined

. Th e rang e of nationa l impact s associate dwit hthos e projection s o f fue l price s whic har e currentl y considere d "mos t likely " i s show nunde r th e "IFCAM " colum ni n Tabl e 1

. A numbe r

o f commenter s state dtha t th e approac huse db y th e Agenc y t o estimat e nationa l impact s (i.e. , IFCAM ) probabl y underestimate dth e cost s an d overestimate dth e emissio n reduction s associate dwit hth e standards

. Commenter s suggeste dtha t bot hth e

• amoun t o f fue l switchin g projecte dt o occu r a s wel l a s the-numbe r

o f ne w stea mgeneratin g unit s projecte dt o b e buil t wer e excessive

. T o respon dt o thes e concerns , a n approac hbase do n historica l dat awa s als o use dt o estimat e nationa l impact s (show n unde r th e "SALE S DATA " colum ni n Tabl e lj

. Thi s alternat e approac huse s annua l stea mgeneratin g uni t

sale s statistic s gathere db y th e America n Boile r Manufacturin g Associatio n(ABMA ) fo r th e pas t fiv e year s t o projec t

a populatio nof

ne w industrial

commercial-institutiona l stea m generatin g unit s expecte dt o b e buil t i n th e nex t fiv e years
. Th e cost s an d emissio n reduction s associate dwit hth e recommende dstandard s ar e estimate d for eac hne w coal

- o r

oil-fire dstea m generatin g unit

. N o fue l switchin g i sP. 6

Federa l Registe r

/ Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r 16 , 198 7 /

Rule s an dRegulation s 47®2 9

assume dt o occu r

in respons e t o standard s limitin g SO 2 emissions , an d th e relativ e marke t

share s b y fue l typ e ar e assume dt o remai n constant

. Th e result s ar e the n aggregate dt o yiel da n alternativ e estimat e o f

nationa l impacts

. A s show n i n Tabl e 1 th e fina l standard s resul t

i n significan t reduction s i n SO 2 emission s fro mne w industrial-commercial-institutiona l stea mgeneratin g units

. Tabl e 1 show s th e standard s could , however , resul t i n som e increas e i n liqui dan dsoli dwaste

. Th e amoun t

of liqui dan dsoli dwast e generate ddepend s o n th e amoun t o f fue l switchin g tha t

occurs
. Whe n stea m generatin g unit s fue l switc hfro mfirin g coa l o r oi l t o firin g natura l gas , th e SO 2 standard s woul dno t

resul t i nan y wast e generatio n an dth e standard s could , i n fact , resul t

i n ane t decreas e i n liqui do r soli dwastes

. Whe n fue l switchin g doe s no t occur , th e liqui do r

soli dwast e increas e depend s o n th e typ e o f FG D syste minstalle dt o contro l SO 2 emissions

. Som e system s generat e onl y liqui dwastes , other s generat e onl y soli d wastes

. Impact s o n energ y consumptio n associate dwit hth e recommende d standard s als o depen do n th e exten t t o whic hfue l switchin g occurs
. A t most , th e standard s woul dresul t i n les s tha n5 percen t (31 0 trillio n Btu/yr ) increas e i n th e amoun t

o f natura l ga s consume db y industria l sources
. Muc hof thi s increase dnatura l ga s consumption , however , woul db e balance db y a correspondin g decreas e i n oi l consumption

. Overall , therefore , th e fina l standard s ar e viewe da s havin g minima l energ y impact s an dar e considere dconsisten t

wit hnationa l energ y policie s directe dtowar dreducin g import s of

oi l an dincreasin g us e of domesti c energ y supplies

. I n additio n t o th e nationa l impact s summarize di n Tabl e 1 , industr y specifi c economi c impact s wer e als o assesse d fo r si x industrie s whic hwer e considere d likel y t o experienc e th e mos t sever e impacts

. Fo r

thes e industries , produc t price s wer e projecte dt o increas e b y les s tha n 0.0 1 t o 1. 5 percen t

i n 1990 , assumin g "ful l cos t

pass-through " o f

al l increase dcost s associate dwit h standard s requirin g apercen t reductio n i n S0 2 emissions

. Assumin g "ful l cos t absorption, " retur n o n asset s wa s projecte dt o decreas e b y 0.0 3 t o 2. 8 percentag e points

. IV

. Publi c Participatio n Prio r t o proposa l of

th e standards , intereste dpartie s wer e advise dof a meetin g of

th e Nationa l Ai r

Pollutio n Contro l Technique s Advisor y Committe e (NAPCTAC ) t o discus s th e standard s unde r

development

. Thi s meetin g wa s hel do nMa y 1 an d2,1985

. Th e meetin g wa s ope nt o th e publi c an d eac hattende e wa s give n a n opportunit y t o commen t

o n th e standards

. Severa l presentation s t o NAPCTA C wer e als o mad e throughou t

th e developmen t

of th e propose dstandard s t o solici t th e view s o f committe e member s an dintereste d member s o f

th e public

. Additiona l meeting s wer e hel dwit haffecte d industrie s a t

severa l time s durin g developmen t

of th e standards

. Th e standard s wer e propose do n Jun e 19,198 6 (5 1 F

R22384)

. Th e preambl e t o th e propose dstandard s discusse dth e availabilit y o f

th e backgroun d informatio n documents , whic hconsiste d of nin e document s liste di n th e preamble

. Thes e backgroun d informatio ndocument s describe din ' detai l th e regulator y alternative s considere dan dth e impact s o f thos e alternatives

. Publi c comment s wer e solicite da t

th e tim e of

proposal , an d copie s o f th e backgroun dinformatio n document s wer e distributed

. T o provid e intereste dperson s th e opportunit y fo r

ora l presentatio n of data , views , o r

argument s concernin g th e propose dstandards , apubli c hearin g wa s hel do nSeptembe r 4,1986 , a t Researc hTriangl e Park , Nort hCarolina

. Th e hearin g wa s ope n t o th e publi c an d eac hattende e wa s give na n opportunit y t o commen t

o nth e propose dstandards

. Ninetee nintereste dpartie s testifie da t th e publi c hearin g concernin g issue s relativ e t o th e propose dstandards

. A transcrip t

o f th e publi c hearin g wa s prepare dan dplace di nDocke t A-83-27

. Th e publi c commen t

perio dwa s fro m Jun e 19,1986 , t o Octobe r 2,1986

. A tota l of 9 9 commen t

letter s wer e receive dan d place di n Docke t

A-83-27

. Th e comment s hav e bee n carefull y considere dand , wher e determine dt o b e appropriat e b y th e Administrator , change s hav e bee nmad e i n th e standards

. V

. Significan t

Comment s an dChange s t o th e Propose dStandard s Comment s o n th e propose dstandard s wer e receive dfro mindustry , trad e associations , Federa l agencies , Stat e agencies , a nenvironmenta l group , an d th e genera l public

. A numbe r of majo r issue s wer e raise di nth e followin g areas : Applicability , Basi s o f Standard , Standar dfo r

SO2 , Nationa l Impacts , Cost , Performance/Reliabilit y o f Contro l Technology , Environmenta l Impacts , Emissio nCredits , an dEmergin g Technologies

. Significan t comment s ar e discusse dbelow

. A summar y o f al l comment s an dresponse s whic har e no t discusse dbelo w ca n b e foun di n th e promulgatio nBackgroun dInformatio n Documen t

(BID) , whic hi s referre dt o i n th e ADDRESSE S sectio nof thi s preamble

. Th e summar y o f

comment s an d response s discusse dbelow , a s wel l u s in th e BID , serve s a s th e basi s for th e revision s tha t

hav e bee nmad e t o th e standard s betwee n proposa l an d promulgation

. A. Applicability A numbe r

of commenter s fel t

tha i stea mgeneratin g unit s operatin g a t lo w capacit y utilizatio nrate s for oi l o r coa l shoul db e exempte dfro mth e SO 2 standards

. The y indicate dtha t no t al l lo w capacit y facto r

stea mgeneratin g unit s woul delec t

t o us e natura l ga s an d sai dth e cos t

t o compl y wit hth e standard s woul db e unreasonabl e for lo w capacit y facto r

unit s combustin g coa l o r oil , considerin g th e smal l amoun t o f SO 2 contro l obtained

. Specifically , th e commenter s mentione dauxiliar y stea m generatin g unit s locate da t electri c utilit y powe r

plant s whic har e use dt o star t u p mai nstea mgeneratin g units , industria l stea mgeneratin g unit s tha t ar e operate dinfrequentl y t o provid e "backup " stea mo r

t o mee t seasona l demand s (i.e. , peakin g units) , mixed

fuel-fire dstea mgeneratin g unit s burnin g smal l amount s o f

coa l o r oil , an d nonfossil-fuel-fire dstea mgeneratin g unit s tha t

us e oi l o r

coa l a s abacku p fue l durin g period s o f

unavailabilit y of th e nonfossi l fuel

. Revie w an dreconsideratio n of th e initia l analysis , recen t

stea mgeneratin g uni t sale s data , an drecen t

operation s dat afro mne w stea mgeneratin g unit s lead s t o th e conclusio ntha t som e plant s wil l instal l coal

- o r

oil-fire dstea m generatin g unit s eve n wher e natura l ga s i s th e fue l o f

economi c choic e an d despit e promulgatio n of standard s requirin g apercen t

reductio ni n emission s fro mcoal

- an doil-fire dstea m generatin g units

. T o avoi dimposin g emissio ncontro l requirement s tha t coul dresul t

i nunreasonabl e impacts , th e 3 0 percen t

annua l capacit y facto r exemptio n i n th e propose dstandard s fo r mixed-fuel-fire dunit s wa s extende di n th e fina l standard s t o includ e coal

- an d oil-fire dunits

. Th e owne r

o r operato r of suc h facilitie s mus t

obtai n aFederall y enforceabl e permi t

limitin g th e annua l capacit y facto r

of th e uni t fo r coa l an d oi l t o 3 0 percen t

o r les s (se e "Impac t

of Ne w Fue l Price s o nth e Cost s an dCos t Effectivenes s of

SO 2 Emissio n Contro l of Industria l Coal

- an dOil-Fire dMode l Stea mGeneratin g Units, " 1987 ; "Alternativ e Estimate s o f Nationa l Impact s Base do nStea mGeneratin g Uni t Sale s Data, " 1987)

. Althoug h"lo w capacit y factor " stea mgeneratin g unit s ar e exemp t

fro mpercen t

reductio nP. 7

Registe r / Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r 16 , 198 7 /

Rule s an dRegulation s

1 v = requirements , the y ar e require dt o mee t certai n emissio n limits

. Emission s o f SO 2 fro mstea mgeneratin g unit s operatin g a t

coa l an doi l annua l capacit y factor s o f

3 0 percen t

o r les s woul db e limite dt o 52 0 ng/ J (1. 2 lb / millio n Btu ) hea t

inpu t i f coa l i s fire d an d13 0 ng/ J (0. 3 lb/millio n Btu ) if oi l i s fire d(se e "Assumption s an dProcedure s Use dt o Generat e Mode l Boile r Impacts, " 1987 ; "Availabilit y of Ver y Lo w Sulfu r

Fue l Oil, " 1987)

. Base do n thes e emissio n limits , th e exemptio n fro mpercen t

reductio n requirement s fo r stea mgeneratin g unit s operatin g a t les s tha n a3 0 percen t

coa l an doi l utilizatio n facto r wil l reduc e th e cos t

o f th e fina l standard s b y u p t o 1 5 percen t compare d t o n o exemption , bu t

result s i n les s tha n a2 percen t

increas e i n SO 2 emission s compare dt o n o exemption

. Continuou s emissio n monitorin g (o r fue l samplin g an danalysis) , continuou s complianc e provisions , an dquarterl y reportin g ar e require dfo r al l stea m generatin g units , includin g "lo w capacit y factor " units

. If adecisio n i s subsequentl y mad e t o operat e a"lo w capacit y factor " stea mgeneratin g uni t a t highe r loads , th e operatin g permi t woul d hav e t o b e revise dan dcomplianc e wit h th e percen t

reductio n requiremen t woul d b e necessary
. Othe r commenter s requeste dtha t a n exemptio n fro mth e percen t reductio n requiremen t

b e grante dfo r

stea m generatin g unit s bumin g anthracit e coa l o r anthracit e minin g wast e (culm) , a s wa s don e i n Subpar t

D afo r electri c utilit y stea mgeneratin g units

. Som e commenter s als o state dtha t othe r coa l minin g an dwashin g waste s shoul db e include di n thi s exemption

. Th e exemptio n fro mth e percen t reductio n requiremen t

grante dfo r anthracit e i n Subpar t

D awa s provide d t o encourag e reclamatio n o f abandone d anthracit e mine s durin g ne w anthracit e mining , resultin g i n environmenta l benefit s suc ha s improvemen t o f min e drainag e acid-wate r

conditions , eliminatio n o f

ol dminin g scar s o n th e topography , an deradicatio n o f dangerou s fire s i n dee p mine s an dcul m banks

. Th e exemptio n fro mth e percen t reductio n requiremen t

provide dfo r anthracit e unde r

Subpar t D awa s t o creat e aspecia l loca l utilit y marke t fo r thi s fuel , an dth e environmenta l benefit s associate dwit hutility-scal e reclamatio n wer e judge dt o outweig henvironmenta l impact s fro mburnin g anthracit e withou t apost-combustio n SO 2 contro l system

. Th e smalle r

coa l deman di nth e industrial-commercial-institutiona l stea mgeneratin g uni t

marke t wil l no t resul t i n utility-scal e min e reclamatio n eve n i f a n exemptio n fro mth e percen t reductio n requiremen t

wer e grante dfo r anthracit e (se e "Electri c Utilit y Stea m

Generatin g Unit s Backgroun d Informatio n fo r

Promulgate dEmissio n Standards, " 1979)

. Therefore , n o specia l •provision s fo r

anthracit e hav e bee n include di nth e final standards

. A differen t

situatio nexists , however , wit hth e firin g of

anthracit e minin g wast e an dothe r

coa l minin g an d washin g waste s (collectivel y referre dt o a s coa l refuse)

. Thes e waste s rais e concern s simila r

t o thos e addresse di n th e Subpar t

D aexemptio nfor anthracite

. Thes e wast e pile s ar e no t onl y unsightly , bu t

the y ar e responsibl e fo r acid-wate r

drainag e problem s an d ca n als o lea dt o fire s fro mspontaneou s combustion

. Therefore , i t i s importan t

t o encourag e th e us e o f

thes e waste s a s fuel s i n stea mgeneratin g unit s (specificall y fluidize dbe dcombustio n [FBC ] stea mgeneratin g units ) t o eliminat e apotentia l environmenta l hazard

. Consequently , ales s stringen t requiremen t

o f 8 0 percen t

reductio n combine dwit ha nemissio nlimi t o f 52 0 ng/ J (1. 2 lb/millio n Btu ) ha s bee n provide dfo r

FB C stea mgeneratin g unit s whic hfire coa l refuse

. Thi s actio n balance s th e nee dt o minimiz e ai r pollutio n fro mcombustio no f thes e waste s agains t

th e environmenta l benefit s resultin g fro meliminatin g coa l refus e piles

. On e commente r

sai dth e fina l standard s shoul dinclud e a nexemptio n fro mth e percen t

reductio nrequiremen t fo r stea mgeneratin g unit s locate di n noncontinenta l areas , a s wa s don e i n Subpar t Da

. Th e commente r

sai dthat , du e t o alac k

o f flexibilit y i n fue l choic e an dth e necessit y o f

importin g th e reagen t material s necessar y fo r flu e ga s desulfurizatio n (FGD ) syste moperation , th e cost s associate dwit hachievin g a percen t reductio ni nemission s coul db e exorbitant

. Facilitie s i nnoncontinenta l area s (Hawaii , th e Virgi n Islands , Guam , America nSamoa , Puert o Rico , an dth e Norther n Marian aIslands ) constitut e a subcategor y subjec t

t o uniqu e environmenta l an deconomi c constraint s i n complyin g wit hthi s NSPS

. Becaus e o f alac k o f natura l ga s supplies , "fue l switching " t o natura l ga s i s no t feasible

. I n addition , th e cos t

o f importin g FG D reagen t an dothe r

material s t o noncontinenta l area s woul dmak e di e cost s associate dwit hachievin g a percen t reductio ni n emission s muc h highe r tha no n th e continenta l mainland

. I n ligh t o f thes e considerations , a n exemptio nfro mth e percen t reductio n requiremen t

ha s bee n provide dfo r stea mgeneratin g unit s locate di n noncontinenta l areas , regardles s o f th e capacit y facto r

o f th e unit

. Suc h facilitie s are , however , require dt o mee t th e S0 2 emissio n limitation s discusse d abov e for

unit s operatin g a t

lo w capacit y factor s fo r

coa l o r oil

. Thes e emissio nlimits , a s wel l a s th e fac t tha t thes e facilitie s wil l b e reviewe dt o ensur e complianc e wit hlimitation s establishe dunde r

th e preventio n o f significan t

deterioratio n(PSD ) program , wil l minimiz e th e impac t o f thes e facilitie s o n ambien t

ai r quality

. B. Basis of

Standard A numbe r

o f commenter s questione d th e lega l basi s fo r

establishin g apercen t reductio n requiremen t

a s th e basi s o f th e standard

. The y sai dth e percen t reductio nprovisio ni nsectio n 11 1 o f th e Clea n Ai r

Ac t wa s intende dt o appl y t o utilit y stea mgeneratin g unit s only , an d i s no t appropriat e fo r

industrial

commercial-institutiona l stea m generatin g units

. Th e percentag e reductio nrequiremen t wa s enacte db y th e 197 7 Amendment s t o th e Act

. Sectio n 111(a)(1 ) define s th e ter m"standar dof

performance " a s follows : (A ) wit hrespec t to an y air

pollutan t emitte dfro

macategor

y o f fossil fue l fired stationary source s * * * astandard — (i) establishin g allowabl e emissio n limitation s fo

r suchcategor

y o f sources , an d (ii) requirin g the achievement o f a percentag e reductio n i

n the emission s fro

m suc hcategor

y o f source s fro

mth e emission s whichwoul dhav e resulte dfro mth e us e o

f fuel s whic har e no t

subjsc t to treatmen t

prio r t o combustion

. Althoug hth e discussio n o f th e percsnteg e reductio nrequiremen t i n th e legislativ e histci y sometime s refar s t o particula r

type s o f fossil-fuel-fire d sources , th e ter m"boilers " i s use d generall y an di s no t

limite dt o utilit y stea mgeneratin g units

. Th e legislativ e histor y specificall y mention s "industria l sources " an d"mines , processin g plants , an dfactories, " an dindicate s tha t th e Agenc y ha s th e authorit y t o includ e a percentag e reductio n requiremen t i n a n NSP S fo r fossil-fuel-fire dsources ; S

. Rep

. No

. 564 , 95thCong. , 1s t Sess

. 13 0 (1977) ; H.R

. Rep

. No

. 294 , 95t hCong. , 1s t Sess

. 18 8 (1977 ) a t

188-192 ; Accord, Sierra Club v
. Ruckelshaus,. Civi l Actio nNo

. 84-032 5 (D.D.C

. Sept

. 4 , 1985) , a t 5

. Som e commenter s asserte dtha t th e Agenc y conclude dafte r promulgatio n o f th e utilit y stea mgeneratin g uni t NSP S tha t ther e wa s n o obligatio nt o revis e th e existin g larg e industria l stea m generatin g uni t

NSP S (Subpar t

D ) t o includ e apercen t

reductio nrequirement

. Th e commenter s referre dt o abrie f file d b y th e Agenc y i nSierra Club v
. Ruckelshaus i n1984

.P. 8



## Kegast e / Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe

r 16 , 198 7 / Rule s and

Regulation s 6fmi

Th e issu e i n Sierra Club wa s th e scop e o f th e nondiscretionary dutie s unde r sectio n 111(b)(6)

. Th e Agenc y di d no t expres s an y vie w i n tha t cas e abou t th e applicatio n o

f percentag e reductio n requirement s unde r

sectio n 111(a)(1 ) t o industrial-commercial-institutiona l stea mgeneratin g units , bu t simpl y argue dtha t

sectio n 111(b)(6) di dno t impos e anondiscretionary duty t o promulgat e revise dNSP S fo r thes e steamgeneratin g units

. Similarly , th e utility steamgeneratin g uni t NSP S rulemakin g cite di n tha t

brie f di dno t analyz e th e applicability o f th e percentag e reductio n requiremen t t o non-utility stea mgeneratin g units ; 4 4 F R 33580 (June 11,1979) ; 4 3 F R42154 (Sep t 19,1978)

. Othe r commenter s sai dtha t

section

. Il l give s th e Agenc y th e flexibility to foreg o apercentage-reductio n wher e ther e i s n o demonstrate dnee dfo r it , o r wher e th e cost s ar e to o hig hcompare d t o th e benefits , o r

wher e apercen t reductio n woul dcreat e mor e problem s tha n it solves

. Severa l commenter s sai d tha t a n emissio n limi t

only , rathe r

tha na percen t reductio n requirement , shoul d b e establishe dan dsource s shoul db e allowe dto achiev e tha t

limit b y whateve r mean s i s appropriat e for

eac h source
. 

### Sectio n 11 1 doe s provid e th e flexibilit y t o foreg o th e percentag e reductio n requiremen t

i f th e impact s associate dwithi t

woul db e unreasonabl e an dexemptio nfro m percen t reductio n ha s bee nprovide din th e final standard s wher e impact s woul dhav e bee n unreasonable

. A thoroug hanalysi s o

f th e economic , environmental , an denerg y impact s base do n th e exemption s include di n th e fina l standard s was-conducted , an dn o unreasonabl e impact s wer e identified

. Therefore , th afina l standard s promulgate dunde r

sectio n 11 1 ar e considere dreasonable

. Th e percen t

reductio n requiriament dos s no t forc e asourc e t o instal l an y particular technological syste mo

f SO * emissio n reduction

. I t

i s simpl y & performanc e standar dtha t i s base do n th e performanc e capabilitie s o f th e "beat demonstrate dtechnology. " Source s are
free t o us e an y technological syste mtha t i s abl e t o achiev e emissio n reduction s equa l t o or

greate r tha ntha t achievabl e b y th e "bes t

demonstrate dtechnology. " C. Standard

for Sulfur Dioxide Som e commenter s expresse dconcern , tha t a9 0 percen t

reduction , requiremen t wa s to o stringen t

t o allo w flexibility i n selectio n o

f SO z control , technology

. The y fel t tha t alowe r percen t reduction , requiremen t

woul dallo w th e us e o

f les s
. expensiv e technologies , achiev e comparabl e SO i control , an dfoster increase dcoal us e in th e future

. Th e issu e o

f regulatory complianc e flexibilit y o f aS O percen t reductio n requiremen t

compare dt o lower

percen t reductio nrequirement s wa s carefully evaluated

. Whil e i t

i s tru e tha t

lowe r percen t reductio n requirement s woul d allo w th e us e o

f agreate r number o f SO3 contro l technologies , thi s alternativ e mus t b e evaluate dinrelatio n t o th e requirement s o

f sectio n 11 1 o

f th e Clean Ai r Act

. Sectio n 11 1 require s th e NSP S t o b e establishe da t

th e leve l achievabl e b y th e bes t

demonstrate dtechnolog y foi r whic hn o unreasonabl e cost , environmental , o r

energ y impact s hav e bee n identified

. Thi s "bes t demonstrate d technology " i s flue , ga s desulfurizatio n an dfluidize dbe dcombustion , bothof whic hhav e demonstrate d9 0 percen t reduction s in SO s emissions

. I naddition , th e impact s associate dwithachievin g a 90 percen t reductio n a s require db y th e final standar dar e considere d reasonable

. Thus , th e final standard s requir e a9 0 percen t

reductio nin SO s emission s fro

mcoa l an doil , excep t wher e unreasonabl e impact s woul d occur
. I n thes e cases , percen t reductio n i s no t required , bu t

a n emissio nlimit base do nus e of

lo w sulfu r complianc e fueLi s applicable

. 

### T o provid e some flexibilit y an dt o encourag e th e developmen t of alternativ e SO

2 contro l technologies , a percen t reductio n requiremen t

o f 5 0 percen t ha s bee nestablishe dfo

r emergin g technologies , Thi aprovision , wa s discusse di n th e preambl e t o th e propose dstandard s an di aretaine dirt th e fina l standard s an di s discusse din more detai l below

. Severa l commenter s sai dth e requirement s inth e Subpart D e electri c utility NSP S shoul db e th e mos t stringen t scenari o considere dfo r industrial-commercial-inatitutiona l stea mgeneratin g units

. The y sai dther e i s n o reason , industrial-commercial

institutiona l unit s shoul db s regulate d more stringentl y tha n utility units

. Direc t compariso n of

th e standar dfor industrial-commercial-institu tiona l stea mgeneratin g units , witi i th e utility standar dpromulgate di n 197 9 is

inappropriat e fo

r severa l reasons
. First , th e desig nand

. operatin g characteristic s of

utility stea m generatin g unit s an demissio ncontro l system s ar e different

fro mindustrial

commercial-institutione l units

. Utility stea mgeneratin g unit s ar e generall y muc hlarger

. A typica l electri c utility uni t woul dhav e ahea t

inpu t capacity o f abou t 1,450 M W(5,00 0 millio n Btu/ hour)

. Thi s compare s t o 4 4 M W(15 0 millio nBtu/hour ) hea t

inpu t capacity for atypica l industrial-commarcial

institutiona l unit , 0 30-folddifferenc e in size

. Becaus e o

f thei r larg e size , utility steamgeneratin g unit s an dFG D Gyutt'-ns ar e fiel derecte dan dar e usuall y cun'o m designe dfo

r aspecifi c sita

. Long-torn : fue l purchas e contract s fo

r u p to 22 year s ar e common
. A s c result , uii'.V.y ateamgeneratin g units 1 

### an dFG D nynta:: o ca n b e designe dto optimis e site

- ur.ii fuel-specifi c factors

. Also , t c handL : f't c larg e quantitie s o

f flue ga agenerated , utility FG D system s typicall y conoic i « r multipl e paralle l FG

D module s (tynica[Iy 4 o r 5 modules) , witheocl t

capabl e o

f handlin g par t

o f tho tota l flue gas
. T

u ensur e operatin g reliability o f th o tota l FG D system , a nadditiona l FG D modd c i s frequentl y installe da s c spar e o r backu p modul e to b e availabl e durin g period s o f FG D malfunctio no r

fo r rotatio ndurin g preventiv e maintenance ) an dservicin g o

f othe r FG D moduleo

. I n contrast , industrial-commercial

institutiona l stea mgeneratin g unit s an d FG D system s ar e likel y to b e shop

assemble dbase do nstandar ddesign s an dhav e th e ability t o handl e awide r rang e o f fuel s than typical utility steam generatin g units

. Also , long-ter mfue l suppl y contract s specifyin g delivery of a fue l o f well-define dquality ar e les s commo n thaninutilit

y applications

. Becaus e o f thei r smalle r size , switchin g t o natura l ga s or

lo w sulfu r oil durin g FG D syste mmalfunction s i s aviabl e alternativ e t o installin g aspar e FG D module

. Second , a t

th e time Subpart

D awag promulgated , lime/limeston e we t scrubbin g wa s th e predominan t FG D technolog y use db y utilities

. Newe r technologies , suc ha s lime spra y dryin g FGD , wer e stil l inth e earl y stage s o f commercial applicatio n an dconcern o existe dabou t

th e ability o

f theo o newe r technologie s t o achiev e high

. SOa reduction s o nareliabl e basis

. Today , c numbe r o f demonstrate dFG

D technologie s ar e availabl e fo r us e b y Indu s trialrcommercial-institutiona l stea mgeneratin g unit s includin g sodiu m scrubbing , lime spra y drying , an dduo ! alkal i FG D systems , a s wel l a s fluidisnd ! be dcombustion

. Base do n oxperieac o gaine dwiththes e technologie s durin g th e pas t decade , a s wel l e

& variou s technica l advantage s o

f thes e technologie s ove r

we t lime/limeston e FGD , industria l FG

D system s ar a expecte dt o b e more efficien t ei: d reliabl e tha nutility FG

D system s wcr a a t th e tim e Subpar t

D awe aadopted

. Becaus e o f th e man y difference e betwee n industrial-commercial

institutiona l an dutility stea mgencrctfRQ units , i t i s inappropriat e t o conclud atfea l th e standard s bein g adopte dtodc y rnuaf l mimi c Subpar t

Da

.P. 9

4783 2 Federa l Registe r/ Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r 16 , 198 7 /

Rule s an dRegulation s

Som e commenter s sai dth e propose d S0 2 emissio n limi t

o f 8 6 ng/ J (0. 2 lb / millio n Btu ) fo r

a n oil-fire dstea m generatin g uni t

withou t a n FG D syste m wa s unrealistic

. The y sai dtha t oi l wit h thi s sulfu r

conten t i s no t commerciall y available , an dsuggeste dsulfu r content s rangin g fro m13 0 ng/ J (0. 3 lb/millio n Btu ) t o 26 0 ng/ J (0. 6 lb/millio n Btu ) a s lo w sulfu r oi l complianc e alternatives

. Th e basi s fo r

th e S0 2 emissio nlimi t o f 8 6 ng/ J (0. 2 lb/millio n Btu ) i nth e proposa l wa s t o provid e a n alternativ e mean s o f demonstratin g complianc e wit hth e percen t

reductio n requirement

. Th e sulfu r

conten t o f thi s oi l wa s s o lo w tha t i t appeare dreasonabl e t o assum e tha t refinin g o f

th e origina l crud e oi l ha d resulte di n a9 0 percen t reductio ni n potentia l SO 2 emissions

. Thi s provision , therefore , wa s no t

base do n a n assessmen t

of th e availabilit y o f

suc h oils , bu t merel y a n assessmen t

of ho w lo w th e sulfu r

conten t o f a n oi l woul d nee dt o b e i n orde r

t o reasonabl y ensur e tha t a9 0 percen t

reductio n i nit s sulfu r conten t ha dbee n achieved

. A s aresul t

o f thes e comments , th e basi s for thi s provisio n wa s reviewed

. A mor e detaile dassessmen t tha n tha t don e a t th e tim e o f

proposa l wa s undertake n t o determin e th e mean s b y whic hmos t

ver y lo w sulfu r

oil s ar e produced

. Thi s assessmen t conclude d tha t mos t ver y lo w sulfu r

oils , eve n thos e a s lo w a s 8 6 ng/ J (0. 2 l b S0 2 / millio n Btu) , ar e produce db y distillatio n o f ver y lo w sulfu r

conten t crud e oils , an dtha t littl e o r n o desulfurizatio n ma y tak e place

. Th e analysi s als o indicate d tha t mos t desulfurize doil s wer e no t sol d a s ver y lo w sulfu r

conten t fue l oils , bu t wer e upgrade dt o gasolin e o r othe r highe r cos t products

. A s aresult , ther e i s n o particula r

sulfu r conten t tha t ca n reasonabl y b e assume dt o b e th e resul t o f 9 0 percen t

reductio n b y fue l pretreatmen t

(i.e. , hydrodesulfurization)

. Consequently , th e fina l standard s contai n n o provision s simila r t o thos e propose dtha t

provid e a n alternativ e mean s of demonstratin g complianc e wit hth e 9 0 percen t

reductio n requirement

. However , th e final standard s d o exemp t oil-fire dstea mgeneratin g unit s fro mth e percen t

reductio n requirement s wher e th e impact s associate dwit hth e percen t reductio n requirement s ar e considere dunreasonable

. Thes e stea m generatin g units , however , ar e subjec t to ' a n SO 2 emissio n limit , whic hi n th e cas e o f oil-fire dunit s i s 13 0 ng/ J (0. 3 l b S0 2 / millio n Btu)

. Unlik e th e 8 6 ng/ J (0. 2 lb/millio n Btu ) emissio n limi t

provide da t

proposal , th e 13 0 ng/ J (0. 3 lb/millio n Btu ) emissio n limi t fo r stea mgeneratin g unit s exemp t fro mth e percen t

reductio n requiremen t i s base do n a n assessmen t o f th e emissions , costs , an davailabilit y of suc hoils

. A s cite db y th e commenters

. thi s assessmen t

foun dtha t

th e lowes t sulfu r conten t specificatio n place do n commerciall y availabl e oil s i s generall y 13 0 ng/ J (0. 3 lb/millio nBtu)

. Oil s wit h suc hlo w sulfu r

contents , however , ar e widel y available

. I n som e areas , thes e oil s ma y b e residua l oil s an di n othe r area s the y ma y b e distillat e oils

. I n eithe r case , suc hoil s ar e availabl e an d th e cost s associate dwit hthei r us e ar e considere dreasonabl e compare dt o highe r sulfu r conten t oils

. Consequently , wher e lo w capacit y facto r oil-fire d stea mgeneratin g unit s ar e exemp t fro m th e percen t

reductio n requirement s i n th e fina l standards , the y ar e subjec t t o a n S0 2 emissio n limi t

of 13 0 ng/ J (0. 3 lb / millio n Btu)

. I n reviewin g th e reasonablenes s o f applyin g percen t

reductio nrequirement s t o highe r capacit y oil-fire dstea m generatin g units , reasonabl e impact s wer e note dfor

mos t oil-fire dunits

. Unreasonabl e impact s wer e noted , however , fo r

applyin g percen t

reductio n requirement s t o ver y lo w sulfu r oils

. Thus , th e fina l standard s exemp t fro m percen t reductio nrequirement s stea m generatin g unit s firin g ver y lo w sulfu r oil s wit hS0 2 emissio n rate s les s tha n 13 0 ng/ J (0. 3 lb/millio nBtu ) becaus e o f unreasonabl e impacts

. Th e fina l standard s exemp t fro m percen t reductio nrequirement s duc t burner s use da s par t

of combined-cycl e systems

. Thi s exemptio n i s include d becaus e of

cost-effectivenes s consideration s an di s analogou s t o th e exemptio nfro mpercen t reductio nfo r mixed-fuel-fire dstea mgeneratin g unit s tha t hav e a nannua l coa l an doi l capacit y facto r

o f les s tha n 3 0 percent

. Th e effec t

of exhaus t gase s supplie dt o th e duc t burne r fro mupstrea mprocesse s (e.g. , ga s turbine , interna l combustio n engines , kilns , etc. ) i s simila r t o th e firin g of woo do r municipa l wast e wit h coa l o r oi l i namixed-fuel-fire dstea m generatin g unit

. Th e cost-effectivenes s consideration s associate dwit hth e exemptio no f

duc t burner s fro mpercen t reductio n requirement s ar e th e sam e a s thos e for bot hmixed-fuel-fire dan d fossil-fuel-fire dstea mgeneratin g unit s wit hlo w annua l coa l an doi l capacit y factors

. D. National

Impacts Severa l commenter s fel t tha t th e propose dstandard s conflic t wit ha nationa l energ y polic y o f encouragin g th e us e of

domesti c coa l an dencourag e furthe r U.S

. dependenc e o n unreliabl e foreig n energ y supplies

. On e commente r expresse dconcer nabou t an y regulatio n tha t discourage dcoa l use , unles s som e assuranc e coul db e provide dtha t th e exodu s fro mcoa l wil l no t b e t o oil

. Anothe r sai dtha t

recen t nationa l energ y polic y recommendation s shoul db e considere di ndevelopin g thes e standards

. Revise dfossi l fue l pric e scenario s indicat e that , wit hrecen t oi l an dga s prices , th e cost s o f

generatin g stea m fro moi l an dnatura l ga s ar e competitiv e wit hthos e o f

generatin g stea mfro m coal

. I n fact , base do neconomi c factor s alone , i t i s expecte dtha t

natura l ga s and , t o som e extent , oi l wil l clai mth e larges t shar e of th e industrial

commercial-institutiona l stea m generatin g uni t

marke t eve ni n th e absenc e of

th e standards

. Thus , th e curren t leve l o f oi l an dnatura l ga s price s wil l hav e muc hmor e impac t o n coa l us e i n industrial-commercial

institutiona l stea mgeneratin g unit s tha n wil l th e fina l standards

. I n addition , th e tota l amoun t o f fossi l fue l deman db y industrial-commercial

institutiona l stea mgeneratin g unit s i s a ver y smal l percentag e o f tota l U.S

. demand , an dan y change s i nth e fue l mi x i nthi s secto r

wil l no t caus e significan t

change s i n U.S

. energ y market s o r

threate nU.S

. energ y security

. Fo r example , th e nationa l impact s analysi s assume s tha t

sale s of ne w industrial-commercial-institutiona l stea mgeneratin g unit s ove r th e nex t 5 year s wil l resul t

i n tota l annua l fossi l fue l consumptio n o f

52 5 P J (50 0 trillio n Btu)

. Thi s represent s les s tha n2 percen t o f th e tota l curren t

U.S

. oi l marke t (abou t 32,50 0 P J o r 31,00 0 trillio n Bt

u pe r year)

. A numbe r

o f commenter s sai dth e fue l pric e scenario s use dt o evaluat e th e impact s of

th e propose dstandard s wer e out-of-date

. On e commente r sai dtha t

a greate r rang e of energ y price s an da spectru mof

possibl e energ y scenario s shoul db e considere di nevaluatin g th e possibl e energ y impact s of th e standards

. I naddition , thi s commente r suggeste dtha t

a nenerg y scenari o i n whic hoi l an dga s price s increas e substantially , leadin g t o massiv e fue l switchin g fro moi l an dga s t o coal , b e considered

. A s aresul t

of change s i n fossi l fue l price s sinc e earl y 1986 , th e projecte d energ y price s use dt o asses s th e impact s associate dwit hth e propose dstandard s wer e reviewed

. Thi s revie w le dt o developmen t

of revise dprojection s of futur e energ y prices

. Thes e revise d projection s reflec t

severa l different , bu t possible , energ y scenarios.and , a s a result , lea dt o awid e rang e i n projecte d prices

. Tw o scenario s concernin g futur e worl doi l prices , for

example , wer e considered

. Bot hreflec t curren t "low "P.1 0

Registe r / Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r 16 , 198 7 /

Rule s an dRegulation s A?A!3

worl doi l prices , bu t

on e scenari o assume s agradua l increas e i nworl doi l price s whil e th e othe r

assume s arapi d retur n t o "high " oi l prices

. Simila r t o th e result s o f

th e analysi s unde r th e projectio n of

futur e energ y price s considere dmos t likel y a t proposa l (Le. , th e hig hoi l penetratio n scenario) , thes e revise dprojection s o f futur e energ y price s le dth e Industria l Fue l Choic e Analysi s Mode l (IFCAM ) t o projec t tha t ne w stea mgeneratin g unit s wil l generall y fir e natura l ga s o r oil

. Ver y little , i

f any, , coa t

i s projecte dt o b e fire di n ne w units

. A n energ y scenari o leading , t o massive , fue l switchin g from oi l an dnatura l ga s t acoal, , therefore , i s considere dimprobable

. Usin g thes e revise dprojection s o f futur e energ y prices , th e potentia l nationa l impacts , associate dwit hth e fina l standard s wer e examine d ("Revise dImpact s o f

Alternativ e Sulfu r Dioxid e Ne w Sourc e Performanc e Standard s fo r

Industria l Fossi l Fuel

Fire dBoilers, " Februar y 1987)

. Natura l ga s consumptio n i n ne w stea m generatin g unit s i s projecte db y IFCA M t o increas e b y abou t

120-33 0 PJ/y r

(110

- 31 0 trillio n Btu/yr ) i n19S aThi s represent s abou t

1. 5 t o 4. 5 percen t

o f natura l ga aconsumptio n b y al l industria l sources
- Thi s projecte d increas e i n natura l ga s consumption , however , i aprojecte dt o b e accompanie db y asimila r decreas e i n nationa l oi l consumption

- Coa l consumptio n i s no t

projecte dt o b e affecte dsinc e littl e coa l consumptio nb y ne w stea mgeneratin g unit s i s projecte d b y IFCA M eve n i n di e absenc e o f a a NSPS

. The

. fina l standard s ar e als o projecte d t o reduc e nationa l SO * emission s b y 120,00 0 t o 320,00 0 Mg/y r (130,00 0 t o 360,00 0 tons/yr ) i n 1990

. Th e correspondin g nationa l annualize dcost s ar e projecte dt o rang e fro m$ 5 t o 5 0 million

. A numbe r

o f commenter s questione d whethe r fue l switchin g t o natura l ga s woul db e a s widesprea da s IFCA M projects

. I n respons e t o thes e comments , th e nationa l impact s associate dwit hth e fina l standard s wer e estimate dbase do n histori c stea mgeneratin g uni t sale s dat a an dth e assumptio n tha t fue l switchin g fro moi l o r

coa l t o natura l ga s woul dno t occu r ("Estimation

- o f

Nationa l Impact s Base do n Stea mGeneratin g Uni t Sale s Data, " 1S87)

. Usin g thi s approach , tota l nationa l annua l cost s associate dwit h th e final standar dar e projecte dt o b e - $12 0 million

. Nationwid e emission s o f S0 2 ar e projecte dt o decreas e b y 130,00 0 Mg/y r (140,03 0 tons/yr) , resultin g i n a n averag e cos t

effectivenes s of

$980/M g ($890/ton)

. Th e nationa l incrementa l cos t effectivenes s o f

th e fina l standard s relativ e t o standard s base do n

combustio n o f

lo w sulfu r

fue l i s projecte dt o b e abou t

$1,600/M g ($1,400 / ton ) of S0 2 . Dependin g o n th e exten t t o whic h source s elec t

t o fue l switc ht o natura l gas , th e incrementa l cos t effectivenes s o f th e emissio nreductio n requiremen t wil l rang e fromzer o (i n th e cas e o f th e complet e substitutio n projecte db y IFCAM ) t o $1,600/M g ($1,400/ton ) (i n th e cas e o f

n o chang e i n fue l marke t shares)

. EP A believe s tha t som e fue l switchin g t o natura l ga s wil l occur— a propensit y thi s rul e ma y foster—an d tha t th e rea l incrementa l cos t effectivenes s o f

th e fina l standard s i s likel y t o b e lowe r

tha n th e n o fue l switchin g cas e describe dabove

. EP A view s al l o f

thes e estimate dimpacts — zer o fro mIFCAM , $1,600/M g ($1,400 / ton ) base do nhistorica l data , an dsom e intermediat e valu e base do n som e leve l o f fue l switching—a s reasonable

. A numbe r

o f commenter s questione d th e potentia l impac t

o f standard s o n th e installatio n o f

ne w stea mgeneratin g unit s an dth e replacemen t o f ol dstea m generatin g units

. Som e fel t tha t th e IFCA M analysi s overestimate dth e tota l stea mgeneratin g uni t

populatio n becaus e replacemen t

stea mgeneratin g unit s wer e treate da a"ne w capacity. " Accordin g t o th e commenters , a s muc h a s 6 0 percen t

o f ne w unit s ar e installe d a s replacement s fo r

existin g units

. Th e commenter s indicate dtha t stringen t standard s coul ddiscourag e thes e replacemen t

projects , resultin g i n a furthe r depressio no f

th e alread y sluggis hindustrial-commerciar

institutiona l stea mgeneratin g uni t marke t an dane t

increas e i nSQ s emission s compare dt o standard s base d o n combustio n o f

lo w sulfu r

fuel

. Th e numbe r

o f ne w stea mgeneratin g uni t installation s use db y IFCA M t o estimat e nationa l impact s i s base do n projection s o f

growt hi nenerg y consumptio ndevelope db y th e Departmen t

o f Energy

. Th e projecte d numbe r o f ne w uni t

installation s usin g thi s approac hi s abou t

doubl e th e estimate s mad e b y othe r organizations , suc ha s th e America n Boile r Manufacturer s Associatio n (ABMA)

. A s show nb y sale s statistics , annua l stea m generatin g uni t

sale s hav e decrease d sinc e 197 0 du e t o lowe r growt hi n steam r consumin g industrie s an denerg y conservatio nefforts , bu t appea r t o hav e stabilize dsinc e 198 aThus , i t i s possibl e tha t emissio n reduction s a s wel l a s cost s attribute dt o th e propose dstandard s ma y b e overestimate dt o som e extent

. However ; thi s doe s no t significantl y alte r th e overal l balanc e betwee nth e cost s an dbenefit s o f

th e standard

. Eve n i f fewe r ne w stea mgeneratin g unit s ar e buil t tha nprojected , th e SO areduction s achieve db y th e standar dar e stil l considere dsignificant , bot hfro m individua l unit s an dfro mth e sourc e categor y a s awhole

. Also , whil e strai n generatin g uni t

sale s ar e lowe r

tha n ; n 1970 , ne w unit s ar e bein g buil t an dwil l continu e t o b e buil t

i nth e future

. A a mor e an dmor e unit s ar e constructed , furthe r SO areduction s wil l b e achieve d b y th e standard s bein g adopte dtoduy

. Th e cost , environmental , an denerg y impact s o f

th e final standerd s therefor e ar e considere dreasonable , eve n assumin g lowe r

populatio n growt h projections

. I n respons e t o comment s concernin g th e proportio no f

ne w stea mgeneratin g unit s tha t

ar e replacement s fo r

existin g stea mgeneratin g units , asurve y wa n conducte do f

stea mgeneratin g unit s ordere dbetwee n Januar y 198 1 an d Septembe r

198 4 ("Surve y o f

Ne w Industria l Boile r

Projects—1981-1984, " EPA-450/3-87-C08 , Apri l 1987)

. Response s wer e receive dfor 16 ane w projects , encompassin g atota l o f 22 9 ne w stea mgeneratin g units

. O f these , 15 1 stea mgeneratin g unit s wer e i n th e regulate dsiz e categor y an dforme dth e basi s fo r th e analysi s diecuose dbelow

. Compariso nwit hstea mgeneratin g uni t sale s dat acollecte db y ABM A indicate d tha t thes e unit s represen t

almos t ul l o f th e industria l stea mgeneratin g unit n i n thi s siz e categor y sol dbetwee n193 1 an d 1984

. Th e surve y indicate dtha t ubou t 5 0 percen t of ne w stea mgeneratin g units , rathe r tha n8 0 percen t

a s suggeste db y th e commenters , wer e fo r replacemen t o f existin g stea mgeneratin g units

. Assumin g tha t

recen t decline s i n th u pric e of oi l an dnatura l ga s resul t inn curtailmen t

o f ne w stea mgeneratin g unit s installe dfo r

th e purpos e o f switchin g fro moi l o r

ga s t o coal , th e percentag e o f

ne w stea mgeneratin g unit s sol da s replacement s fo r existin g unit s wil l b e eve nlowe r tha n indicate d b y th e survey
. Man y commenter s note dtha t withou t a noptio n t o us e lo w sulfu r fuel , operatin g cost s fo r

ne w stea m generatin g unit s wil l increas e sufficientl y t o discourag e thei r installation , thu s inhibitin g th e replacemen t

o f existin g unit s firing hig h sulfu r fuel s an ddelayin g th e reduction s i nSO aemission s associate dwit hth: s replacemen t

process
. Ne w stea mgeneratin g uni t purchase s ca nb e divide dint o tw o categories :
. discretionary , meanin g th e purchas e coul db e deferre dif

economics , environmenta l requirements , o r othe r factor s changed ; an dnondiscretionary , meanin g ane w uni t

mus t b e installed

. Th e abov e surve y indicate dtha tp.1 1

4783 4 Federa l Registe r/ Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r 16 , 198 7 /

Rule s an dRegulation s
discretionar y installation s accounte dfo r abou t hal f of th e ne w stea mgeneratin g uni t project s surveyed

. However , th e surve y foun dtha t

man y of thes e discretionar y installation s wer e relativel y insensitiv e t o cos t changes

. Nearl y three-fourth s of al l project s woul dhav e proceede da s designe di f cost s increase db y u p t o 2 0 percent

. I n almos t al l cases , th e percen t

reductio n requiremen t

woul dincreas e cost s b y les s tha n thi s amount

. Therefore , whil e som e project s coul db e affecte db y th e NSPS , mos t

of th e ne w stea mgeneratin g uni t installation s woul dremai n viable , an dar e no t

expecte dt o b e discourage d o r delaye db y th e fina l NSPS

. I n respons e t o comment s suggestin g a n NSP S migh t

actuall y resul t

i n delayin g emissio n reduction s du e t o a slowdow n i n ne w stea mgeneratin g uni t installations , dat afro mth e boile r replacemen t

surve y mentione dabov e wer e use dt o examin e th e chang e i n overal l S0 2 emission s fromplant s installin g ne w industria l stea m generatin g units

. Analysi s o f S0 2 emission s befor e an dafte r installatio n of th e ne w stea mgeneratin g unit s foun d that , althoug hth e ne w coal

- an doil-fire d stea mgeneratin g unit s generall y emitte d les s S0 2 pe r

millio n Bt

u of fue l fire d tha n th e existin g (replaced ) stea m generatin g units , th e tota l annua l emission s (i.e. , tons/year ) emitte db y plant s installin g ne w stea mgeneratin g unit s increase db y roughl y 7 0 percent

. Thi s increas e result s fro m(1 ) installatio n o f

ne w stea mgeneratin g capacit y tha t

i s no t replacin g existin g units , (2 ) replacemen t

of existin g unit s wit hne w unit s tha t

ar e significantl y larger , (3 ) fue l switche s fro mnatura l ga s an doi l t o coa l fo r

energ y independence , an d(4 ) continue doperatio n o f th e existin g stea mgeneratin g unit s whic h wer e "replaced " b y ne w units

. A larg e portio n o f

th e emission s increas e wa s du e t o stea mgeneratin g unit s installe deithe r

t o switc hbas e fue l (usuall y fro mga s o r

oi l t o coal ) o r

t o cogenerat e electricity

. Becaus e thes e type s of project s ar e sensitiv e t o cos t consideration s an dt o provid e conservativ e estimates , calculation s wer e als o mad e excludin g thes e type s of projects

. Eve n withou t

thes e significan t source s o f

SO 2 emissions , tota l emission s a t

plant s installin g ne w stea m generatin g unit s increase db y roughl y 2 0 percen t afte r installatio n of

ne w projects

. Thes e result s indicat e tha t installatio n o f

ne w stea mgeneratin g unit s di dno t

resul t i n an y "natural " decreas e i n overal l SO 2 emissions

. Base do n furthe r

analysi s o f

th e surve y data , however , applyin g a9 0 percen t reductio n standar dt o th e ne w stea m generatin g unit s (assumin g th e standar d di dno t affec t th e fue l choic e an ddesig n o f th e projects ) woul dhav e resulte di n a n estimate dne t

reductio n i n S0 2 emission s fro mthes e plant s o f 2 5 t o 3 0 percent

. Othe r commenter s sai dthat , b y includin g replacemen t

unit s i nth e analyse s o f

ne w stea mgeneratin g units , th e proposa l overestimate dth e actua l emissio nreduction s attributabl e t o th e standards

. Emission s fro mal l ne w stea m generatin g unit s (includin g thos e tha t replace dexistin g stea mgeneratin g units ) wer e correctl y include da s "new " capacit y emission s i nth e impact s analyses

. Th e SO aemissio nreductio n attribute dt o th e NSP S i s th e reductio n i n emission s fro mne w stea mgeneratin g unit s unde r

th e fina l standard s compare dt o baselin e emission s tha t woul doccu r

fro mth e sam e unit s i nth e absenc e o f

th e NSPS

. Becaus e SO 2 emission s fro mne w industrial

commercial-institutiona l stea m generatin g unit s ca nb e reduce da t reasonabl e cost , regardles s of whethe r the y ar e replacemen t

o r ne w capacity , the y ar e covere db y th e fina l standards

. E. Cost of the Standard Severa l commenter s fel t tha t th e EP A cos t analyse s associate dwit hth e propose dstandard s wer e deficien t o r inaccurate

. Commenter s specificall y mentione dtha t

actua l data , rathe r

tha n estimates , shoul dhav e bee n use dfo r capita l cos t

calculations , an dtha t

EP A shoul dno t

us e utilit y FG D cos t

dat at o estimat e industrial-commercial

institutiona l uni t

FG D cost

. Othe r commenter s state dtha t th e cos t estimate s di dno t

adequatel y conside r cost s associate dwit hsludg e disposal , th e nee dfo r

backu p S0 2 contro l durin g contro l syste mmalfunction , coa l transportation , o r

manufacturers ' profi t margins

. Th e cos t estimate s use dt o asses s th e impact s of

variou s alternative s wer e generate dfro mcos t

algorithm s develope dfro mdat ao nindustria l stea m generatin g unit s supplie db y vendor s an dn o utilit y dat awer e used

. Th e validit y of

th e cos t algorithm s wa s examine db y compariso nwit hcost s associate dwit hactua l installations

. Th e agreemen t

betwee nthes e algorithm s an dactua l installation s wa s foun dt o b e ver y goo dan dwa s wel l withi n th e genera l criteri aof

±3 0 percen t

fo r a n individua l uni t

whic hi s normall y associate dwit h"budge t cost " estimates

. Validit y of

th e cost s use di n th e cos t analyse s wa s als o confirme db y statement s fro msevera l commenters , includin g som e industr y trad e associations

. Thi s doe s no t mea ntha t th e cos t estimate s generate db y th e cos t algorithm s wil l agre e i never y cas e wit h actua l installe dcosts

. Uniqu e desig n requirement s relate dt o site-specifi c factor s ma y wel l caus e actua l cost s t o b e highe r

o r lowe r tha n thos e generate d b y th e cos t

algorithm s use di nth e cos t analyses

. Th e cost s generate db y th e cos t algorithms , however , ar e considere drepresentativ e of th e cost s associate dwit hinstallatio n an d operatio n o f

stea mgeneratin g unit s an d emissio n contro l system s an dar e appropriat e fo r

estimatin g tota l costs

. Th e cos t analyse s examine dth e cost s associate dwit hvariou s emissio n contro l requirement s fo r stea m generatin g unit s a s smal l a s 2 9 M W(10 0 millio nBtu/hour ) hea t

inpu t capacit y an da s larg e a s 11 7 M W(40 0 millio n Btu/hour ) hea t

inpu t capacity

. Cost s wer e als o assesse dfo r

unit s of 44 , 58 , an d7 3 M W(150 , 20 0 an d25 0 millio n Btu/hour)

. Th e effect s o f "economie s o f scale, " therefore , wer e considere din thes e cos t

analyses

. Sludg e disposa l cost s wer e include d i nth e cos t

analyses

. Th e cost s reflec t th e typica l cost s associate dwit hoff-sit e lan ddisposa l o

f sludge s fro memissio n contro l systems

. Thes e cost s wer e base d o ninformatio n provide db y stea m generatin g uni t

vendor s an doperators , an dar e considere drepresentativ e of sludg e disposa l cost s i n general

. The y may , however , b e lowe r o r highe r tha n actua l cost s experience da t specifi c location s wher e uniqu e o r site-specifi c requirement s ma y apply

. Th e cos t analyse s assumed , base do n operatin g dat afrom anumbe r of FG D system s o nindustria l stea mgeneratin g units , tha t

FG D system s ar e capabl e of 9 5 percen t

reliabilit y wit hprope r design , operation , an dmaintenance

. Th e cos t analyses , therefore , considere dcontro l syste mreliabilit y an dexamine dvariou s approache s t o reducin g emission s durin g period s of

contro l syste mmalfunction s o r servicing

. Thes e approache s include d bot hth e us e o f

spar e absorbe r

module s an dth e firin g of

backu p fuel s suc ha s natura l gas
. Th e assessmen t conclude d tha t th e cost s associate dwit hth e us e o f spar e absorbe r

module s o r

th e firin g of ver y lo w sulfu r

fuel s wer e of

th e sam e orde r o f magnitude

. Thus , eithe r , approac hcoul db e use di n th e cos t analyse s t o represen t

th e additiona l cost s o f reducin g emission s durin g period s o f

emissio ncontro l syste m malfunction

. Fo r

convenienc e an deas e o f calculation , th e cos t

analyse s assume dth e firin g of

natura l gas
. Th e capita l an dannualize dcost s o f spar e equipmen t

t o fire natura l gas , suc ha s valves , controls , etc. , wer e als o adde dt o th e contro l costs

. Consequently , th e cos tP.1 2

Federa l Registe r/

Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r 16 , 198 7 /

Rule s an dRegulation s 4783 5
analyse s considere dth e increase dcost s necessar y t o addres s reliabilit y problems

. Th e coa l price s use di n th e cos t analyse s wer e als o develope d specificall y fo r

industrial-commercial

institutiona l stea mgeneratin g units

. Th e coa l transportatio n cost s assume dsingl e coa l ca r rate s t o reflec t

th e lac k o f volum e discount s obtainabl e b y utilitie s whic hus e muc hgreate r quantitie s of fuel

. Thus , th e cost s associate dwit hth e fina l standard s wer e develope d specificall y for

industrial-commercial

institutiona l stea mgeneratin g units , an d thes e cost s wer e carefull y considere din developin g th e fina l standards

. On e commente r

sai dth e hig h emission s baseline s use di n th e cos t analysi s resulte di n underestimatin g th e cos t effectivenes s o f

th e standard

. Th e baselin e use di n th e nationa l impact s analysi s reflect s existin g Stat e Implementatio n Pla n (SIP ) emissio n limit s withi n eac hAi r

Qualit y Contro l Regio n (AQCR)

. Th e baselin e use di n th e "mode l boiler " cos t analysi s wa s chose n t o represen t

atypica l SI P emissio n limit

. Othe r

baseline s coul d hav e bee n selected

. However , i f mor e stringen t baseline s wer e used , th e annualize dcost s fo r

S0 2 contro l a t

th e revise dbaselin e woul dals o hav e t o b e increase dt o accoun t

for th e additiona l complianc e cost s associate dwit hmor e stringen t baselin e regulations

. Us e of differen t baselines , however , woul dno t alte r th e analysi s of

incrementa l difference s i n emission s an dcost s amon g increasingl y stringen t alternatives

. Varyin g assumption s regardin g th e baselin e hav e n o effec t o n thes e incrementa l comparisons

. A s a result , change s o r

refinement s i n baselin e emissio n level s woul dhav e littl e effec t

o n judgin g th e reasonablenes s of

th e fina l standard

. Man y commenter s fel t

tha t th e cos t estimate s associate dwit hFG D system s wer e to o low

. Som e sai dth e cost s o f FG D system s ar e muc hgreate r fo r industrial-commercial-institutiona l stea mgeneratin g unit s tha n fo r utilit y stea mgeneratin g unit s du e t o lac k o f economie s of

scale , an dthi s shoul db e considere di n calculatin g th e impact s of th e standards

. Stil l othe r commenter s sai dtha t becaus e sodiu monce-throug h FG D wa s selecte da s th e basi s fo r th e cos t analysis , th e cost s wer e underestimated

. Th e economic s of

FG D system s ar e differen t fo r utilit y an dindustria l stea m generatin g units

. Becaus e of large r uni t siz e an dth e highe r

capacit y factor s of man y utilit y units , operatin g cost s generall y pla y amor e dominan t rol e i n th e economic s o f

FG D system s for

utilit y unit s tha n the y d o fo r industria l units

. Thus , th e typica l FG D syste mfo r a utilit y stea mgeneratin g uni t i s frequently on e whic hminimize s operatin g costs , ofte n a t th e expens e o f highe r capita l costs

. I n contrast , th e mos t attractiv e FG D syste mfo r a n industria l stea mgeneratin g uni t i s frequentl y on e whic hminimize s capita l costs , ofte na t

th e expens e of

highe r operatin g costs

. Fo r

example , sodiu m FG D system s ar e characterize db y relativel y lo w capita l costs , bu t highe r operatin g cost s du e t o th e us e of sod a as ha s areagent

. Lim e spra y dryin g systems , o n th e othe r

hand , hav e relativel y hig hcapita l costs , bu t relativel y lo w operatin g cost s du e t o th e us e o f lim e a s areagent

. A s on e migh t expect , therefore , whe n th e economic s of thes e tw o FG D system s ar e compared , lim e spra y dryin g i s les s expensiv e fo r

utilit y stea mgeneratin g units , bu t sodiu mscrubbin g i s les s expensiv e fo r

man y industria l stea m generatin g units

. Sodiu mscrubbin g i s currentl y th e mos t widel y use dFG D technolog y fo r reducin g S0 2 emission s fro mindustrial

commercial-institutiona l stea m generatin g units

. Thi s i s becaus e sodiu m scrubbin g i s generall y les s expensiv e tha n othe r

FG D technologie s fo r

man y industrial-commercial-institutiona l units

. Consequently , th e sodiu mscrubbin g cos t algorith mwa s use dprio r t o proposa l t o generat e cost s whic hwer e viewe da s representativ e o f th e typ e of FG D syste mtha t

woul db e mos t

widel y use dt o contro l SO 2 emission s fro mne w industrial-commercial-institutiona l stea mgeneratin g units

. I n respons e t o comment s concernin g th e us e of

th e sodiu mscrubbin g cos t algorith mi nthi s manner , however , th e cost s of variou s type s of

FG D system s wer e reviewe dan dcompare dagain

. Th e cos t of sodiu mscrubbin g wa s generall y foun dt o b e somewha t

lowe r tha nth e cos t of othe r FG D systems , suc ha s dua l alkal i an dlim e spra y drying , a s wel l a s fluidize dbe dcombustion

. Fro mth e standpoin t

of overal l projec t

economics , th e tota l annualize dcos t o f th e stea m generatin g uni t

an dSO 2 contro l syste m varie db y les s tha n 1 0 percen t fo r al l technologie s examined

. However , whe n onl y th e cos t

associate dwit hS0 2 contro l wa s considered , thi s variatio n wa s muc hlarger , rangin g fro m3 0 t o 10 0 percent

. Therefore , becaus e o f variation s i n project-specifi c factor s tha t coul dinfluenc e th e choic e of SO 2 contro l system , th e us e o f

an y singl e technolog y a s a"surrogate " for

al l type s of

SO2 contro l system s i ncos t

analyse s wa s judge dto b e inappropriate

. Consequently , "generic " FG D cos t estimate s wer e develope dt o represen t th e midpoin t i nth e rang e of

cos t estimate s fo r

severa l type s o f

industria l SO 2 contro l system s (specifically , sodiu mscrubbing , lim e spra y drying , dua l alkali , an dfluidize dbe d combustion)

. Thes e generi c FGD cos t estimate s wer e the n use dt o represen t th e cos t o f FG D system s for

industrial

commercial-institutiona l stea m generatin g units

. Thi s approac hresulte d i nsomewha t

highe r FG D syste mcos t estimate s tha n a t

proposal , bu t

di dno t lea dt o an y significan t

difference s in conclusions

. Tw o commenter s sai dtha t bot hth e nationa l annualize dcost s an dth e individua l stea mgeneratin g uni t cost s associate dwit hth e standard s woul db e muc hhigher

. I n particular , th e commenter s said , th e cost s o f achievin g apercen t reductio ni n emission s for stea mgeneratin g unit s no t switchin g t o natura l ga s coul db e unreasonable

. A s discusse dearlier , th e nationa l cos t impact s associate dwit hth e fina l standard s wer e reassesse dbase do n revise dfue l pric e projections

. In addition , th e cos t

impact s o n typica l o r individua l stea mgeneratin g unit s wer e als o reassesse dusin g thes e revise dfue l pric e projections , assumin g n o fue l switchin g t o natura l ga s occurred

. A s discusse dearlier , severa l case s wer e identifie di n whic hth e cos t impact s associate dwit happlicatio no f apercen t reductio n requiremen t

wer e considere d unreasonable

. Consequently , th e fina l standar dprovide s exemption s fromth e percen t reductio n requirement s i nthes e cases
. Wit hthes e exemptions , th e cos t impact s associate dwit hth e final standard s ar e considere dreasonable

. Severa l commenter s expresse d concer n tha t

th e capita l cost s of auxiliar y fue l system s neede dfor startups , shutdowns , an dmalfunction s wer e no t considered

. Accordin g t o th e commenters , thes e cost s ar e significant

. I nman y cases , stea mgeneratin g unit s wil l b e designe dan dconstructe dwit h alternativ e fue l firin g capabilit y eve n i n th e absenc e of

th e standard s t o allo w greate r flexibilit y i n fue l selectio n an dt o provid e fo r

stea mgeneratin g uni t startu p capability

. T o tha t extent , th e onl y additiona l cost s fo r firin g alternativ e fuel s suc ha s natura l gun durin g period s o f

FG D startup , shutdown , o r

malfunctio n woul db e th e differenc e i nth e pric e betwee n natura l ga s an dth e primar y fuel

. However , becaus e no t

al l unit s ar e designe dwit h dua l fue l capability , additiona l capita l cost s associate dwit hswitchin g t o firing a nalternativ e fue l durin g period s o f malfunctio n wer e include din th e cos t analyses

. Fo r

al l mode l stea mgenerntin g uni t size s analyze d(100,150 , 25 0 an dP.1 3



### 47B3 S Federa l Registe r

/ Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r

16 , 1987 /

Rule s an dRegulation s

40 0 millio n Btu/hour) , th e capita l cos t o f providin g alternativ e fuel-firin g capabilit y t o acoal-fire dstea m generatin g uni t

wa s abou t

tw o t o thre e percen t o f th e tota l stea mgeneratin g uni t cost

. Th e annualize dcos t of providin g alternativ e fue l firin g capabilit y wa s thre e t o fou r percen t o f th e tota l annualize dcos t o f th e stea m generatin g uni t

system

. Therefore , th e additiona l capita l cost s of providin g ver y lo w sulfu r

fue l backu p capabilit y represen t

onl y asmal l percentag e of th e tota l stea mgeneratin g uni t cost s whil e providin g significan t

benefit s i n term s of additiona l S0 2 control

. F. Performance/Reliability of Demonstrated

Technologies Man y commenter s sai dther e i s inadequat e proo f

tha t ther e ar e demonstrate dS0 2 contro l technologie s whic hca n mee t

th e 9 0 percen t

remova l requiremen t

o n acontinuou s basi s fo r industrial-commercial-institutiona l stea mgeneratin g units

. The y contende d tha t th e performanc e of

"demonstrated " technologie s ha s bee n assesse dfo r utilit y stea mgeneratin g units , whic h hav e totall y differen t

desig n an d operatio n requirement s tha n industria l units

. Othe r

commenter s questione dth e adequac y o f

th e dat abas e fo r

S0 2 contro l technologie s o n oil-fire dstea m generatin g units

. Th e performanc e dat afo r FG D system s discusse di n th e "Summar y of Regulator y Analysis, " "Fossi l Fuel-Fire d Industria l Boilers-Backgroun d Information, " an d"S0 2 Technolog y Updat e Report " ar e base do n experienc e wit hindustria l stea mgeneratin g units

. Moreover , a s als o discussed , fo r severa l type s o f FG D system s thi s experienc e i s supporte db y experienc e wit hutilit y FG D systems

. Sodiu mFG D system s ar e currentl y th e mos t widel y use dFG D syste mo n industria l stea mgeneratin g units

. Therefore , th e industria l dat abas e fo r thi s technolog y i s mor e extensiv e tha n thos e fo r othe r FG D technologies

. Bot h short

- an dlong-ter memission s dat afo r 4 5 sodiu mFG D system s locate da t 1 8 differen t industria l site s sho w consisten t S0 2 remova l efficiencie s of greate r tha n 9 0 percent , an daverage dgreate r tha n 9 6 percent

. Syste mreliabilitie s average d nea r 9 8 percent

. Mos t

o f th e industria l experienc e wit hsodiu mFG D system s i s o n oil-fire dstea mgeneratin g unit s use d i n enhance doi l recover y whic hoperat e a t fairl y constan t

load

. However , dat a wer e als o gathere dfromsodiu mFG D system s operatin g o n oil-fire dstea m generatin g unit s i n othe r industria l application s whic hhav e mor e typica l loa dswings

. Dua l alkal i FG D system s ar e als o use d o n industrial-commercial-institutiona l stea mgeneratin g units

. Test s o f dua l alkal i FG D system s operatin g o n coal

fire dstea mgeneratin g unit s hav e show n short-ter mSO 2 remova l efficiencie s of greate r tha n 9 0 percent , wit hlong-ter m efficiencie s o f

aroun d9 2 percent

. Althoug hdua l alkal i FG D system s hav e generall y no t

bee napplie do noil-fire d stea mgeneratin g units , thei r performanc e shoul db e simila r t o sodiu mFG D systems

. Althoug hlittl e long-ter mdat aar e availabl e t o demonstrat e 9 0 percen t SO 2 remova l level s wit hlim e spra y drying , short-ter mtest s resultin g i ngreate r tha n 9 0 percen t

SO 2 remova l indicat e thi s proces s i s capabl e o f

achievin g thes e performanc e levels

. Curren t remova l rate s a s lo w a s 7 0 percen t reflec t th e fac t tha t man y commercia l system s hav e no t bee n require dt o achiev e hig h remova l levels , rathe r

tha n an y inheren t limitatio n o n th e technology

. Lim e an dlimeston e FG D systems , becaus e o f

highe r capita l an d maintenanc e costs , hav e ha dlimite d applicatio ni n th e industria l sector

. However , i n along-ter mtes t a t a n industria l stea mgeneratin g uni t tha t operate dalime/limeston e FG D system , th e SO 2 remova l efficienc y range dfrom 9 1 t o 9 4 percent

. Remova l efficiencie s wer e insensitiv e t o change s i n stea m generatin g uni t

load

. I n addition , lim e an dlimeston e we t

FG D system s ar e prove n processe s i nth e utilit y industry

. Lim e an dlimeston e FG D system s accoun t for approximatel y 6 8 percen t o f existin g utilit y FG D systems

. Althoug h few , if any , lim e o r

limeston e FG D system s ar e expecte dt o b e installe do n industrial-commercial-institutiona l stea mgeneratin g unit s du e t o economics , ther e ar e n o technica l limitation s whic hwoul dmak e thi s technolog y les s effectiv e o nindustria l stea mgeneratin g unit s tha no n utilit y stea mgeneratin g units

. Performanc e tes t

dat aals o demonstrat e tha t

FB C technolog y i s capabl e of

achievin g 9 0 percen t

S0 2 remova l a t

hig hreliabilities

. A recen t 30

- da y tes t o n abubblin g be dFB C uni t burnin g hig hsulfu r

coa l (400 0 n g SO2/J , 9. 3 lb/millio n Btu ) showe dSO 2 remova l efficiencie s averagin g 93. 5 percent

. A secon d30-da y tes t

conducte da t

a differen t sit e an dcombustin g alo w sulfu r coa l (47 0 n g S0 2 /J , 1. 1 lb/millio n Btu ) showe da n averag e SO * remova l of 9 0 percen t

wit hgreate r

tha n9 9 percen t reliability

. Durin g a67-da y perio da t thi s secon dsite , th e FB C uni t ha da reliabilit y of

9 7 percent

. I naddition , vendor s hav e state dtha t FB C unit s ca n b e designe dt o achiev e wel l ove r 9 0 percen t

S0 2 remova l a t

hig hreliabilit y levels

. Consequently , th e abilit y of FG D an d FB C system s t o achiev e a9 0 percen t SO2 reductio n o nindustria l stea m generatin g unit s i s wel l demonstrated

. I n addition , experienc e gaine db y utilitie s operatin g simila r

FG D system s serve s t o confir mth e abilit y of

thes e technologie s t o achiev e 9 0 percen t

SO 2 reductio n a t hig hreliabilit y levels

. Commenter s als o questione dth e adequac y of

th e dat abas e fo r

SO2 contro l technologie s o n stea m generatin g unit s operate dunde r condition s of

loa dswings

. Accordin g t o th e commenters , th e variabl e operatin g mode s an dhig hcapacit y loa dswing s typica l of

industria l operation s ca n caus e sever e upset s i n FG D efficienc y an dreliability

. Th e FG D syste mperformanc e dat a bas e i s primaril y compose dof dat a collecte dfro mindustria l stea m generatin g uni t

installations

. Thes e stea mgeneratin g unit s wer e locate da t plant s representativ e of th e industrial

commercial-institutiona l stea m generatin g uni t

population , includin g stea mgeneratin g unit s operate dunde r man y differen t

conditions

. Stea m generatin g unit s wit haverag e capacit y utilizatio n factor s rangin g from 5 t o 10 0 percen t wer e include di nth e dat abase

. I naddition , stea mgeneratin g uni t load s wer e varie ddurin g test s of individua l unit s t o simulat e loa dswing s tha t migh t b e experience di nsom e industria l applications

. Base do n thes e data , S0 2 remova l efficienc y wa s foun dt o b e insensitiv e t o change s i n stea m generatin g uni t

loa dove r

th e range s observed

. Th e primar y concer n fo r FG D system s operatin g o nstea mgeneratin g unit s whic hexperienc e loa dswing s i s a sudde nincreas e i nth e S0 2 loading

. Thi s ca nresul t

fro ma nincreas e i n eithe r th e flu e ga s flo w rat e o r

th e flu e ga s S0 2 concentration

. A s discusse di n th e "S0 2 Technolog y Updat e Report, " change s i n flu e ga s flo w rat e ar e matche db y correspondin g change s i n th e scrubbin g solutio nflo w rat e accordin g t o ase t liquid-to-ga s (L/G ) ratio

. I nawel l designe dan doperate dsystem , asafet y margi n i s maintaine di nth e L/ Grati o t o accoun t fo r delay s i ncontro l loo p response ; thus , a n increas e i n flu e ga s flo w rat e woul db e adequatel y handled

. Also , FG D system s whic hexperienc e highl y variabl e SO 2 loading s typicall y operat e a t

hig halkalin e reagen t concentrations

. Thi s provide s a bufferin g capacit y agains t larg e swing s i nsolutio n p H cause db y dramati c change s i n SO 2 concentration

. A s a result , sufficien t

exces s alkalin e reagen tP.1 4

Federa l Registe r

/ Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r 16 , 198 7 /

Rule s an dRegulation s

i s presen t

t o ensur e adequat e S0 2 remova l performanc e durin g loa d swings

. A numbe r

of commenter s questione d th e reliabilit y o f

FG D systems , expressin g concer n tha t thes e system s canno t mee t th e hig hoperationa l availabilit y demande db y man y industria l operations

. Other s sai dtha t utilit y FG D reliabilit y experienc e canno t b e extrapolate dt o industria l application s becaus e mos t utilitie s instal l spar e scrubber s t o maintai n hig h reliabilitie s an dd o no t

experienc e th e radica l loa dfluctuation s typica l o f industria l operations

. Th e reliabilit y o f

variou s type s of

FG D system s fo r

industria l application s wa s discusse di n th e "Backgroun d Informatio n Document, " th e "Summar y o f Regulator y Analysis, " an dth e "SO 2 Technolog y Updat e Report. " A s wit hth e dat ao n performanc e of S0 2 contro l systems , reliabilit y dat awer e gathere d fro mavariet y of

industria l applications , wit hdat afromutilit y stea mgeneratin g unit s use dt o supplemen t th e industria l data

. Reliabilit y dat awer e reporte dfo r ove r 25 0 sodiu mFG D system s operatin g o n industrial-commercial-institutiona l stea mgeneratin g unit s firin g coa l an d oil

. Averag e long-ter mreliabilit y level s fo r thes e unit s o f

98-10 0 percen t

wer e reporte dfo r

period s of

tim e rangin g fro m severa l month s t o severa l years
. SC v removal s durin g thes e period s average d i n exces s o f

9 0 percent

. Reliabilit y an davailabilit y dat awer e reporte dfo r

seve n dua l alkal i systems

. On e dua l alkal i syste moperatin g o n a n industria l coal-fire dstea mgeneratin g uni t reporte da navailabilit y of ove r 9 7 percen t fo r a12-mont hperiod

. Othe r dua l alkal i system s operatin g o n bot h industria l an dutilit y stea mgeneratin g unit s reporte dreliabilit y an davailabilit y level s of 9 4 t o 9 9 percen t

ove r simila r length s of

time

. Fo r lim e spra y dryin g systems , reliabilit y level s rangin g from70t o 9 7 percen t wer e reporte dfo r

variou s site s surveyed

. A n examinatio n of th e reason s fo r

th e wid e rang e i nreporte d reliabilit y level s indicate dtha t th e lo w reliabilit y level s coul dhav e bee n improve do r

prevente dwit hbette r operatin g an dmaintenanc e procedures

. Althoug hlim e spra y dryer s toda y ar e typicall y operate da t

moderat e performanc e levels , ther e i s n o reaso n t o believ e lim e spra y dryer s canno t maintai n hig hreliabilitie s achievin g 9 0 percen t SG ^ removal

. I n fact , on e vendo r o f lim e spra y dryer s i s prepare dt o guarante e 9 5 percen t

reliabilit y provide d th e operato r

follow s apreventiv e maintenanc e program
. Thi s claime d reliabilit y leve l i s consisten t wit hth e tw o year s o f commercia l operatin g dat a obtaine dfrom a13 2 M W(45 0 millio n Btu/hour ) coal-fire dstea mgeneratin g uni t equippe dwit halim e spra y drye r FG D tha t achieve di n exces s o f

9 8 percen t reliability

. A s state dabove , lime/limeston e FG D system s hav e ha dlimite dapplicatio n i n th e industria l sector

. Therefore , mos t o f th e dat ao nlime/limeston e FG D syste m reliabilit y ar e fromutilit y stea m generatin g units

. However , durin g a long-ter m(85-day ) performanc e tes t of a lime/limeston e FG D syste mo n a n industria l stea mgeneratin g unit , FG D syste mreliabilit y wa s greate r tha n9 0 percent

. Dat afrom autilit y lime / limeston e FG D syste mfirin g coa l indicat e reliabilitie s clos e t o 10 0 percen t ove r aperio do f

severa l years
. Th e abov e discussio n indicates , therefore , tha t

wit hprope r

operatio n an dmaintenance , hig hreliabilitie s ca n b e achieve dan dmaintaine do n industrial-commercial-institutiona l FG D an dFB C system s operatin g a t hig hS0 2 remova l levels

. T o allo w continue d stea mgeneratin g uni t

operatio ndurin g period s o f

FG D syste mmalfunction , backu p FG D modules , commo n i n th e electri c utilit y sector , ca n b e installe do r th e uni t ca nfir e ver y lo w sulfu r fuels , suc ha s natura l ga s o r

ver y lo w sulfu r oil

. On e commente r

sai dtha t

a n averag e 9 0 percen t

reductio n usin g a nFG D syste mi s feasibl e onl y whe n astea m generatin g uni t

i s usin g ahig hsulfu r fuel , an dtha t

i t i s les s feasibl e whe n a lo w sulfu r

fue l i s use dbecaus e o f th e lowe r concentratio n of

S0 2 i n th e flu e gas
. Th e abilit y o f

a n FG D syste mt o achiev e hig hSO 2 remova l efficiencie s durin g combustio no f

lo w sulfu r

fuel s i s determine db y th e concentratio n o f SCh i n th e flu e ga s exitin g th e FG D system

. Tes t dat afro msodiu man dlim e spra y dryin g FG D system s an dfromFB C system s indicat e SO 2 emission s of les s tha n 1 5 pp m(equa l t o roughl y 1 3 ng/ J o r 0.0 3 lb/millio n Btu ) ar e achievable ; i n som e tests , SO 2 level s o f les s tha n5 pp m (4. 3 ng/ J [0.0 1 lb/millio nBtu] ) wer e measured

. Thi s indicate s tha t 9 0 percen t remova l i s achievabl e wit hflu e gase s havin g uncontrolle demissio nrate s a s lo w a s 13 0 ng/ J (0. 3 l b S0 2 /millio n Btu)

. Thes e performanc e level s measure di n operatin g FG D system s ar e supporte db y kineti c dat afro mlaborator y studie s an d b y FG D vendo r

claims

. Consequently , th e abilit y t o achiev e a9 0 percen t reductio n whe n firin g lo w sulfu r fuel s i s considere dwel l demonstrated

. G. Secondary Environmental Impacts Severa l commenter s sai dth e impact s o f standard s "based " o n th e us e o f sodiu mFG D system s wer e no t evaluate di nrelatio n t o othe r regulations , especiall y Stat e an dloca l wate r qualit y regulations

. The y sai dth e effluen t produce db y sodiu mFG D system s coul dcaus e wastewate r disposa l problem s i n som e areas
. Th e limit s impose db y existin g regulatio n o nth e disposa l o f wastewate r stream s fromsodiu mFG D system s wer e examine db y reviewin g curren t disposa l practice s fo r

thes e type s o f

wastes

. Wastewate r

stream s fro msodiu mFG D system s ar e no t

considere dhazardou s wastes , eve nunde r

th e mos t

stringen t Stat e o r loca l regulations

. In th e West , disposa l o f

thes e type s o f

waste s i s generall y b y dee p wel l injection , abov e groun devaporation , o r

percolatio n ponds

. I n th e East , disposa l of thes e type s o f waste s i s generall y b y direc t discharg e t o areceivin g wate r bod y o r indirec t discharg e throug hapublicl y owne dtreatmen t

wor k (POTW)

. Thes e stream s ar e ofte n treate dprio r t o discharg e t o compl y wit hth e term s o f applicabl e permits , Stat e o r loca l effluen t limitations , wate r

qualit y standards , o r

POT Wpretreatmen t standard s o r

limitations

. Thus , whil e treatmen t

ma y b e necessar y i n som e cases , thes e type s o f

wastewate r stream s ar e currentl y bein g dispose dof b y severa l method s i ncomplianc e wit h Federal , State , an dloca l regulations

. Th e cos t algorith mfor

sodiu mFG D system s include dcost s fo r oxidatio n i n orde r t o reflec t

som e for

mo f treatmen t prio r t o disposal

. I n som e cases , however , eve n wit htreatmen t o f th e wastewate r

streams , som e form s o f disposal , suc ha s direc t o r indirec t discharge , ma y no t

b e permitted

. Thi s coul dhappe n i narea s of hig hindustria l usag e wher e maximu mpollutan t loading s fo r

th e receivin g wate r

bod y 0 1 POT Wha s bee nreached

. I n addition , i t i s als o possibl e i n som e case s tha t disposa l b y dee p wel l injection , evaporatio nponds , o r

landfil l container s ma y no t b e permitted

. Thi s coul d happe ni narea s wher e concern s abou t possibl e contaminatio n o f undergroun d aquifer s effectivel y prohibi t disposa l o f an y liqui dwaste s b y suc hmeans
. Fo r thi s reason , a s wel l a s othe r reasons , th e standard s ar e no t "based " o nth e us e o f

sodiu mFG D system s alone , no r

fo r tha t matte r d o th e standard s requir e th e us e o f an y particula r

FG D syste mo r

SO 2 contro l technology

. Rather , th e standard s reflec t th e leve l o f

contro l tha t

i s achievabl e throug hth e us e o f

an y on e of

severa l technologies , includin g sodiu mFGD , dua l alkal i FGD , lime/limeston e FGD , lim e spra y dryin g FGD , an dFBC

. I n addition , wher e a nindividua lP.1 5

4783 8 Federa l Registe r/ Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r 16 , 198 7 /

Rule s an dRegulation s ^m^^^^^m^^^^m^^mM^^^^^^^^mamM^asa^^^^^^m^^^msm^^^mBm^^m^mn^^^*B^^M^mm^a^^^a.^^m^mmmsmxmm^m^^^m^^^^^^mmmm^^msmmsssssm^^^^Bsa confronte dwit hth e standar dma y vie w th e "burden " of

usin g thes e contro l technologie s a s excessive , "fue l switching " ca n b e employed

. I n thi s manner , th e necessit y o f usin g thes e S0 2 contro l technologie s ca n b e avoided

. A s discusse dthroughou t th e "Backgroun dInformatio n Document, " th e "S0 2 Contro l Technolog y Updat e Report, " an dth e "Summar y o f Regulator y Analysis, " th e environmenta l (i.e., air , water , an dsoli dwaste) , energy , cost , an deconomi c impact s associate d wit hus e o f

al l of th e abov e mentione d S0 2 contro l technologies , a s wel l a s thos e associate dwit hfue l switching , wer e reviewe dan dar e considere d reasonable

. Consequently , i n area s wher e disposa l of

wastewate r

stream s fro msodiu mFG D systems , o r fo r tha t matte r wastewate r

stream s fro man y "wet " FG D system , i s foun dt o b e ver y costl y o r essentiall y prohibite db y loca l regulation , stea mgeneratin g unit s woul d b e expecte dt o selec t

a n alternativ e approac ht o complyin g wit hth e standards

. Suc halternative s coul drang e fro mth e us e o f

"dry " SO 2 contro l system s (i.e., lim e spra y dryin g o r FBC ) t o firin g natura l gas
. Othe r commenter s expresse dconcer n abou t th s availabilit y o f

adequat e landfil l capacit y t o dispos e o f FG D syste mwaste

. On e adde dtha t Stat e an d loca l soli dwast e disposa l regulation s ar e forcin g th e closur e of man y existin g landfills , makin g th e sitin g of proxima l landfill s difficul t

an ddrivin g u p disposa l costs

. Anothe r

sai dthat , accordin g t o th e proposal , th e us e o f FG D system s coul dgenerat e u p t o 1 5 time s a s muc h wast e a s th e us e o f

lo w sulfu r

coal , an d ther e i s n o evidenc e i n th e recor do f landfil l capacit y sufficien t t o handl e thi s larg e increas e i n waste

. Stea mgeneratin g unit s d o no t generall y operat e a s independen t entities , bu t

ar e mos t

ofte n par t

of a n industria l plan t

whic hproduce s othe r waste s requirin g disposal

. I n addition , coal-fire dstea mgeneratin g unit s generat e fly as hwhic hals o require s disposal

. Thus , us e of

a n FG D syste mt o contro l SO 2 emission s generall y doe s no t creat e ane w proble m(i.e. , anee dt o dispos e o f

waste s wher e n o suc hnee d existe dbefore)

. A s discusse di n th e "Summar y of Regulator y Analysis, " th e quantit y o f soli dwast e generate db y FG D technologie s depend s o n th e sulfu r conten t o f th e fuel

. I n general , however , FG D technologie s doubl e t o tripl e th e quantit y o f

soli dwast e generate d compare dt o existin g standards , rathe r tha n afifteen-fol dincreas e a s suggeste d b y th e commenters

. Fo r example , a typica l 4 4 M W(15 0 millio n Btu/hour ] stea mgeneratin g uni t

firin g lo w sulfu r coa l withou t FG D generate s abou t

3,20 0 Mg/yea r (3,50 0 tons/year ) o f

soli dwast e (mainl y stea mgeneratin g uni t blowdow n an das hfro mP M control)

. Th e us e o f

adua l alkal i o r

lim e spra y dryin g FG D syste mt o achiev e 9 0 percen t reductio n i n SO2 emission s from th e sam e stea mgeneratin g uni t firin g th e sam e lo w sulfu r

coa l woul dgenerat e a n additiona l 1,200-2,10 0 Mg/yea r (1,300

- 2,30 0 tons/year ) o f

soli dwast e i nth e formof FG D sludge

. I

f ahig hsulfu r

coa l wer e fire di nthi s unit , th e quantit y of soli dwast e generate dwoul dincreas e b y 6,600-6,80 0 Mg/yea r (7,300-7,50 0 tons/year)

. I n mos t cases , disposa l of

waste s generate db y FG D system s present s n o mor e of aproble mtha n disposa l of plan t waste s o r

stea mgeneratin g uni t

fl y ash

. A s aresult , FG D syste mwaste s ma y generall y b e dispose do f b y th e sam e mean s a s thes e wastes

. I n fact , sinc e th e waste s fro msom e industria l plant s ar e considere dtoxi c o r

hazardou s an dFG D syste mwaste s ar e not , disposa l o f waste s fromFG D system s ma y presen t les s of aproble mtha n disposa l o f othe r plan t wastes

. Consequently , i n thos e specifi c location s wher e landfil l capacit y ma y b e limited , disposa l o f

othe r plan t waste s i s likel y t o presen t

a s man y problems — an di n som e case s mor e problems—a s disposa l o f

waste s fromFG D systems

. Fo r individua l plants , suc hconstraint s ma y necessitat e substantia l change s t o th e manufacturin g proces s i n orde r t o minimiz e th e waste s generate do r t o alte r thei r characteristics

. Fo r

th e stea m generatin g uni t

an dS0 2 contro l system , thi s ma y necessitat e selectio no f on e typ e of contro l syste move r

anothe r (i.e. , a"dry " syste move r

a"wet " system , fo r example ) o r

selectio n o f

a nalternativ e fue l tha t generate s littl e o r

n o wast e products

. H. Emission Credits A numbe r

o f commenter s fel t

tha t emissio ncredit s shoul db e grante dfo r stea mgeneratin g unit s firin g wast e materials , sayin g tha t

th e environmentall y beneficia l an dcos t effectiv e us e of

wast e fuel s shoul db e encouraged

. Othe r

commenter s sai dth e standar dshoul dcredi t

th e hea t inpu t fromnatura l ga s fire di n combinatio n wit hcoa l o r

oi l whe ncalculatin g SO 2 emissio n rate s rathe r

tha nrequirin g coa l o r oi l t o mee t

thei r respectiv e emissio n limit s withou t

dilutio ncredits

. Emissio n credit s woul dallo w aplan t operato r firin g asulfur-fre e fue l suc ha s woo do r natura l ga s i n conjunctio nwit h coa l o r oi l t o emi t

SO 2 a t th e sam e overal l rat e a s astea mgeneratin g uni t firin g onl y coa l o r

oil

. State danothe r way , astea mgeneratin g uni t firin g a50 / 5 0 mixtur e of coa l an dwood , o r

coa l an d natura l gas , coul dhav e twic e th e SO 2 emission s wit ha nemissio n credi t a s it coul dwithou t

a nemissio n credit

. A s a result , emissio ncredit s depriv e th e publi c of th e ai r qualit y benefits , i n term s of reduce dS0 2 emissions , associate dwit hth e combustio no f nonsulfur-bearin g fuels

. Th e effect s o f

encouragin g wast e fue l us e throug hemissio ncredit s wer e thoroughl y examine dan ddiscusse di n "Summar y of

Regulator y Analysis, " "A n Analysi s of

th e Cost s an dCos t Effectivenes s o f

S0 2 Contro l fo r

Mixe d Fuel-Fire dStea mGeneratin g Units, " an d "Impact s o f

Ne w Fue l Price s o n S0 2 Emissio n Credit s fo r

Cogeneratio n System s an dMixe dFuel-Fire dStea m Generatin g Units. " Thes e analyse s sho w tha t grantin g emissio ncredit s fo r mixed

fuel-fire dstea mgeneratin g unit s result s i nver y smal l reduction s i n cost s whil e allowin g significan t

increase s i n S0 2 emissions

. A s aresult , th e incrementa l cos t effectivenes s of

th e additiona l reductio ni nSO 2 emission s achieve db y no t providin g emissio ncredit s i s low , generall y i n th e rang e of $220-330/M g ($200-300/ton)

. Thes e cost s ar e considere dreasonable

. Consequently , th e standard s d o no t

includ e emissio n credit s fo r

mixed-fuel-fire dstea m generatin g unit s firin g wast e fuel s o r natura l ga s i n combinatio nwit hcoa l o r oil

. Firin g wast e fuel s i s economicall y attractiv e in'man y case s an dresult s i n reduce dfue l cost s for

th e plan t

operator

. Th e absenc e of

provision s for

emissio n credit s shoul dno t

discourag e th e us e of thes e waste s a s stea mgeneratin g uni t fuels

. I nman y cases , th e disposa l o f suc hwaste s i n thi s manne r woul d represen t

th e mos t

cos t effectiv e metho d o f disposa l regardles s of

th e NSPS

. I n addition , th e fina l standard s includ e a n exemptio n fro mth e percen t reductio n requiremen t

fo r stea mgeneratin g unit s obtainin g 3 0 percen t

o r les s o f thei r rate dannua l hea t

inpu t capacit y from coa l o r oil

. Thi s provide s substantia l incentiv e t o us e waste s i n orde r t o reduc e th e amoun t

of oi l o r coa l burne d i n th e stea mgeneratin g unit

. Othe r commenter s state dtha t emissio n credit s shoul db e allowe dfo r cogeneratio nsystem s i nrecognitio n o f th e increase defficienc y achieve db y thes e system s ove r

separat e system s fo r stea man dpowe r

generation

. Emissio ncredit s fo r

cogeneratio n system s wer e als o thoroughl y examine d an ddiscusse di n th e "Summar y of Regulator y Analysis, " "A n Analysi s o f th e Cost s an dCos t

Effectivenes s of Allowin g SO 2 Emissio n Credit s fo r Cogeneratio nSystems, " an d"Impac t ofP

. 1 6



### :e r / Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r 16 , 198 7 /

Rule s an dRegulation s £703 3

Ne w Fuel Price s on SO s Emissio n Credit s fo r Cogeneratio n System s an d Mixe dFuel-Fire dStea

mGeneratin g Unit s " A s wit hmixed-fuel-fire dstea m generatin g units , thes e analyse s conclude dtha t

grantin g a n emissio n credi t fo r cogeneratio n stea mgeneratin g unit s result s i n very smal l reduction s in cost s whil e allowin g significant increase s i n SO-

t emissions

. Therefore , th e incrementa l cos t

effectivenes s o

f th e additiona l reduction s i n emission s achieve db y no t

providin g emissio n credit s fo r cogeneratio n stea m generatin g unit s i s low, , generall y in th e rang e o f $220-6S0/Mg ($200-600/ton)

. Thes e cost s ar e considere dreasonable

. Stron g economi c incentive s exis t fo r us e o f cogeneration

. Th e absenc e of emissio n credit s fo

r cogeneration

system s wil l no t

significantl y offset thes e incentives

. Consequently , th e fina l standard s d o no t

includ e provision s for emissio n credit s fo

r cogeneratio n systems

. Som e commenter s state dtha t imposin g apercentag e reductio n requiremen t

o n cogeneratio n steam generatin g unit s coul dseverel y affec t th e economic s o

f cogeneration projects

. Accordin g t o th e commenters , impact s o n cogeneratio n system s woul db e more sever e tha n o n othe r

industria l sector s becaus e th e increase dcost s canno t b e "passe dthrough " to th e consumer
. Th e fina l standard s wil l increas e th e cos t o f coal

- an doil-fire dcogeneratio n stea mgeneratin g units

. Thi s coul d preclud e some smaller , les s profitabl e cogeneratio n projects

. However , mos t coal

- an doil-fire dcogeneratio n stea m generatin g unit s covere db y th e standard s wil l no t

b e severel y affected

. A cos t analysi s of

th e impac t

of standard s o n atypical coal-fire d cogeneratio n steamgeneratin g uni t showe dtha t

apercen t reductio n requiremen t

increase dtota l annualize d cost s b y abou t

1 1 percent

. Th e "Surve y o f Ne w Industria l Boile

r Projects " indicate s tha t

mor e tha n8 0 percen t

o f th e cogeneratio n project s complete din 198 1 throug h198

4 woul dhav e gon e forwarda s designe deve n i f cost' s increase db y IQ percent^ an dmore tha n 6 0 percen t o f th e cogeneratio n project s woul dhav e gon e forwar da s designe di f cost s increase db y 2 0 percent

. I n addition , man y cogeneratio n project s wil l no t

b e subjec t

to final SO

2 standard s a t

all

. Give n curren t

fuel pric e projections, , man y ne w cogeneration

. project s are
- expecte dt o b e base do n firing natura l ga s (i nbot hga s turbin e cogeneratio n systems ; an dsteamturbin e cogeneratio n systems ) o r

firin g municipal soli dwast e Cogeneration

. project s firin g thes e fuels 1 

### ar e no t affecte db y th e fina

l standards.

. Finally , ne w coal-fire dcogeneratio n

stea mgeneratin g unit s compete wit h ne w coal-fire delectri c utility stea m generatin g unit s tha t

ar e subjec t

t o percen t reductio nrequirement s unde r Subpar t Da

. Thus , applicatio n o

f percen t reductio n t o coal-fire dcogeneratio n stea mgeneratin g unit s unde r Subpart • D b coul db s viewe da s a"neutral " positio nwhic htreat s bothutility stea m generatin g unit s an dindustrial

commercial-institutional cogeneratio n steamgeneratin g unit s inasimila r manner
. Consequently , th e fina l standard s trea t

coal-fire dcogeneratio n steamgeneratin g unit s jus t like an y othe r coal-fire dstea mgeneratin g unit

. /

. Emerging Technologies Several commenter s sai dthat , becaus e emergin g technologie s hav e no t bee n "adequatel y demonstrated " a s require db y th e Clean Ai r Act , a standar dfo

r emergin g technologie s canno t b e establishe dunde r

sectio n 111

. Other s expresse dconcern tha t establishin g standard s fo

r emergin g technologie s coul dinhibi t developmen t an dcommercial demonstratio no f thes e technologies

. Stil l othe r

commenter s state dtha t

ne w o r emergin g technologie s shoul db e require dto achiev e th e sam e performanc e level s tha t existin g technologie s ar e capabl e o f achievin g an dtha t

th e standard s shoul d no t includ e an y specia l provision s fo r ne w o r emergin g technologies

. NSP S shoul db e se t

s o a s t o avoi d unreasonabl e cost s or

othe r impacts ; Essex Chemical

Corp. v.. Ruckelshaus, 48 6 F

. 2 d4

2 (D

. C

. Cir

. 1973)

. Standard s requirin g ahig hleve l o

f performance , suc ha s 90 percen t

reduction , withou t

a provisio n fo

r emergin g technologies , migh t discourag e continue d developmen t

o f som e ne w technologies

. Owner s an doperator s o

f ne w stea m generatin g unit s coul dsimply vie w th e risks o f usin g ane w an duntrie d emissio n contro l technolog y to achiev e a S O percen t reductio nin emission s a s to o great

. Thus , t o encourag e th e continue d developmen t

o f emissio n contro l technologie s tha t

sho w promis e of achievin g level s of

performanc e comparabl e t o thos e o

f existin g technologies , bu t

a t lowe r cos t o r with othe r offsettin g environmenta l or energ y benefits , specia l provision s ar e neede d whic hencourag e th e developmen t an d us e o f ne w technologies , whil e ensurin g tha t SO 2 emission s wil l b e minimized

. Th e fina l standar drequirin g a5 0 percen t reductio n in S0 2 emission s whil e limitin g emission s to 17 0 an d26 0 ng/ J [0A an d0. 0 lb/millio n Btu) hea t inpu t fo r oi l an dcoal , respectively , appear s t o achiev e thi s objective

. Th e minimumpercen t

reductio n requiremen t o f 5 0 percen t

shoul deffectively eliminat e th e ris k

o f failure fo r an y technolog y whic hha s th e potential to achiev e higher

performanc e level s and , whe ncombine dwit

hemissio n limit s o

f 17 0 an d23 0 ng/

J (0. 4 an d0. 6 lb/millio n Btu) , minimiz e S0 2 

### emission s b y limitin g allowabl e emissio nrate s t o les s tha n half th e leve l that

woul dresul t

fro mth e us e o f lo w sulfu r fuel

. Th e emissio n limit s als o encourag e improvement s i n thes e technologie s b y requirin g greate r SO 2 reduction s whe nfiring higher sulfu r fuels

. For example , atechnolog y ma y b e initiall y teste dat

5 0 percen t

SO a reductio n on asteamgeneratin g unit firin g lo w sulfu

r coal (les s than52

0 ng/J , 1. 2 lb/millio n Btu) , an dthen , base don th e informatio n gathere dfro mthes e tests , improve dto achiev e increase d percen t reduction s o nhigher

sulfu r coal s in orde r to comply wit

hth e emissio n limit

. Fo r example , th e 26

0 ng/J (0. 6 lb / millio n Btu

) emissio n limit

fo r coal-fire d unit s applyin g emergin g technolog y wil l requir e unit s firing an86

0 ng/J (2. 0 lb / millio nBtu) coa l t

o achiev e 70 percen t SO 2 reductio nan dunit s firing a170 0 ng / J (4. 0 lb/millio n Btu ] coal to achiev e a n 8 5 percen t

SO 2 reduction

. Thus , th e emerging technolog y provision s wit h botha5 0 percen t

reductio nrequiremen t an demissio nlimit s o

f 170 an d280 ng/

J (0. 4 an d0. 6 lb/millio n Btu ) fo r oi l an d coa l wil l encourag e technolog y demonstration s whil e minimizin g SO a emissions

. Severa l commenter s sai d disallowanc e o

f credi t fo r precombustio n cleanin g o f fuel towar d th e percen t

reductio n requiremen t

fo r emergin g technologie s i s inappropriat e an dcounte r

to th e philosoph y o

f preferrin g th e cleanu p o

f fuel s prio r

to combustion , rathe r

tha n post

combustio n cleanup

. Whil e th e allowanc e o

f fue l pretreatmen t

credit s towar dth e 8 0 percen t reductio n roquiremen

. i o considere dappropriat e an di s allowe d i n th e fina l standards , allowin g fue

l pretreatmen t

credit s fo r emergin g technologie s i s ill-suite dto th o purpos e o f th e emergin g technolog y provisions

. Th e primar y objectiv e 0 ? th e emergin g technolog y provision s i

o t o otimulcto an dencourag e th e developmen t en dus e of emergin g SO

acontro l technologie s whic hsho w promis e 0 ? achievin g significant emissio n reduction s in th e future

. Fue l pretreatmen t

credit s ar e unwarrante dfo

r th s intende dpurpos e of demonstratio n o

f emergin g technologies. Th e final standard , therefore , doe s no t allo w fue l pretreatmen t

t o b e applie da s credi t agains t th e percen t

reductio n requiremen t

fo r emergin g technologies

. However , th e final standar dha s bee n4784 0 Federa l Registe r/ Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r 16 , 198 7 /

Rule s an dRegulation s

amende dt o allo w consideratio n o f fue l pretreatmen t

a s a n emergin g technolog y i f all o f th e require d5 0 percen t reductio n an dth e 17 0 an d26 0 ng/ J (0. 4 an d0. 6 lb/millio n Btu ) emissio n limi t i s achieve db y th e fue l pretreatmen t technology

. Thi s wil l serv e t o encourag e th e developmen t

o f fue l pretreatmen t technologie s tha t

sho w promis e o f achievin g significan t

SO 2 reductions

. On e commente r

suggeste dtha t

th e Agenc y shoul dconside r ho w i t plan s t o limi t th e emergin g technolog y provisio n to : (1 ) Ne w technologie s o r processe s whic har e uniqu e relativ e t o demonstrate dtechnologie s rathe r tha n simpl y modifie dversion s o f currentl y demonstrate dtechnologies , an d(2 ) thos e whic har e likel y t o b e abl e t o mee t 9 0 percen t

remova l afte r

areasonabl e demonstratio n an ddevelopmen t time

. A s i n th e propose dstandards , th e fina l standard s includ e definition s o f conventiona l technologies

. I n som e cases , thes e definition s hav e bee n revise di n respons e t o th e commenter' s concerns
. Technologie s considere da s nothin g mor e tha n modifie dversion s o f existin g demonstrate dtechnologie s wil l no t b e viewe da s emergin g technologie s an dwil l no t

b e approve dfo r

installatio n o r operation

. Curren t

example s o f emergin g technologie s includ e injectio n o f dr y sorbent s int o th e furnac e o f a stea mgeneratin g uni t

(a.k.a. , LIMB ) an d th e us e of

electron s t o enhanc e SO 2 o r NO xreactivit y (E-beam)

. Th e definitio n o f conventiona l "dr y flu e ga s desulfurizatio n technology " i n th e regulatio n ha s bee n revise dt o mak e i t clea r tha t i t onl y include s processe s tha t injec t a n alkalin e slurr y int o th e flu e gas
. I t doe s no t includ e processe s tha t injec t dr y sorbent

. Th e Agenc y recognize s tha t demonstratio n o f

a n emergin g technolog y ma y requir e installatio n an d testin g a t severa l differen t

stea m generatin g unit s befor e i t i s considere d demonstrate dan dintend s t o allo w severa l installation s of

a nemergin g technology

. Th e emergin g technolog y provision s wil l b e reviewe dregularl y durin g th e cours e o f th e revie w proces s associate d wit hal l NSPS

. A s aresul t of thes e reviews , emergin g contro l technologie s tha t hav e bee n demonstrate dwil l b e reclassifie da s conventiona l technologie s an dwoul db e subjecte dt o th e sam e requirement s a s othe r conventiona l contro l technologies

. A s wit hal l NSPS , stea mgeneratin g unit s subjec t

t o th e fina l standard s mus t notif y th e Agenc y withi n 3 0 day s o f th e dat e o f commencemen t

o f constructio n o f th e affecte dfacility

. I

f th e owne r

o r operato r of th e stea mgeneratin g uni t plan s t o us e a n emergin g technology , an dthereb y operat e unde r a5 0 percen t reductio n requirement , afull an d

complet e descriptio no f thi s technolog y mus t b e submitte dt o th e Agenc y alon g wit hadiscussio nof

ho w o r wh y thi s technolog y doe s no t

mee t an y of th e definition s o f

conventiona l technologies

. Technologie s no t

considere demergin g b y th e Agenc y wil l b e treate da s conventiona l technologies , an dth e stea mgeneratin g uni t

owne r o r operato r wil l b e s o notified

. T o ensur e consisten t applicatio n of

th e specia l provision s fo r emergin g technologies , thes e provision s wil l no t b e delegate dt o th e State s an d wil l remai nwit hth e Agency

. I n summary , a5 0 percen t reductio n requiremen t

an da26 0 ng/ J (0. 6 lb / millio nBtu ) emissio nlimi t ar e applicabl e t o emergin g technologie s applie dt o coal-fire dstea mgeneratin g units

. A 5 0 percen t

reductio n requiremen t

an da17 0 hg/ J (0. 4 lb / millio n Btu ) emissio nlimi t ar e applicabl e t o emergin g technologie s applie dt o oil-fire dstea mgeneratin g units

. A s specifie di n th e fina l standards , emergin g technologie s ar e thos e tha t

ar e no t conventiona l techniques ; an dapprova l mus t b e obtaine dfro mth e Agenc y fo r applicatio no f

a n emergin g technology

. Revie w of

emergin g technolog y application s wil l b e mad e onl y b y th e Agenc y an dthi s authorit y wil l no t b e delegated

. Th e Agenc y wil l no t approv e fo r emergin g technolog y applicatio n(1 ) contro l technologie s tha t ar e i n fac t

onl y amino r variatio nof

aconventiona l technology , o r

(2 ) technologie s tha t

d o no t promis e a t

leas t a5 0 percen t

SO 2 remova l potentia l an da nemissio n rat e les s tha n 26 0 ng/ J o r

17 0 ng/ J (0. 4 o r

0. 6 lb/millio n Btu ) fo r

coa l an doil , respectively

. VI

. Administrativ e A. Outline of

Additions to Subpart

Db Subpar t Db , a s publishe di ntoday' s Federa l Register , include s bot hth e provision s fo r

NO , an dPM promulgate d o n Novembe r

25,198 6 (5 1 F

R42768 ) an d

. th e provision s fo r

SO2 an dPM fro moil

fire dstea mgeneratin g unit s promulgate dtoday

. Th e followin g lis t i s provide da s a nai dt o th e reade r i n identifyin g th e section s of Subpar t D b tha t ar e bein g adde do r

substantivel y revise db y today' s action

. Sectio n 60.40b : Revise dparagraph s (b) an d

. (c) , adde dparagrap h(g)

. Sectio n 60.41b : Revise dan dadde dne w definitions

. Sectio n 60.42b : Adde dentire section

. Sectio n 60.43b : Adde dparagrap h(b)

. Sectio n 60.44b : N

o substantiv e changes

. Sectio n 60.45b : Adde dentire section

. Sectio n 60.46b : N

o substantiv e changes

. Sectio n 60.47b : Adde dentire section

. Sectio n 60.48b : N

o substantiv e changes

. Sectio n 60.49b : Revise dparagrap h(b) , adde d paragraph s (a)(3)

. (a)(4)

. (j)

. (k)

. (I) , (m)

. an d(n)

. B. Revision of

Method 19' Today' s actio nals o promulgate s revision s t o Metho d1 9 o f 4 0 CF RPar t 60 , Appendi x A

. Thes e revision s includ e updating , reorganizing , an dcombinin g th e existin g Metho d1 9 an dth e propose d Metho d19 A int o th e ne w Metho d19

. A t th e tim e of

proposa l of

standard s o f performanc e for

S0 2 o nJun e 19,198 6 (5 1 F R22384) , Metho d1 9 wa s applicabl e t o determinin g S0 2 emission s an dpercen t reductio n fo r

FGD-equippe dstea m generatin g units , an dth e propose d Metho d19 A wa s applicabl e t o determinin g S0 2 emission s fromstea m generatin g unit s firin g lo w sulfu r conten t fuel s withou t

FG D controls

. Metho d19 A include dthre e alternative s for measurin g SO 2 emissions : Continuou s emission s monitorin g system s (CEMS) , Metho d6B (stac k

testing) , an dfue l samplin g an danalysi s procedures

. Metho d1 9 wa s originall y adopte din 197 9 a s ametho dfor

determinin g complianc e wit hth e S0 2 emissio n limit s an dpercen t

reductio nrequirement s for electri c utilit y stea mgeneratin g unit s subjec t t o 4 0 CF RPar t 60 , Subpar t

Da

. Metho d19 A wa s propose din1983 , bu t ha s no t bee npromulgated

. Th e fina l S0 2 standard s referenc e onl y th e revise dMetho d19

. Metho d1 9 i s no w applicabl e to : (1 ) SO*. , NO x . an d P M emissio ncalculations , (2 ) S0 2 percen t reductio n calculation s for post

combustio ncontrol , (3 ) S0 2 percen t reductio n calculation s for fue l pretreatment , an d(4 ) fue l samplin g an d analysi s procedure s fo r complianc e fuel

fire dstea mgeneratin g units

. Additionally , Metho d1 9 ha s bee n update dt o incorporat e ne w America n Societ y of

Testin g an dMaterial s (ASTM ) procedure s fo r analyzin g th e sulfu r conten t i n petroleu mproduct s (AST M Metho dD1552-83) an di ncoa l an dcok e (AST M Metho dD4239-85)

. Additiona l informatio no n Metho d1 9 i s availabl e i n Docke t

A-81-15

. C. Relationship

of Subpart Db to Operational

Guidance

and Plans to Develop Standards

for Municipal

Waste Combustors Today' s actio ncomplete s th e rulemakin g fo r

Subpar t Db

. A s such

. Subpar t D b no w limit s emission s o f particulat e matter , nitroge noxides , an d sulfu r dioxid e fro mth e combustio n o f coal , oil , natura l gas , wood , municipa l soli dwaste , an dmixture s o f thes e fuel s wit hothe r

fuel s i nnew , modified , o r reconstructe dindustrial-commercial

institutiona l stea mgeneratin g units

.P.1 8



### Federa l Register

/ Vol

. 52 , No , 24 1 /

Wednesday , December 16 , 1987 /

Rule s an dRegulation s GTMl
Subpar t D b include s standard s limitin g emissions , of

particulat e matte r fro mth e combustio n o f municipa l soli d waste

. I n addition , Subpar t D b include s standard s limitin g emission s o f nitroge n oxides , i f th e stea mgeneratin g uni t combust s coal , oil , o r

natura l ga s wit h municipa l soli dwaste

. Similarly , Subpar t D b include s standard s limitin g emission s o f

sulfu r dioxide , if

th e stea m generatin g uni t

combust s coa l o r

oi l wit h municipa l soli dwaste

. I n respons e t o concern s regardin g emission s fro mth e combustio n o f municipa l soli dwast e whic har e beyon d thos e considere ddurin g th e developmen t

o f Subpar t Db , th e Agenc y issue doperationa l guidanc e t o State s an dRegiona l office s o n Jun e 26,198 7 regardin g contro l technolog y applicabl e t o municipa l wast e combustors

. Thi s guidanc e i s fo r

us e i n al l ongoin g preventio n of.significan t deterioratio n (PSD ) an dnonattainmen t ne w sourc e revie w (NSR ) proceedings , a s wel l a s t o al l ne w permi t

applications

. Althoug hSubpar t

D b limit s emission s fromcombustio n o f

municipa l soli d waste , Subpar t

D b shoul dno t

b e viewe d a s supersedin g th e Jun e 26,1987 , operationa l guidanc e o n contro l technolog y fo r

municipa l soli dwast e combustors

. Thi s guidanc e wil l continu e t o b e use db y th e Agenc y a s th e referenc e poin t

i n it s oversigh t

o f al l PS D an dnonattainmen t NS R proceedings , a s wel l a s al l ne w permi t application s fo r

municipa l wast e combustors

. Th e Agenc y als o ha s announce dit s intentio n t o develo p ne w sourc e performanc e standard s limitin g emission s fro mnew , modified , o r reconstructe dmunicipa l wast e combustor s unde r

sectio n 11 1 o f

th e Clea n Ai r

Ac t (5 2 F R25389)

. Dependin g o n th e natur e o f

th e fina l standards , the y ma y supersed e o r

complemen t

thos e unde r Subpar t Db

. Th e Agenc y als o intend s t o develo p standard s limitin g emission s o f

on e o r mor e designate d pollutant s (pollutant s no t regulate d unde r section s 10 8 t o 11 0 o r

112 ) i n additio n t o developin g standard s limitin g emission s of

criteri apollutant s unde r sectio n 111

. Thi s wil l invok e sectio n 111(d ) an drequir e th e Agenc y t o issu e guidanc e fo r

contro l o f

emission s fromexistin g municipa l wast e combustor s which , i n turn , wil l requir e State s t o develo p specifi c emissio n standard s fo r

existin g municipa l wast e combustors

. D. Docket Th e docke t

i s a norganize dan d complet e fil e o f

al l th e informatio n considere di n th e developmen t o f thi s
. rulemaking

. Th e docke t i s adynami c file , sinc e materia l i s adde dthroughou t

th e rulemakin g process
. Th e docketin g syste mi s intende dt o allo w member s o f th e publi c an daffecte dindustrie s t o identif y an dlocat e document s readil y s o the y ca n participat e effectivel y i n th e rulemakin g process
. Th e statement s o f basi s an dpurpos e o f

th e propose dan d promulgate dstandards , th e response s t o significan t

comments , an dth e othe r content s of

th e docke t

(excep t fo r interagenc y revie w materials ) wil l serv e a s th e recor di ncas e o f judicia l revie w (sectio n307(d)(7)(A))

. E. Clean Air

Act Procedural Requirements Th e effectiv e dat e o f

thi s regulatio ni s Decembe r

16,1987

. Sectio n11 1 o f th s Clea n Ai r

Ac t provide s tha t

standard s o f performanc e o r

revision s thereo f becom e effectiv e o n promulgatio nan d appl y t o affecte dfacilitie s fo r whic h construction , modification , o r reconstructio n wa s commence dafte r th e dat e o f proposa l (5 1 F

R22384 , Jun e 19 , 1986)

. A s prescribe db y sectio n 111 , th e promulgatio no f

thes e standard s i s base do n th e Administrator' s determinatio n tha t

industrial

commercial-institutiona l stea m generatin g unit s contribut e significantl y t o ai r pollutio ntha t

ma y reasonabl y b e anticipate dt o endange r publi c healt ho r welfare

. I n accordanc e wit hsectio n11 7 o f th e Act , publicatio no f thes e promulgate dstandard s wa s precede db y consultatio nwit happropriat e advisor y committees , independen t experts , an d Federa l department s an dagencies

. Thi s regulatio nwil l b e reviewe dno t late r tha n 4 year s fromth e dat e o f promulgatio n a s require db y th e Clea n Ai r Act

. Thi s revie w wil l includ e a n assessmen t

o f suc hfactor s a s th e nee d fo r integratio nwit hothe r

programs , th e existenc e o f

alternativ e methods , enforceability , improvement s i n emissio n contro l technology , an d reportin g requirements

. Sectio n31 7 o f

th e Clea nAi r

Ac t require s th e Administrato r t o prepar e a n economi c impac t

assessmen t

fo r an y NSP S promulgate dunde r sectio n 111(b ) o f th e Act

. A n economi c impac t assessmen t

wa s prepare dfo r

thi s regulatio n an dfo r

othe r regulator y alternatives

. Al l aspect s o f th e assessmen t

wer e considere di nth e formulatio n o f

th e standard s t o ensur e tha t cos t wa s carefull y considere di n determinin g th e bes t

demonstrate d technology

. Portion s o f th e economi c impac t assessmen t

ar e include di n th e backgroun dinformatio ndocument s fo r th e propose dstandards , an dadditiona l informatio ni s include di n Docke t A-83

- 27

. F. Office of Management

andBudyt Reviews Th e informatio ncollectio n requirement s associate dwit hthi s regulatio n (thos e include di n 4 0 C7 R Par t 60 , Subpar t

A an dSubpar t

Db ) hav e bee n approve db y th e Offic e o f Managemen t

an dBudge t

(OMB ) unde r th e provision s o f

th e Paperwor k Reductio nAc t

o f 1980 , 4 4 U.S.C

. 330 1 at seq. an dhav e bee nassigne dOM B Contro l Numbe r

2030-0072

. Unde r Executiv e Orde r

12291 , th e Administrato r

i s require dt o judg e whethe r aregulatio n i s a"majo r rule " an dtherefor e subjec t

t o th e requirement s fo r

preparatio n of

a Regulator y Impac t

Analysi s (RiA)

. A t th e tim e o f

proposal , i t

wa s expecte d tha t thi s regulatio n coul dresul t i n industry-wid e annualize dcoot s i athti fift hyea r afte r th e standard. ! g o int o effec t o f mor e tha nth e $1C0 millio n cutof f estabhshe da s th s firs t criterio n fo r a"majo r

rule " i n tiie Order

. I n accordanc e wit hth e Order , n n RI A WH O prepare dfo r

thi s regulation

. Th e RI A review s th e benefits , costs , an d economi c impact s associate dwit hth e regulator y alternative s thu t wer e considered

. Thi s rul e wa acubmiUa dt n OM B fo r revie w unde r

Executiv e Orde r 12291

. G. Regulatorv Flexibility Act Compliance Th e Regulator y Flexibilit y Ac t c f lPl'. O require s th e identificatio n o f potentiall y advers e impact s o f

Federa l regutalionr

. upo n smal l busines s entities

. Th e Ac t specificall y require s th e completio n o f n Regulator y Flexibilit y Analysi s i nthos e instance s wher e smal l busines s impnet n ar e possible

. Becaus e thes e standard s impos e n o advers e economi c impact s o n smal l businesses , aRegulator y Flexibilit y Analysi s ha s no t bee n conducted

. Pursuan t t o th e provision s of

5 U.S.C , 605(b) , I hereb y certif

y tha t thi n regulatio n wil l no t

hav e asignificun t economi c impac t

o nasubstantia l numbe r o f smal l entities

. Lis t o f Subject s i n4 0 CF RPar t S O Ai r pollutio n control , Intergovernmenta l relations , Reportin g an drecordkeepin g requirements , Incorporatio nb y reference , Enduetrial

commercial-institutiona l stea m generatin g units

. Date : December

1,1987

. Le e M

. Thomas , Administrator. Fo r th e reason s se t

ou t i nth e preamble , Titl e 40 , Chapte r I o f th e Cod a4784 2 Federa l Registe r/ Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r 16 , 198 7 /

Rules'an dRegulation s P.1 9

of Federa l Regulations , i s amende da s se t forthbelow

. PAR T60—STANDARD S O F PERFORMANC E FO R NEW STATIONAR YSOURCE S 1

. Th e authorit y citatio nfor Par t 6 0 continue s t o rea da s follows : Authority : 4

2 U.S.C

. 7411 , 741 4 an d7601(a)

. 2

. Sectio n 60.1 7 i s amende db y revisin g paragraph s (a)(1) , (a)(3) , (a)(7) , (a)(8) , (a)(9) , (a)(10) , (a)(24) , (a){25) , (a)(26) , (a)(27) , (a)(28) , an d(a)(47) ; an d b y addin g paragraph s (a)(48) , (a)(49) , (a)(50) , (a)(51) , (a)(52) , an d(a)(53 ) t o rea da s follows : § 60.1 7 Incorporatio n byreference

. **** * (a ) * * *

. (1 ) AST M D388-77 , Standar d Specificatio n fo r

Classificatio n o f

Coal s b y Rank , incorporatio n b y referenc e (IBR) approve dJanuar y 27,1983 , fo r § § 60.41(f) ; 60.45(f)(4 ) (i) , (ii) , (vi) ; 60.41a ; 60.41b ; 60.25 1 (b) , (c)

. **** * (3 ) AST M D3176-74 , Standar dMetho d fo r Ultimat e Analysi s o f

Coa l an dCoke , IB Rapprove dJanuar y 27,1983 , fo r § 60.45(f)(5)(i) ; Appendi x A t o Par t 60 , Metho d19

. **** * (7 ) AST M D2015-77 , Standar dTes t Metho dfor

Gros s Calorifi c Valu e o f Soli dFue l b y th e Adiabati c Bom b Calorimeter , IB Rapprove dJanuar y 27 , 198 3 fo r § 60.45(f)(5)(h) ; § 60.46(g) ; Appendi x A t o Par t

60 , Metho d19

. (8 ) AST M D1826-77 , Standar dTes t Metho dfo r

Calorifi c Valu e o f

Gase s i n Natura l Ga s Rang e b y Continuou s Recordin g Calorimeter , IB Rapprove d Januar y 27,1983 , fo r

§ § 60.45(f)(5)(ii) ; 60.46(g) ; 60.296(f) ; Appendi x A t o Par t 60 , Metho d19

. (9 ) AST M D240-76 , Standar dTes t Metho dfo r

Hea t o f Combustio n o f Liqui dHydrocarbo n Fuel s b y Bom b Calorimeter , IB Rapprove dJanuar y 27 , 1983 , for § 60.46(g) ; 60.296(f) ; Appendi x A t o Par t 60 , Metho d19

. (10 ) AST M D396-78 , Standar d Specificatio n fo r

Fue l Oils , IB R approve dJanuar y 27,1983 , fo r § § 60.40b ; 60.4lb ; 60.111(b) ; 60.111a(b)

. ***-* * (24 ) AST M D2234-76 , Standar d Method s fo r

Collectio n o f

aGros s Sampl e of

Coal , IB Rapprove dJanuar y 27,1983 , fo r

Appendi x A t o Par t

60 , Metho d19

. (25 ) AST M D3173-73 , Standar dTes t Metho dfor

Moistur e i n th e Analysi s Sampl e o f

Coa l an dCoke , IB Rapprove d Januar y 27,1983 , fo r

Appendi x A t o Par t 60 , Metr o i 19

. * (26 ) AST M D3177-75 , Standar dTes t Method s for

Tota l Sulfu r

i nth e Analysi s Sampl e o f Coa l an dCoke , IB Rapprove d Januar y 27,1983 , fo r

Appendi x A t o Par t 60 , Metho d19

. (27 ) AST M D2013-72 , Standar d Metho dof

Preparin g Coa l Sample s fo r Analysis , IB Rapprove dJanuar y 27 , 1983 , fo r Appendi x A t o Par t

60 , Metho d 19

. (28 ) AST M D270-6 5 (Reapprove d 1975) , Standar dMetho do f Samplin g Petroleu man dPetroleu mProducts , IB R approve dJanuar y 27,1983 , fo r Appendi x A t o Par t 60 , Metho d19

. * * * * * (47 ) AST M D3431-80 , Standar dTes t Metho dfo r

Trac e Nitroge ni n Liqui d Petroleu mHydrocarbon s (Microcoulometri c Method) , IB R approve dNovembe r

25,1986 , fo r Appendi x A t o Par t

60 , Metho d19

. (48 ) AST M D129-6 4 (reapprove d1978) , Standar dTes t

Metho dfo r

Sulfu r i n Petroleu mProduct s (Genera l Bom b Method) , IB Rapprove dfo r Appendi x A t o Par t 60 , Metho d19

. (49 ) AST M D1552-83 , Standar dTes t Metho dfor

Sulfu r i nPetroleu mProduct s (Hig hTemperatur e Method) , IB R approve dfor

Appendi x A t o Par t

60 , Metho d19

. (50 ) AST M D1835-86 , Standar d Specificatio nfo r

Liquefie dPetroleu m (LP) Gases , t o b e approve dfor. § 60.41b

. (51 ) AST M D3286-85 , Standar dTes t Metho dfo r

Gros s Calorifi c Valu e o f Coa l an dCok e b y th e Isothermal-Jacke t Bom b Calorimeter , IB Rapprove dfo r Appendi x A t o Par t

60 , Metho d19

. (52 ) AST M D4057-81 , Standar d Practic e fo r

Manua l Samplin g o f Petroleu man dPetroleu mProducts , IB R approve dfo r

Appendi x A t o Par t

60 , Metho d19

. (53 ) AST M D4239-85 , Standar dTes t Method s fo r

Sulfu r i nth e Analysi s Sampl e of

Coa l an dCok e Usin g Hig h Temperatur e Tub e Furnac e Combustio n Methods , IB Rapprove dfor Appendi x A t o Par t 60 , Metho d19

. 3

. Subpar t

D b i s revise dt o rea da s follows : Subpar t Db—Standard s of Performanc e fo r Industrial-Commercial-lnstitutiona l Stea m Generatin g Unit s Sec

. 60.40 b Applicabilit

y an ddelegatio n o

f authority

. 60.41 b Definitions

. 60.42 b Standar dfo

r sulfu r dioxide

. 60.43 b Standar dfo

r particulat e matter

. 60.44 b Standar dfo

r nitrogenoxides

. 60.45b Complianc e an dperformanc e tes t method s an dprocedures'fo r sulfu r dioxide

. Sec

. 60.46 b Complianc e an dperformanc e tes t method s an dprocedure s fo r particulat e matte r an dnitroge n oxides

. 60.47 b Emissio n monitorin g fo r sulfu r • dioxide

. 60.48 b Emissionmonitorin g fo r particulat e matte r an dnitrogenoxides

. 60.49 b Reportin g an drecordkeepin g requirements

. Subpar t Db—Standard s o f Performanc e fo rIndustrial

Commercial-Institutiona l Stea m Generatin g Unit s § 60.40 b Applicabilityan d delegatio n o f authority

. (a ) Th e affecte dfacilit y t o whic hthi s subpar t applie s i s eac hstea mgeneratin g uni t tha t commence s construction , modification , o r

reconstructio nafte r Jun e 19,1984 , an dtha t

ha s ahea t

inpu t capacit y fromfuel s combuste di nth e stea mgeneratin g uni t

of greate r tha n 2 9 M W(10 0 millio nBtu/hour)

. (b ) An y affecte dfacilit y meetin g th e applicabilit y requirement s unde r paragrap h(a ) o f

thi s sectio n an d commencin g construction , modification , o r reconstructio nafte r

Jun e 19,1984 , bu t o no r befor e Jun e 19,1986 , i s subjec t t o th e followin g standards : (1 ) Coal-fire daffecte dfacilitie s havin g ahea t inpu t capacit y betwee n 2 9 an d7 3 M W(10 0 an d25 0 millio nBtu/hour) , inclusive , ar e subjec t

t o th e particulat e matte r an dnitroge n oxide s standard s unde r thi s subpart

. (2 ) Coal-fire daffecte dfacilitie s havin g ahea t inpu t capacit y greate r

tha n 7 3 M W(25 0 millio nBtu/hour ) an dmeetin g th e applicabilit y requirement s unde r Subpar t D (Standard s o f

performanc e fo r fossil-fuel-fire dstea mgenerators ; § 60.40 ) ar e subjec t

t o th e particulat e matte r an dnitroge n oxide s standard s unde r thi s subpar t

an dt o th e sulfu r dioxid e standard s unde r Subpar t D ( § 60.43)

. (3 ) Oil-fire daffecte dfacilitie s havin g ahea t inpu t capacit y betwee n 2 9 an d7 3 M W(10 0 an d25 0 millio nBtu/hour) , inclusive , ar e subjec t

t o th e nitroge n oxide s standard s unde r thi s subpart

. (4 ) Oil-fire daffecte dfacilitie s havin g ahea t inpu t capacit y greate r

tha n 7 3 M W(25 0 millio n Btu/hour ) an dmeetin g th e applicabilit y requirement s unde r Subpar t D (Standard s o f

performanc e fo r fossil-fuel-fire dstea mgenerators ; § 60.40 ) ar e als o subjec t t o th e nitroge n oxide s standard s unde r thi s subpar t

an d th e particulat e matte r

an dsulfu r

dioxid e standard s unde r

Subpar t D ( § 60.4 2 an d § 60.43)

. • (c ) Affecte dfacilitie s whic hals o mee t th e applicabilit y requirement s unde r Subpar t J (Standard s of

performanc e forP.2 0

Federa l Registe r/

Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r 16 , 198 7 /

Rule s an dRegulation s 4784 3
petroleu mrefineries ; § 60.104 ) ar e subjec t t o th e particulat e matte r an d nitroge n oxide s standard s unde r thi s subpar t an dth e sulfu r

dioxid e standard s unde r Subpar t J ( § 60.104)

. (d ) Affecte dfacilitie s whic hals o mee t th e applicabilit y requirement s unde r Subpar t E(Standard s o f

performanc e fo r incinerators ; § 60.50 ) ar e subjec t t o th e nitroge n oxide s an dparticulat e matte r standard s unde r

thi s subpart

. (e ) Stea mgeneratin g unit s meetin g th e applicabilit y requirement s unde r Subpar t D a(Standard s o f

performanc e for electri c utilit y stea mgeneratin g units ; § 60.40a ) ar e no t

subjec t t o thi s subpart

. (f ) An y chang e t o a nexistin g stea m generatin g uni t

for th e sol e purpos e of combustin g gase s containin g TR S a s define dunde r

§ 60.28 1 i s no t

considere d amodificatio n unde r

§ 60.1 4 an dth e stea mgeneratin g uni t

i s no t subjec t t o thi s subpart

. (g ) I n delegatin g implementatio nan d enforcemen t

authorit y t o aStat e unde r sectio n 111(c ) o f

th e Act , th e followin g authoritie s shal l b e retaine db y th e Administrato r

an dno t transferre dt o a State

. (1 ) Sectio n 60.44b(f)

. (2 ) Sectio n 60.44b(g)

. (3 ) Sectio n 60.49b(a)(4)

. § 60.41 b Definitions

. A s use din thi s subpart , al l term s no t define dherei n shal l hav e th e meanin g give n the mi n th e Ac t

an di nSubpar t

A o f thi s part

. "Annua l capacit y factor " mean s th e rati o betwee n th e actua l hea t inpu t t o a stea mgeneratin g uni t

fro mth e fuel s liste di n § 60.42b(a) , § 60.43b(a) , o r § 60.44b(a) , a s applicable , durin g a calenda r yea r an dth e potentia l hea t inpu t t o th e stea mgeneratin g uni t ha di t bee n operate dfo r

8,76 0 hour s durin g a calenda r yea r a t th e maximu mstead y stat e desig n hea t

inpu t capacity

. I n th e cas e of stea mgeneratin g unit s tha t ar e rente do r leased , th e actua l hea t inpu t shal l b e determine dbase do n th e combine dhea t

inpu t fro mal l operation s o f th e affecte dfacilit y i n acalenda r year
. "Byproduct/waste " mean s an y liqui d o r gaseou s substanc e produce da t chemica l manufacturin g plant s o r petroleu mrefinerie s (excep t natura l gas , distillat e oil , o r

residua l oil ] an d combuste di n astea mgeneratin g uni t fo r hea t recover y o r

for disposal

. Gaseou s substance s wit hcarbo n dioxid e level s greate r tha n 5 0 percen t

o r carbo n monoxid e level s greate r tha n 1 0 percen t ar e no t byproduct/wast e for

th e purpose s o f

thi s subpart

. "Chemica l manufacturing , plants " mean s industria l plant s whic har e classifie db y th e Departmen t of Commerc e unde r

Standar dIndustria l Classificatio n(SIC ) Cod e 28

. "Coal " mean s al l soli dfuel s classifie d a s anthracite , bituminous , subbituminous , o r

lignit e b y th e America nSociet y o f

Testin g an d Material s i n AST M D388-77 , Standar d Specificatio nfo r

Classificatio nof

Coal s b y Ran k (IBR—se e § 60.17) , coa l refuse , an dpetroleu mcoke

. Coal-derive d syntheti c fuels , includin g bu t no t limite d t o solven t

refine dcoal , gasifie dcoal , coal-oi l mixtures , an dcoal-wate r mixtures , ar e als o include di nthi s definitio nfo r

th e purpose s o f

thi s subpart

. "Coa l refuse " mean s an y byproduc t o f coa l minin g o r

coa l cleanin g operation s wit ha n as hconten t

greate r tha n 5 0 percent , b y weight , an daheatin g valu e les s tha n13,90 0 kj/k g (6,00 0 Btu/lb ) o na dr y basis

. "Combine dcycl e system " mean s a syste mi nwhic haseparat e source , suc h a s aga s turbine , interna l combustio n engine , kiln , etc. , provide s exhaus t ga s t o ahea t recover y stea mgeneratin g unit

. "Conventiona l technology " mean s we t flu e ga s desulfurizatio n (FGD ) technology , dr y FG D technology , atmospheri c fluidize dbe dcombustio n technology , an doi l hydrodesulfurizatio n technology

. "Distillat e oil " mean s fue l oil s tha t contai n0.0 5 weigh t

percen t nitroge no r les s an dcompl y wit hth e specification s fo r fue l oi l number s 1 an d2 , a s define d b y th e America nSociet y of Testin g an d Material s i n AST M D396-78 , Standar d Specification s fo r

Fue l Oil s (incorporate db y reference—se e § 60.17)

. "Dr y flu e ga s desulfurizatio n technology " mean s asulfu r dioxid e contro l syste mtha t

i s locate d downstrea mo f

th e stea mgeneratin g uni t an dremove s sulfu r

oxide s fro mth e combustio n gase s o f

th e stea m generatin g uni t

b y contactin g th e combustio n gase s wit ha nalkalin e slurr y o r solutio n an dformin g adr y powde r material

. Thi s definitio n include s device s wher e th e dr y powde r materia l i s subsequentl y converte dt o anothe r form

. Alkalin e slurrie s o r solution s use di ndr y flu e ga s desulfurizatio n technolog y includ e bu t ar e no t limite dt o lim e an dsodium

. "Duc t burner " mean s adevic e tha t combust s fue l an dtha t

i s place di nth e exhaus t duc t fro manothe r

source , suc h a s astationar y ga s turbine , interna l combustio nengine , kiln , etc. , t o allo w th e firin g of

additiona l fue l t o hea t

th e exhaus t gase s befor e th e exhaus t gase s ente r ahea t recover y stea mgeneratin g unit

. "Emergin g technology " mean s an y sulfu r dioxid e contro l syste mtha t i s no t define da s aconventiona l technolog y

unde r thi s section , an dfor

whic hth e owne r o r operato r of th e facilit y ha s applie dt o th e Administrato r an d receive dapprova l t o operat e a s a n emergin g technolog y unde r § 60.49b(a)(4)

. "Federall y enforceable " mean s al l limitation s an dcondition s tha t ar e enforceabl e b y th e Administrator , includin g th e requirement s o f 4 0 CF R Part s 6 0 an d61 , requirement s withi nan y applicabl e Stat e Implementatio n Plan , an dan y permi t

requirement s establishe dunde r

4 0 CF R52.2 1 o r

unde r 4 0 CFR51.1 8 an d4 0 CF R51.24

. "Fluidize dbe dcombustio n technology " mean s combustio nof fue l in abe do r serie s of bed s (includin g bu t

no t limite dt o bubblin g be dunit s an d circulatin g be dunits ) of limeston e aggregat e (o r

othe r sorben t materiuls ) in whic hthes e material s ar e force d upwar db y th e flo w o f

combustio nai r an dth e gaseou s product s o f combustion

. "Fue l pretreatment " mean s aproces s tha t remove s aportio n o f

th e sulfu r

i n a fue l befor e combustio nof th e fue l i nu stea mgeneratin g unit

. "Ful l capacity " mean s operatio n o f th e stea mgeneratin g uni t a t 9 0 percen t o r mor e o f th e maximu msteady-stut e desig n hea t

inpu t capacity

. "Hea t input " mean s hea t

derive dfrom combustio no f

fue l i nastea mgeneratin g uni t an ddoe s no t

includ e th e hea t

inpu t frompreheate dcombustio nair , recirculate dflu e gases , o r exhaus t gase s fro mothe r

sources , suc ha s ga s turbines , interna l combustio n engines , kilns , etc

. "Hea t releas e rate " mean s th e stea m generatin g uni t

desig n hea t

inpu t capacit y (i n M Wo r

Btu/hour ) divide d b y th e furnac e volum e (i n cubi c meter s o r cubi c feet) ; th e furnac e volum e i s tha t volum e bounde db y th e fron t furnac e wal l wher e th e burne r

i s located , th e furnac e sid e waterwall , an dextendin g t o th e leve l jus t

belo w o r

i n fron t of th e firs t ro w of convectio npas s tubes

. "Hea t transfe r medium " mean s an y materia l tha t

i s use dt o transfe r

heu t fromon e poin t

t o anothe r

point

. "Hig hhea t

releas e rate " mean s ahea t releas e rat e greate r

tha n730,00 0 J/sec

m 3 (70,00 0 Btu/hour-ft 3 )

. "Lignite " mean s atyp e o f coa l classifie da s lignit e A o r lignit e B b y th e America nSociet y of

Testin g an d Material s i n AST M D388-77 , Standar d Specificatio n fo r

Classificatio n of

Coal s b y Ran k (IBR—se e § 60.17)

. "Lo w hea t

releas e rate " mean s aheu t releas e rat e of

730,00 0 J/sec-m 3 (70,00 0 Btu/hour-ft 3 ) o r

less

. "Mass-fee dstoke r

stea mgeneratin g unit " mean s astea mgeneratin g uni t wher e soli dfue l i s introduce ddirectl yP.2 1

4784 4 Federa l Registe r/ Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r 16 , 198 7 /

Rule s an dRegulation s

int o aretor t

o r i s fe ddirectl y ont o a grat e wher e i t

i s combusted

. "Maximu mhea t

inpu t capacity " mean s th e abilit y o f

astea mgeneratin g uni t t o combus t

astate dmaximu m amoun t of fue l o n astead y stat e basis , a s determine db y th e physica l desig n an dcharacteristic s of

th e stea m generatin g unit

. "Municipal-typ e soli dwaste " mean s refuse , mor e tha n 5 0 percen t o f whic hi s wast e consistin g of

amixtur e o f

paper , wood , yar dwastes , foo dwastes , plastics , leather , rubber , an dothe r combustibl e materials , an d noncombustibl e material s suc ha s glas s an drock

. "Natura l gas " mean s (1 ) anaturall y occurrin g mixtur e of

hydrocarbo n an d nonhydrocarbo n gase s foun di n geologi c formation s beneat hth e earth' s surface , o f whic hth e principa l constituen t i s methane ; o r

(2 ) liqui dpetroleu mgas , a s define db y th e America n Societ y fo r Testin g an dMaterial s i n AST M D1835

- 82 , "Standar dSpecificatio n fo r Liqui d Petroleu mGases " (IBR—se e § 60.17)

. "Noncontinenta l area " mean s th e Stat e of Hawaii , th e Virgi n Islands , Guam , America n Samoa , th e Commonwealt hof

Puert o Rico , o r

th e Norther n Marian aIslands

. "Oil " mean s crud e oi l o r petroleu mo r aliqui dfue l derive dfro mcrud e oi l o r petroleum , includin g distillat e an d residua l oil

. "Petroleu mrefinery " mean s industria l plant s a s classifie db y th e Departmen t of Commerc e unde r

Standar dIndustria l Classificatio n (SIC ) Cod e 29

. ' "Potentia l sulfu r

dioxid e emissio n rate " mean s th e theoretica l sulfu r dioxid e emission s (ng/J , lb/millio n Bt u hea t input ) tha t

woul dresul t

fro m combustin g fue l i n a n uncleane dstat e an dwithou t

usin g emissio n contro l systems

. "Proces s heater " mean s adevic e tha t i s primaril y use dt o hea t amateria l t o initiat e o r

promot e achemica l reactio n i n whic hth e materia l participate s a s a reactan t o r catalyst

. "Pulverize dcoal-fire dstea m generatin g unit " mean s astea m generatin g uni t

i n whic hpulverize dcoa l i s introduce dint o a n ai r strea mtha t carrie s th e coa l t o th e combustio n chambe r o f th e stea mgeneratin g uni t wher e i t i s fire di n suspension

. Thi s include s bot hconventiona l pulverize d coal-fire dan dmicropulverize dcoal

fire dstea mgeneratin g units

. "Residua l oil " mean s crud e oil , fue l oi l number s 1 an d2 tha t

hav e anitroge n conten t greate r tha n 0.0 5 weigh t

percent , an dal l fue l oi l number s 4 , 5 an d6 , a s define db y th e America n Societ y o f Testin g an dMaterial s i n AST M D396

- 78 , Standar dSpecification s fo r Fue l Oil s (IBR—se e § 60.17)

. "Spreade r

stoke r stea mgeneratin g unit " mean s astea mgeneratin g uni t i n whic hsoli dfue l i s introduce dt o th e combustio n zon e b y amechanis mtha t throw s th e fue l ont o agrat e fro mabove

. Combustio ntake s plac e bot hi n suspensio n an do n th e grate

. "Stea mgeneratin g unit " mean s a devic e tha t

combust s an y fue l o r byproduct/wast e t o produc e stea mo r t o hea t wate r o r an y othe r

hea t transfe r medium

. Thi s ter minclude s an y municipal-typ e soli dwast e incinerato r wit hahea t

recover y stea mgeneratin g uni t o r an y stea mgeneratin g uni t tha t combust s fue l an di s par t of a cogeneratio n syste mo r acombine d cycl e system

. Thi s ter mdoe s no t includ e proces s heater s a s the y ar e define di n thi s subpart

. "Stea mgeneratin g uni t

operatin g day " mean s a24-hou r

perio dbetwee n12:0 0 midnigh t an dth e followin g midnigh t durin g whic han y fue l i s combuste da t an y tim e i nth e stea mgeneratin g unit

. I t i s no t necessar y fo r

fue l t o b e combuste dcontinuousl y fo r th e entir e 24-hou r period

. "Ver y lo w sulfu r

oil " mean s a distillat e oi l o r

residua l oi l tha t

whe n combuste dwithou t

pos t combustio n S0 2 contro l ha s a n SO 2 emissio n rat e equa l t o o r les s tha n13 0 ng/ J (0.3 0 l b SO2 / millio n Btu)

. "We t flu e ga s desulfurizatio n technology " mean s asulfu r dioxid e contro l syste mtha t

i s locate d downstrea mo f

th e stea mgeneratin g uni t an dremove s sulfu r

oxide s fromth e combustio n gase s of

th e stea m generatin g uni t

b y contactin g th e combustio n ga s wit ha n alkalin e slurr y o r solutio nan dformin g aliqui d material

. Thi s definitio napplie s t o device s wher e th e aqueou s liqui d materia l produc t

o f thi s contac t

i s subsequentl y converte dt o othe r forms

. Alkalin e reagent s use di nwe t flu e ga s desulfurizatio n technolog y include , bu t ar e no t limite dto , lime , limestone , an d sodium

. "We t scrubbe r

system " mean s an y emissio n contro l devic e tha t mixe s a n aqueou s strea mo r

slurr y wit hth e exhaus t gase s fro mastea mgeneratin g uni t t o contro l emission s of particulat e matte r o r sulfu r dioxide

. "Wood " mean s wood , woo dresidue , bark , o r an y derivativ e fue l o r

residu e thereof , i nan y form , including , bu t no t limite dto , sawdust , sanderdust , woo d chips , scraps , slabs , millings , shavings , an dprocesse dpellet s mad e fro mwoo d o r othe r fores t residues

. § 60.42 b Standar d fo r sulfu r dioxide

. (a ) Excep t

a s provide di nparagraph s (b) , (c) , o r

(d ) o f thi s section , o n an d afte r th e dat e o n whic hth e performanc e tes t i s complete do r

require dt o b e complete dunde r

§ 60. 8 of thi s part , whicheve r

dat e come s first , n o owne r o r operato r of a naffecte dfacilit y tha t combust s coa l o r

oi l shal l caus e t o b e discharge dint o th e atmospher e an y gase s tha t

contai n sulfu r

dioxid e i n exces s o f 1 0 percen t

(0.10 ) o f th e potentia l sulfu r

dioxid e emissio nrat e (9 0 percen t

reduction ) an dtha t

contai n sulfu r dioxid e i nexces s o f

th e emissio n limi t determine daccordin g t o th e followin g formula : E,=(K a H a +K b H 1) )/(H a +H b ) where : E s i s th e sulfu

r dioxid e emissio nlimit , in ng/ J or lb/millio nBt

u heat input , K „ i s 52 0 ng/ J (o r 1.2 lb/millio n Btu) , K „ i s 34 0 ng/ J (o r 0.80 lb/millio nBtu) , H , i s th e heat

inpu t fro mth e combustio n o

f coal , inJ (millionBtu) , H b i s th e hea t

inpu t fro mth e combustio n o

f oil , in J (million Btu)

. Onl y th e hea t

inpu t supplie dt o th e affecte dfacilit y fro mth e combustio n of coa l an doi l i s counte dunde r thi s
" section

. N o credi t

i s provide dfo r

th e hea t inpu t t o th e affecte dfacilit y fro m th e combustio n o f

natura l gas , wood , municipal-typ e soli dwaste , o r othe r fuel s o r hea t inpu t t o th e affecte dfacilit y fro mexhaus t

gase s fro manothe r

source , suc ha s ga s turbines , interna l

. combustio nengines , kilns , etc

. (b ) O n an dafte r

th e dat e o nwhic hth e performanc e tes t

i s complete do r require dt o b e complete dunde r § 60. 8 of thi s part , whicheve r

come s first , n o owne r o r operato r o f a n affecte dfacilit y tha t combust s coa l refus e alon e i na fluidize dbe dcombustio n stea m generatin g uni t

shal l caus e t o b e discharge dint o th e atmospher e an y gase s tha t

contai n sulfu r

dioxid e i n exces s o f 2 0 percen t

o f th e potentia l sulfu r dioxid e emissio n rat e (8 0 percen t reduction ) an dtha t

contai nsulfu r dioxid e i nexces s o f

52 0 ng/ J (1. 2 lb / millio nBtu ) hea t

input

. If coa l o r oi l i s fire dwit hcoa l refuse , th e affecte d facilit y i s subjec t

t o paragrap h(a ) o r

(d ) o f thi s section , a s applicable

. (c ) O nan dafte r

th e dat e o nwhic hth e performanc e tes t

i s complete do r

i s require dt o b e complete dunde r § 60. 8 of thi s part , whicheve r

come s first, n o owne r o r operato r of a naffecte dfacilit y tha t combust s coa l o r

oil , eithe r

alon e o r i ncombinatio nwit han y othe r fuel , an d tha t use s a n emergin g technolog y fo r th e contro l of

sulfu r dioxid e emissions , shal l caus e t o b e discharge dint o th e atmospher e an y gase s tha t contai n sulfu r dioxid e i n exces s of

5 0 percen t

ofP-2 2

.



### Federa l Registe r

/ Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r

16 , 1987 /

Rule s an dRegulation s

th e potentia l sulfu r

dioxid e emissio n rat e (5 0 percen t

reduction ) an dtha t contai n sulfu r

dioxid e i nexces s o f

th e emissio n limi t

determine daccordin g t o th e followin g formula : E s=(K < *H c-fK d H < *)/H c + H d) where : E , i s th e sulfu

r dioxid e emissio n limit , expresse di

n ng/ J (lb/millio nBtu

) heat input , I Q i s 26 0 ng/ ) (0.60 lb/millio nBtu) , Kii s 17 0 ng/ J (0.4 0 lb/millio nBtu) , H

. i s th e hea t

inpu t fro mthe combustio n o

f coal , J (million Btu) , H ai s the heat

input fro mthe combustio no

f oil , J (million Btu)

. Onl y th e hea t

inpu t supplie dt o th e affecte dfacilit y fro mth e combustio no f coa l an doi l i s counte dunde r thi s section

. N o credi t

i s provide dfo r

th e hea t inpu t t o th e affecte dfacilit y fro m th e combustio n o f

natura l gas , wood , municipal-typ e soli dwaste , o r othe r fuels , o r fromth e hea t

inpu t t o th e affecte dfacilit y fro mexhaus t gase s fro m anothe r source , suc ha s ga s turbines , interna l combustio n engines , kilns , etc

. (d ) O n an dafte r

th e dat e o n whic hth e performanc e tes t

i s complete do r require dt o b e complete dunde r § 60. 8 o f thi s part , whicheve r

come s first , n o owne r o r operato r of a n affecte dfacilit y liste di n paragraph s (d ) (1) , (2) , (3) , o r (4 ) o f thi s sectio n shal l caus e t o b e discharge dint o th e atmospher e an y gase s tha t

contai n sulfu r

dioxid e i n exces s o f 52 0 ng/ J (1. 2 lb/millio n Btu ) hea t inpu t i f th e affecte dfacilit y combust s coal , o r

13 0 ng/ J (0.3 0 lb / millio n Btu ) hea t

inpu t if th e affecte d facilit y combust s oil

. Percen t reductio n requirement s ar e no t

applicabl e t o affecte dfacilitie s unde r thi s paragraph : (1 ) Affecte dfacilitie s tha t hav e a n annua l capacit y facto r

fo r coa l an doi l of 3 0 percen t

(0.30 ) o r les s an dar e subjec t t o aFederall y enforceabl e permi t limitin g th e operatio no f th e affecte d facilit y t o a n annua l capacit y facto r fo r coa l an doi l t o 3 0 percen t (0.30 ) o r less ; (2 ) Affecte dfacilitie s locate di n a noncontinenta l area ; (3 ) Affecte dfacilitie s combustin g coa l o r oil , alon e o r

i n combinatio n wit han y othe r fuel , i n aduc t

burne r a s par t o f a combine dcycl e syste mwher e 3 0 percen t (0.30 ) o r les s o f th e hea t inpu t t o th e stea mgeneratin g uni t i s fro m combustio n o f

coa l an doi l i n th e duc t burne r an d7 0 percen t

(0.70 ) o r mor e o f th e hea t inpu t t o th e stea mgeneratin g uni t i s fro mth e exhaus t

gase s enterin g th e duc t burner ; o r (4 ) Affecte dfacilitie s combustin g ver y lo w sulfu r

oil

. (e ) Excep t

a s provide di nparagrap h(f ) of thi s section , complianc e wit hth e emissio n limit(s ) an dpercen t reductio n requirement s unde r

thi s sectio n ar e determine do n a30-da y rollin g averag e basis

. (f ) Complianc e wit hth e emissio n limit s unde r

thi s sectio nar e determine d o n a24-hou r

averag e basi s fo r

affecte d facilitie s whic h(1 ) hav e aFederall y enforceabl e permi t

limitin g th e annua l capacit y facto r

fo r oi l t o 1 0 percen t

o r less , (2 ) combus t

onl y oi l whic hemit s les s tha n13 0 ng/ J (0. 3 l b S0 2 /millio n Btu) , an d(3 ) d o no t

combus t an y othe r fuel

. (g ) Excep t

a s provide di nparagrap h(i ) o f thi s section , th e sulfu r

dioxid e emissio nlimit s an dpercen t reductio n requirement s unde r

thi s sectio n appl y a t al l times , includin g period s o f startup , shutdown , an dmalfunction

. (h ) Reduction s i nth e potentia l sulfu r dioxid e emissio n rat e throug hfue l pretreatmen t

ar e no t credite dtowar d th e percen t

reductio nrequiremen t unde r paragrap h(c ) o f

thi s sectio nunless : (1 ) Fue l pretreatmen t

result s i n a5 0 percen t o r greate r reductio n i npotentia l sulfu r dioxid e emission s an d (2 ) Emission s fro mth e pretreate dfue l (withou t combustio n o r

pos t combustio n sulfu r dioxid e control ) ar e equa l t o o r les s tha nth e emissio n limit s specifie di n paragrap h(c ) o f

thi s section

. (i ) A naffecte dfacilit y subjec t t o paragrap h(a) , (b) , o r

(c ) o f thi s sectio n ma y combus t

ver y lo w sulfu r

oi l o r natura l ga s whe nth e sulfu r dioxid e contro l syste mi s no t

bein g operate d becaus e o f

malfunctio no r

maintenanc e o f th e sulfu r

dioxid e contro l system

. § 60.43 b Standar d fo rparticulat e matter

. (a ) O nan dafte r

th e dat e o nwhic hth e initia l performanc e tes t i s complete do r i s require dt o b e complete dunde r § 60. 8 o f thi s part , whicheve r

come s first , n o owne r o r operato r o f a n affecte dfacilit y whic hcombust s coa l o r combust s mixture s o f

coa l wit hothe r

fuels , shal l caus e t o b e discharge dint o th e atmospher e fromtha t

affecte dfacilit y an y gase s tha t

contai n particulat e matte r i n exces s o f

th e followin g emissio n limits : (1 ) 2 2 ng/ J (0.0 5 lb/millio nBtu ) hea t input , (i ) If th e affecte dfacilit y combust s onl y coal , o r (ii ) I f th e affecte dfacilit y combust s coa l an dothe r

fuel s an dha s a nannua l capacit y facto r

fo r th e othe r

fuel s o f 1 0 percen t (0.10 ) o r less

. (2 ) 4 3 ng/ J (0.1 0 lb/millio n Btu ) hea t inpu t if th e affecte dfacilit y combust s coa l an dothe r

fuel s an dha s a nannua l capacit y facto r

fo r th e othe r

fuel s greate r tha n1 0 percen t

(0.10 ) an di s subjec t t o aFederall y enforceabl e requiremen t

limitin g operatio no f

th e affecte dfacilit y t o a nannua l capacit y facto r greate r tha n1 0 percen t

(0.10 ) fo r fuel s othe r

tha n coal

. (3 ) 8 6 ng/ J (0.2 0 lb/millio n Btu ) heu t inpu t i f th e affecte dfacilit y combust s coa l o r coa l an dothe r

fuel s an d (i ) Ha s a n annua l capacit y facto r fo r coa l o r coa l an dothe r

fuel s of 3 0 percen t (0.30 ) o r less , (ii ) Ha s amaximu mhea t inpu t capacit y o f

7 3 M W(25 0 millio n Btu / hour ) o r less , (iii ) Ha s aFederall y enforceabl e requiremen t

limitin g operatio n o

f th e affecte dfacilit y t o a n annua l cupacit y facto r o f 3 0 percen t

(0.30 ) o r les s for coa l o r coa l an dothe r

soli dfuels , an d (iv ) Constructio n o f

th e affecte d facilit y commence dafte r Jun e 19,1984 , an dbefor e Novembe r

25,1986

. (b ) O nan dafte r

th e dat e o n whic hth e performanc e tes t

i s complete do r require dt o b e complete dunde r § 60. 8 o f thi s part , whicheve r

dat e come s first , n o owne r o r operato r o f a naffecte dfacilit y tha t combust s oi l o r

tha t combusl s mixture s o f

oi l wit hothe r

fuel s shal l caus e t o b e discharge dint o th e atmospher e fro mtha t

affecte dfacilit y an y gase s tha t

contai nparticulat e matte r i n exces s o f

4 3 ng/ J (0.1 0 lb / millio n Btu ) hea t

input

. (c ) O nan dafte r

th e dat e o n whic hth e initia l performanc e tes t i s complete do r i s require dt o b e complete dunde r § 60. 8 o f thi s part , whicheve r

dat e come s first , n o owne r

o r operato r o f a n affecte d facilit y tha t

combust s wood , o r

woo d wit hothe r

fuels , excep t

coal , shul l caus o t o b e discharge dfro mtha t affecte d facilit y an y gase s tha t

contai n particulat e matte r

inexces s of

th e followin g emissio n limits : (1 ) 4 3 ng/ J (0.1 0 lb/millio n Btu ] heu t inpu t if th e affecte dfacilit y ha s n n annua l capacit y facto r

greate r tha n 3 0 percen t (0.30 ) for

wood

. (2 ) 8 6 ng/ J (0.2 0 lb/millio nBtu ) hea t inpu t if (i ) Th e affecte dfacilit y ha s a n annua l capacit y facto r

o f 3 0 percen t

(0.30 ) o r les s fo r wood , (ii ) I s subjec t

t o aFederall y enforceabl e requiremen t limitin g operatio n ofth e affecte dfacilit y t o u n annua l capacit y facto r

o f 3 0 percen t (0.30 ) o r les s fo r wood , an d (iii ) Ha s amaximu mhea t inpu t capacit y o f

7 3 M W(25 0 millio n Btu / hour ) o r less

. (d ) O n an dafte r

th e dat e o n whic hth e initia l performanc e tes t i s complete do r i s require dt o b e complete dunde r § 60. 8 o f thi s part , whicheve r

dat e come s first , n o owne r

o r operato r o f a n affecte d facilit y tha t

combust s municipal-typ e soli dwast e o r

mixture s o f

municipal

typ e soli dwast e wit hothe r fuels , shal l caus e t o b e discharge dint o th eP.2 3

4784 6 Federa l Registe r / Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r 16 , 198 7 /

Rule s an dRegulation s atmospher e fromtha t

affecte dfacilit y an y gase s tha t

contai n particulat e matte r i n exces s of

th e followin g emissio n limits : (1 ) 4 3 ng/ J (0.1 0 lb/millio n Btu ) hea t input , (i ) I f th e affecte dfacilit y combust s onl y municipal-typ e soli dwaste , o r (ii ) If th e affecte dfacilit y combust s municipal-typ e soli dwast e an dothe r fuel s an dha s a n annua l capacit y facto r fo r th e othe r

fuel s of 1 0 percen t

(0.10 ) o r less

. (2 ) 8 6 ng/ J (0.2 0 lb/millio n Btu ) hea t inpu t if th e affecte dfacilit y combust s municipal-typ e soli dwast e o r municipal

typ e soli dwast e an dothe r fuels ; an d (i ) Ha s a n annua l capacit y facto r fo r municipal-typ e soli dwast e an dothe r fuel s of 3 0 percen t

(0.30 ) o r less , (ii ) Ha s amaximu mhea t inpu t capacit y o f

7 3 M W(25 0 millio n Btu / hour ) o r less , (iii ) Ha s aFederall y enforceabl e requiremen t

limitin g operatio n ofth e affecte dfacilit y t o a n annua l capacit y facto r o f 3 0 percen t

(0.30 ) fo r

municipal

typ e soli dwaste , o r

municipal-typ e soli d wast e an dothe r

fuels , an d (iv ) Constructio n o f

th e affecte d facilit y commence dafte r Jun e 19,1984 , bu t befor e Novembe r

25,1986

. (e ) Fo r th e purpose s of

thi s section , th e annua l capacit y facto r i s determine d b y dividin g th e actua l hea t inpu t t o th e stea mgeneratin g uni t

durin g th e calenda r yea r fro mth e combustio n o f coal , wood , o r

municipal-typ e soli d waste , an dothe r

fuels , a s applicable , b y th e potentia l hea t

inpu t t o th e stea m generatin g uni t

i f th e stea mgeneratin g uni t ha dbee n operate dfo r

8,76 0 hour s a t th e maximu mdesig n hea t inpu t capacity

. (f ) O n an dafte r

th e dat e o n whic hth e initia l performanc e tes t i s complete do r i s require dt o b e complete dunde r § 60. 8 of thi s part , whicheve r

dat e come s first , n o owne r

o r operato r o f a n affecte d facilit y subjec t

t o th e particulat e matte r emissio n limit s unde r

paragrap h(a) , (b ) o r (c ) o f thi s sectio n shal l caus e t o b e discharge dint o th e atmospher e an y gase s tha t

exhibi t greate r tha n 2 0 percen t opacit y (6-minut e average) , excep t fo r on e 6-minut e perio dpe r hou r o f no t mor e tha n 2 7 percen t

opacity

. (g ) Th e particulat e matte r an dopacit y standard s appl y a t

al l times , excep t durin g period s o f

startup , shutdow n o r malfunction

. § 60.44 b Standar dfor

nitroge n oxides

. (a ) O n an dafte r

th e dat e o n whic hth e initia l performanc e tes t i s complete do r i s require dt o b e complete dunde r § 60. 8 of thi s part , whicheve r

dat e come s first , n o owne r

o r operato r of a n affecte d facilit y tha t

i s subjec t

t o th e provision s of thi s sectio nan dtha t

combust s onl y coal , oil , o r

natura l ga s shal l caus e t o b e discharge dint o th e atmospher e from tha t affecte dfacilit y an y gase s tha t contai n nitroge noxide s (expresse da s N0 2 ) i n exces s of

th e followin g emissio n limits :

Fuef/Stea m generatin g uni t typ e

(1 ) Natura l ga s an d distillat e oil , excep t (4) :
(2 ) Residua l oil :
(3 ) Coal : (ii ) Spreade rstoke ran d fluidize d be d

(v) Lignit e mine d i n Nort h Dakota , Sout h Dakota , o rMontan a an d combuste d i n
(4 ) Duc t burne ruse d i n a combine d cycl e system : Nitroge n oxid e emissio n limit s ng/ J (lb / millio n Btu ) (expresse d a s NO, ) hea t inpu t

4 3 (0.10 ) 8 6 (0.20 )
13 0 (0.30 ) 17 0 (0.40 )
21 0 (0.50 )
26 0 (0.60 ) 30 0 (0.70 ) 26 0 (0.60 )

34 0 (0.80 ) 21 0 (0.50 )

8 6 (0.20 ) 17 0 (0.40 ) (b ) O n an dafte r

th e dat e o n whic hth e initia l performanc e tes t i s complete do r i s require dt o b e complete dunde r § 60. 8 of thi s part , whicheve r

dat e come s first , n o owne r

o r operato r o f a n affecte d facilit y tha t

simultaneousl y combust s mixture s of

coal , oil , o r

natura l ga s shal l caus e t o b e discharge dint o th e atmospher e fro mtha t

affecte dfacilit y an y gase s tha t

contai n nitroge n oxide s i n exces s o f

alimi t determine db y us e of th e followin g formula : E„=[(EL„ 0 hU-HEL TM Hro ) + (EL c H c )] / (H g0 -fHro -(-H c ) where : E ni s the nitroge n oxide s emissio n limit (expresse da s NO2) , ng/

J (lb/millio nBtu) EL, „ i s th e appropriat e emissio nlimit fro m paragrap h(a)(1 ) fo

r combustio no

f ' natura l ga s or

distillat e oil , ng/ ) (lb / million Btu

) H t0i s th e heat

input fro mcombustio no

f natura l ga s or

distillat e oil , EL r o i s th e appropriat e emissio nlimit fro m paragrap h(a)(2) fo

r combustio n o

f residual oil , H r o i s th e heat

input fro mcombustio n o

f residual oil , EL C i s the appropriat e emissio n limit fro m paragrap h(a)(3 ) fo

r combustio n o

f coal , an d Hc i s th e heat

input fro mcombustio no

f coal ; (c ) O n an dafte r

th e dat e o nwhic hth e initia l performanc e tes t i s complete do r i s require dt o b e complete dunde r § 60. 8 of thi s part , whicheve r

come s first , n o owne r o r operato r o f a naffecte dfacilit y tha t simultaneousl y combust s coa l o r oil , o r amixtur e of

thes e fuel s wit h natura l gas , an dwood , municipal-typ e soli dwaste , o r

an y othe r

fue l shal l caus e t o b e discharge dint o th e

atmospher e an y gase s tha t contai n nitroge noxide s i n exces s of th e emissio nlimi t

fo r th e coa l o r

oil , o r mixtur e of

thes e fuel s wit hnatura l ga s combuste di n th e affecte dfacility , a s determine dpursuan t

t o paragrap h(a ) o r (b ) of thi s section , unles s th e affecte d facilit y ha s a nannua l capacit y facto r for cOa l o r oil , o r mixtur e o f

thes e fuel s wit h natura l ga s of

1 0 percen t

(0.10 ) o r les s an di s subjec t

t o aFederall y enforceabl e requiremen t

tha t limit s operatio n of

th e facilit y t o a nannua l capacit y facto r of 1 0 percen t

(0.10 ) o r les s fo r coal , oil , o r

a mixtur e of

thes e fuel s wit hnatura l gas
. (d ) O n an dafte r

th e dat e o nwhic hth e initia l performanc e tes t i s complete do r i s require dt o b e complete dunde r § 60. 8 of thi s part , whicheve r

dat e come s first , n o owne r

o r operato r o f a n affecte d facilit y tha t

simultaneousl y combust s natura l ga s wit hwood , municipal-typ e soli dwaste , o r

othe r soli dfuel , excep t coal , shal l caus e t o b e discharge dint o th e atmospher e fro mtha t affecte d facilit y an y gase s tha t

contai n nitroge n oxide s i n exces s o f

13 0 ng/ J (0.3 0 lb / millio n Btu ) hea t

inpu t unles s th e affecte dfacilit y ha s a n annua l capacit y facto r fo r natura l ga s of

1 0 percen t

(0.10 ) o r les s an di s subjec t

t o aFederall y enforceabl e requiremen t tha t limit s operatio nof

th e affecte dfacilit y t o a n annua l capacit y facto r

o f 1 0 percen t (0.10 ) o r les s fo r natura l gas
. (e ) O nan dafte r

th e dat e o nwhic hth e initia l performanc e tes t i s complete do r i s require dt o b e complete dunde r § 60. 8 of thi s part , whicheve r

dat e come s first , n o owne r

o r operato r o f a n affecte d facilit y tha t

simultaneousl y combust s coal , oil , o r

natura l ga s wit hbyproduct / wast e shal l caus e t o b e discharge dint o th e atmospher e fro mtha t affecte d facilit y an y gase s tha t

contai n nitroge n oxide s i n exces s of

a n emissio n limi t determine db y th e followin g formul a unles s th e affecte dfacilit y ha s a n annua l capacit y facto r

fo r coal , oil , an d natura l ga s o f

1 0 percen t

(0.10 ) o r les s an di s subjec t

t o aFederall y enforceabl e requiremen t

whic hlimit s operatio n o f th e affecte dfacilit y t o a n annua l capacit y facto r

o f 1 0 percen t

(0.10 ) o r less : E n= ((EL

B 0 H B0 ) + (EL „ HJ + (EL C H c )| / (Hg 0 +H r o + H

c) where : E ni s th e nitroge n oxide s emissio n limit (expresse da s NO2) , ng/

J (lb/millio nBtu) ELso i s the appropriat e emissio n limit fro m paragrap h(a)(1 ) fo

r combustio n o

f natura l ga s or

distillat e oil , ng/

J (lb / million Btu)

. H g o i s th e heat

input fro mcombustio no

f natural'gas , distillat e oil an dgaseou s byproduct/waste , ng/

J (lb/millio n Btu)

.P.24

_



### Federa l Register

/ Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , December

16 , 1987 /

Rule s an dRegulation s

ELr 0 i s th e appropriat e emissio n limit fro m paragrap h(a)(2) fo

r combustio no

f residua l oil , ng/

J (lb/millio nBtu) H r o i s th e heat

input fro mcombustio n o

f residual oil and/o r

liqui dbyproduct

/ waste

. EL C i s th e appropriat e emissio n limit fro m paragrap h(a)(3 ) fo

r combustio n o

f coal , an d H c i s th e heat

input fro mcombustio no

f coal

. (f ) An y owne r

o r operato r o f a n affecte dfacilit y tha t

combust s byproduct/wast e wit heithe r natura l ga s o r oi l ma y petitio n th e Administrato r withi n 18 0 day s o f

th e initia l startu p o f th e affecte dfacilit y t o establis ha nitroge n oxide s emissio n limi t whic h shal l appl y specificall y t o tha t affecte d facilit y whe n th e byproduct/wast e i s combusted

. Th e petitio n shal l includ e sufficien t an dappropriat e data , a s determine db y th e Administrator , suc h a s nitroge n oxide s emission s fro mth e affecte dfacility , wast e compositio n (includin g nitroge n content) , an d combustio n condition s t o allo w th e Administrato r

t o confir mtha t

th e affecte dfacilit y i s unabl e t o compl y wit hth e emissio n limit s i n paragrap h(e ) o f thi s sectio n an dt o determin e th e appropriat e emissio n limi t fo r th e affecte dfacility

. (1 ) An y owne r

o r operato r o f a n affecte dfacilit y petitionin g fo r afacility

specifi c nitroge n oxide s emissio n limi t unde r thi s sectio n shall : (i ) Demonstrat e complianc e wit hth e emissio n limit s for

natura l ga s an d distillat e oi l i n paragrap h(a)(1 ) o f thi s sectio n o r

fo r residua l oi l i n paragrap h (a)(2 ) o f thi s section , a s appropriate , b y conductin g a30-da y performanc e tes t a s provide di n § 60.46b(e)

. Durin g th e performanc e tes t

onl y natura l gas , distillat e oil , o r

residua l oi l shal l b e combuste di n th e affecte dfacility ; an d (ii ) Demonstrat e tha t

th e affecte d facilit y i s unabl e t o compl y wit hth e emissio n limit s fo r

natura l ga s an d distillat e oi l i n paragrap h(a)(1 ) of thi s sectio n o r

fo r residua l oi l i n paragrap h (a)(2 ) o f thi s section , a s appropriate , whe n gaseou s o r

liqui dbyproduct / wast e i s combuste di nth e affecte d facilit y unde r

th e sam e condition s an d usin g th e sam e technologica l syste mo f emissio n reductio n applie dwhe n demonstratin g complianc e unde r paragrap h(f)(l)(i ) of

thi s section

. (2 ) Th e nitroge n oxide s emissio n limit s fo r natura l ga s o r

distillat e oi l i n paragrap h(a)(1 ) o f

thi s sectio n o r

fo r residua l oi l i n paragrap h(a)(2 ) of thi s section , a s appropriate , shal l b e applicabl e t o th e affecte dfacilit y unti l an dunles s th e petitio n i s approve db y th e Administrator

. If

th e petitio n i s approve db y th e Administrator , a facility-specifi c nitroge noxide s emissio nlimi t wil l b e establishe da t

th e nitroge noxide s emissio n leve l achievabl e whe n th e affecte dfacilit y i s combustin g oi l o r

natura l ga s an d byproduct/wast e i namanne r tha t th e Administrato r

determine s t o b e consisten t

wit hminimizin g nitroge n oxide s emissions

. (g ) An y owne r

o r operato r o f a n affecte dfacilit y tha t

combust s hazardou s wast e (a s define db y 4 0 CFR Par t 26 1 o r 4 0 CFRPar t

761 ) wit hnatura l ga s o r oi l ma y petitio nth e Administrato r withi n 18 0 day s o f

th e initia l startu p o f th e affecte dfacilit y fo r

awaive r

from complianc e wit hth e nitroge noxide s emissio n limi t

whic happlie s specificall y t o tha t affecte dfacility

. Th e petitio n mus t includ e sufficien t

an dappropriat e data , a s determine db y th e Administrator , o nnitroge noxide s emission s fro mth e affecte dfacility , wast e destructio nefficiencies , wast e compositio n (includin g nitroge n content) , th e quantit y o f specifi c waste s t o b e combuste dan dcombustio n condition s t o allo w th e Administrato r t o determin e if

th e affecte dfacilit y i s abl e t o compl y wit hth e nitroge n oxide s emissio nlimit s require db y thi s section

. Th e owne r

o r operato r o f th e affecte d facilit y shal l demonstrat e tha t whe n hazardou s wast e i s combuste di nth e affecte dfacility , therma l destructio n efficienc y requirement s fo r hazardous

wast e specifie di n a napplicabl e Federall y enforceabl e requiremen t preclud e complianc e wit hth e nitroge n oxide s emissio n limit s o f thi s section

. Th e nitroge n oxide s emissio nlimit s fo r natura l ga s o r

distillat e oi l i n paragrap h (a)(1 ) o f thi s sectio no r

fo r residua l oi l i n paragrap h(a)(2 ) o f

thi s section , a s appropriate , ar e applicabl e t o th e affecte dfacilit y unti l an dunles s th e petitio n i s approve db y th e Administrator

. (Se e 4 0 CF R761.7 0 fo r regulation s applicabl e t o th e incineratio n o f

material s containin g polychlorinate dbiphenyl s (PCB's). ) (h ) Th e nitroge n oxid e standards ; unde r thi s sectio nappl y a t

al l time s includin g period s of

startup , shutdow n o r malfunction

. § 60.45 b Complianc e an dperformanc e tes t method s an dprocedure s fo r sulfur dioxide

. (a ) Th e sulfu r

dioxid e emissio n standard s unde r

§ 60.42 b appl y a t

al l times

. (b ) I n conductin g th e performanc e test s require dunde r

§ 60.8 , th e owne r

o r operato r shal l us e th e method s an d procedure s i n Appendi x A o f thi s par t o r th e metho dan dprocedure s a s specifie d i n thi s section , excep t

a s provide di n § 60.8(b)

. Sectio n 60.8(f

) doe s no t

appl y t o thi s subpart

. Th e 30-da y notic e require di n § 60.8(d ) applie s onl y t o th e initia l performanc e tes t unles s otherwis e specifie db y th e Administrator

. (c ) Th e owne r

o r operato r o f a n affecte dfacilit y shal l conduc t performanc e test s t o determin e complianc e wit hth e percen t o f potentia l sulfu r dioxid e emissio nrat e ( % P D ) an d th e sulfu r

dioxid e emissio nrat e (F y pursuan t t o § 60.42 b followin g th e procedure s liste dbelow , excep t a s provide dunde r

paragrap h(d ) o f

thi s section

. (1 ) Th e initia l performanc e tes t shal l b e conducte dove r

th e firs t 3 0 consecutiv e operatin g day s o f th e stea m generatin g unit

. Complianc e wit hth e sulfu r dioxid e standard s shal l b e determine dusin g a30-da y average
. Th e firs t operatin g da y include di n th e initia l performanc e tes t

shal l b e schedule d withi n3 0 day s afte r

achievin g th e maximu mproductio n rat e a t whic hth e affecte dfacilit y wil l b e operated , bu t no t late r tha n 18 0 day s afte r

initia l startu p o f

th e facility

. (2 ) I f onl y coa l o r

onl y oi l i s combusted , th e followin g procedure s ar e used : (i ) Th e procedure s i n Metho d1 9 ar e use dt o determin e th e hourl y sulfu r dioxid e emissio nrat e (E ho ) an dth e 30

- da y averag e emissio nrat e (E 00 )

. Th e hourl y average s use dt o comput e th e 30

- da y average s ar e obtaine dfromth e continuou s emissio nmonitorin g syste m o f § 60.47 b (a ) o r

(b)

. (ii ) Th e percen t

o f potentia l sulfu r dioxid e emissio n rat e [% P J emitte dt o th e atmospher e i s compute dusin g th e followin g formula : %P 8 =10 0 (1-? S R„/l00)(l- % R,/100 ) where : %R „ i s th e sulfu

r dioxid e remova

l efficiency o f th e contro l devic e a s determino db y Metho d19 , i

n percent

. % R f i s th e sulfu

r dioxid e removal efficiency o f fue l pretreatmen t

a s determine dby Metho d19 , inpercent

. (3 ) I f coa l o r oi l i s combuste dwit h othe r fuels , th e sam e procedure s require di n paragrap h(c)(2 ) o f thi s sectio n ar e used , excep t a s provide di n th e following : (i ) A nadjuste dhourl y sulfu r dioxid e emissio nrat e (E h0 ° ) i s use di n Equatio n 19-1 9 o f Metho d1 9 t o comput e a n adjuste d30-da y averag e emissio nrat e (E ao °)

. Th e E h 0 i s compute dusin g th e followin g formula : EK„°=[E*, 0 -E w (l-X k)l/X* , where : E h() 0 i s th e adjuste dhourly sulfu r dioxid e emissio nrate , ng/

J (lb/millio n Btu)

. Eh o i s th e hourly sulfu

r dioxid e emissio n rate , ng/ J (lb/millio n Btu)

.4784 8 Federa l Registe r/ Vol . 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r 16 , 198 7 /

Rule s an dRegulation s

E„ i s the sulfu

r dioxid e concentratio n i

n fuel s other than coal an doi l combuste di n th e affectedfacility , a s determine db y th e fue l samplin g an danalysi s procedure s i n Metho d19 , ng/

J (lb/millio n Btu)

. Th e valu e E

w fo r eac hfue l lo t i s use dfo r eac h hourly averag e durin g th e time that th e lo t i s bein g combusted

. X k i s the fractio n o

f total heat input fro mfue l combustio n derive dfro

mcoal , oil , or

coal an doil , a s determine db y applicabl e procedure s in Metho d19

. (ii ) T o comput e th e percen t of potentia l sulfu r

dioxid e emissio n rat e ( % P s ) , a n adjuste d% Rg (

% Rg ° ) i s compute d fro mth e adjuste dE ao ° fro mparagrap h (b)(3)(i ) o f

thi s sectio n an da n adjuste d averag e sulfu r

dioxid e inle t

rat e (E al ° ) usin g th e followin g formula : %R,°=100(1.0-E ao °/E ai ° ) T o comput e E ai ° , a n adjuste dhourl y sulfu r dioxid e inle t

rat e (E hi ° ) i s used

. Th e E hi ° i s compute dusin g th e followin g formula : E hl °=[E 111 -E w (l-X k )]/X t where : E hi ° i s th e adjuste dhourly sulfu r dioxid e inlet rate , ng/ J (lb/millio n Btu)

. Ehi i s th e hourly sulfu

r dioxid e inle t

rate , ng/ J (lb/millio n Btu)

. (4 ) Th e owne r

o r operato r o f a n affecte dfacilit y subjec t t o paragrap h (b)(3 ) of thi s sectio n doe s no t

hav e t o measur e parameter s E w o r X k if th e owne r o r operato r elect s t o assum e tha t X k =1.0

. Owner s o r

operator s of

affecte d facilitie s wh o assum e X k =1. 0 shal l (i ) Determin e % P s followin g th e procedure s i n paragrap h(c)(2 ) of thi s section , an d (ii ) Sulfu r dioxid e emission s (E s ) ar e considere dt o b e i n complianc e wit h sulfu r dioxid e emissio n limit s unde r § 60.42b

. (5 ) Th e owne r

o r operato r o f a n affecte dfacilit y tha t

qualifie s unde r

th e provision s of

§ 60.42b(d ) doe s no t

hav e t o measur e parameter s E^, o r X k unde r paragrap h(b)(3 ) of

thi s sectio n i

f th e owne r o r operato r of th e affecte dfacilit y elect s t o measur e sulfu r dioxid e emissio n rate s o f

th e coa l o r

oi l followin g th e fue l samplin g an danalysi s procedure s unde r

Metho d19

. (d ) Th e owne r

o r operato r of a n affecte dfacilit y tha t

combust s onl y oi l emittin g les s tha n 13 0 ng/ J (0. 3 lb / millio n Btu ) SO2 , ha s a n annua l capacit y facto r fo r oi l o f 1 0 percen t

(0.10 ) o r less , an di s subjec t

t o aFederall y enforceabl e requiremen t

limitin g operatio n o f

th e affecte dfacilit y t o a n annua l capacit y fo r oi l o f 1 0 percen t

(0.10 ) o r les s shall : (1 ) Conduc t

th e initia l performanc e tes t ove r 2 4 consecutiv e stea m generatin g uni t

operatin g hour s a t

full load ; (2) Determin e complianc e wit hth e standard s afte r

th e initia l performanc e tes t base do nth e arithmeti c averag e of th e hourl y emission s dat adurin g eac h stea mgeneratin g uni t

operatin g da y i

f a continuou s emissio nmeasuremen t syste m(CEMS ) i s used , o r base do na dail y averag e i

f Metho d6

B o r fue l samplin g an danalysi s procedure s unde r Metho d1 9 ar e used

. (e ) Th e owne r

o r operato r o f a n affecte dfacilit y subjec t t o § 60.42b(d)(l ) shal l demonstrat e th e maximu mdesig n capacit y of

th e stea mgeneratin g uni t b y operatin g th e facilit y a t maximu m capacit y fo r

24 hours

. Thi s demonstratio n wil l b e mad e durin g th e initia l performanc e tes t an da subsequen t

demonstratio n ma y b e requeste da t

an y othe r

time

. I f th e 24

- hou r averag e firin g rat e fo r

th e affecte d facilit y i s les s tha n th e maximu mdesig n capacit y provide db y th e manufacture r o f th e affecte dfacility , th e 24-hou r averag e firin g rat e shal l b e use dt o determin e th e capacit y utilizatio nrat e fo r th e affecte dfacility , otherwis e th e maximu mdesig n capacit y provide db y th e manufacture r

i s used

. (f ) Fo r th e initia l performanc e tes t require dunde r

§ 60.8 , complianc e wit h th e sulfu r dioxid e emissio nlimit s an d percen t reductio n requirement s unde r § 60.42 b i s base do n th e averag e emissio n rate s an dth e averag e percen t reductio n fo r

sulfu r dioxid e fo r

th e firs t 3 0 consecutiv e stea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g days , excep t

a s provide d unde r paragrap h(d ) o f

thi s section

. Th e initia l performanc e tes t i s th e onl y tes t fo r whic ha t

leas t 3 0 day s prio r

notic e i s require dunles s otherwis e specifie db y th e Administrator

. Th e initia l performanc e tes t

i s t o b e schedule ds o tha t th e firs t stea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g da y of

th e 3 0 successiv e stea m generatin g uni t

operatin g day s i s complete dwithi n 3 0 day s afte r achievin g th e maximu mproductio nrat e a t whic hth e affecte dfacilit y wil l b e operated , bu t

no t late r tha n18 0 day s afte r initia l startu p o f

th e facility

. Th e boile r loa ddurin g th e 30-da y perio d doe s no t hav e t o b e th e maximu mdesig n load , bu t mus t b e representativ e o f futur e operatin g condition s an dinclud e a t leas t on e 24-hou r

perio da t

full load

. (g ) Afte r th e initia l performanc e tes t require dunde r

§ 60.8 , complianc e wit h th e sulfu r dioxid e emissio n limit s an d percen t reductio n requirement s unde r § 60.42 b i s base do nth e averag e emissio nrate s an dth e averag e percen t reductio n fo r

sulfu r dioxid e fo r

3 0 successiv e stea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g days , excep t

a s provide d unde r paragrap h(d)

. A separat e performanc e tes t

i s complete da t

th e en d o f eac hstea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g da y afte r th e initia l performanc e test , an dane w 30-da y averag e emissio n rat e an dpercen t

reductio nfo r

sulfu r dioxid e ar e calculate dt o sho w complianc e wit h th e standard

. (h ) Excep t

a s provide dunde r paragrap h(i ) o f

thi s section , th e owne r o r operato r of a naffecte dfacilit y shal l us e al l vali dsulfu r

dioxid e emission s dat ai ncalculatin g % P s an dE h o unde r paragrap h(c) , of

thi s sectio nwhethe r

o r no t th e minimu memission s dat a requirement s unde r

§ 60.46 b ar e achieved

. Al l vali demission s data , includin g vali dsulfu r

dioxide s emissio n dat acollecte ddurin g period s of startup , shutdow n an dmalfunction , shal l b e use di ncalculatin g % P 5 an dE h 0 pursuan t t o paragrap h(c ) of

thi s section

. (i ) Durin g period s of

malfunctio n o r maintenanc e o f

th e sulfu r

dioxid e contro l system s whe n oi l i s combuste d a s provide dunde r

§ 60.42b(i) , emissio n dat aar e no t

use dt o calculat e % P s o r E s unde r § 60.42 b (a) , (b ) o r

(c) , however , th e emission s dat aar e use dt o determin e complianc e wit hth e emissio n limi t unde r § 60.42b(i)

. § 60.46 b Complianc e an d performanc e tes t method s an d procedure s fo r particulat e matte r an d nitroge n oxides

. (a ) Th e particulat e matte r emissio n standard s an dopacit y limit s unde r § 60.43 b appl y a t

al l time s excep t

durin g period s o f

startup , shutdown , o r malfunction

. Th e nitroge noxide s emissio n standard s unde r § 60.44 b appl y a t al l times

. (b ) Complianc e wit hth e particulat e matte r emissio n standard s unde r § 60.43 b shal l b e determine dthroug h performanc e testin g a s describe di n paragrap h(d ) o f

thi s section

. (c ) Complianc e wit hth e nitroge n oxide s emissio nstandard s unde r § 60.44 b shal l b e determine dthroug h performanc e testin g a s describe di n paragrap h(e ) o r

(f ) o f thi s section

. (d ) Th e followin g procedure s an d referenc e method s ar e use dt o determin e complianc e wit hth e standard s for particulat e matte r

emission s unde r § 60.43b

. (1 ) Metho d3 i s use dfo r ga s analysi s whe n applyin g Metho d5 o r Metho d17

. (2 ) Metho d5 , Metho d5B , o r Metho d 1 7 shal l b e use dt o measur e th e concentratio nof

particulat e matte r

a s follows : (i ) Metho d5 shal l b e use da t affecte d facilitie s withou t

we t flu e ga s desulfurizatio n(FGD ) systems ; an d (ii ) Metho d1 7 ma y b e use da t facilitie s wit ho r

withou t we t scrubbe r system s provide dth e stac k ga s temperatur e doe s no t

excee da temperatur e of

16 0 ° C (32 0 °F)

. Th eP.2 6

Federa l Registe r

/ Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r 16 , 198 7 /

Rule s an dRegulation s procedure s o f

section s 2. 1 an d2. 3 of Metho d5 B ma y b e use di n Metho d1 7 onl y if i t i s use dafte r

awe t FG D system

. D o no t us e Metho d1 7 afte r

we t FG D system s if

th e effluen t

i s saturate do r lade n wit hwate r

droplets

. (iii ) Metho d5 B i s t o b e use donl y afte r we t FG D systems

. (3 ) Metho d1 i s use dt o selec t th e samplin g sit e an dth e numbe r o f travers e samplin g points

. Th e samplin g tim e fo r eac hru n i s a t

leas t 12 0 minute s an dth e minimu msamplin g volum e i s 1. 7 dsc m(6 0 dscf

) excep t tha t smalle r samplin g time s o r

volume s ma y b e approve db y th e Administrato r whe n necessitate db y proces s variable s o r othe r factors

. (4 ) Fo r Metho d5 , th e temperatur e o f th e sampl e ga s i n th e prob e an dfilte r holde r i s monitore dan di s maintaine da t 16 0 ° C (32 0 °F)

. (5 ) Fo r determinatio n of

particulat e matte r emissions , th e oxyge n o r carbo n dioxid e sampl e i s obtaine d simultaneousl y wit heac hru n o f Metho d 5 , Metho d5 B o r

Metho d1 7 b y traversin g th e duc t a t th e sam e samplin g location

. (6 ) Fo r eac hru n usin g Metho d5 , Metho d5 B o r

Metho d17 , th e emissio n rat e expresse di n nanogram s pe r joul e hea t inpu t i s determine dusing : (i ) Th e oxyge n o r

carbo n dioxid e measurement s an dparticulat e matte r measurement s obtaine dunde r thi s section , (ii ) Th e dr y basi s Ffactor , an d (iii ) Th e dr y basi s emissio n rat e calculatio n procedur e containe di n Metho d1 9 (Appendi x A)

. (7 ) Metho d9 i s use dfo r determinin g th e opacit y o f

stac k emissions

. (e ) T o determin e complianc e wit hth e emissio n limit s fo r

nitroge n oxide s require dunde r

§ 60.44b , th e owne r

o r operato r o f a n affecte dfacilit y shal l conduc t th e performanc e tes t

a s require dunde r

§ 60. 8 usin g th e continuou s syste mfo r

monitorin g nitroge n oxide s unde r

§ 60.48(b)

. (1 ) Fo r th e initia l complianc e test , nitroge n oxide s fro mth e stea m generatin g uni t

ar e monitore dfo r

3 0 successiv e stea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g day s an dth e 30-da y averag e emissio n rat e i s use dt o determin e complianc e wit hth e nitroge n oxide s emissio n standard s unde r § 60.44b

. Th e 30-da y averag e emissio n rat e i s calculate da s th e averag e of al l hourl y emission s dat arecorde db y th e monitorin g syste mdurin g th e 30-da y tes t period

. (2 ) Followin g th e dat e o n whic hth e initia l performanc e tes t i s complete do r i s require dt o b e complete dunde r § 60. 8 o f thi s part , whicheve r

dat e come s first , th e owne r

o r operato r o f a naffecte d facilit y whic hcombust s coa l o r whic h combust s residua l oi l havin g anitroge n

conten t greate r tha n0.3 0 weigh t

percen t shal l determin e complianc e wit hth e nitroge n oxide s emissio nstandard s unde r § 60.44 b o n acontinuou s basi s throug hth e us e o f

a30-da y rollin g averag e emissio nrate

. A ne w 30-da y rollin g averag e emissio n rat e i s calculate deac hstea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g da y a s th e averag e of al l o f tiie hourl y nitroge n oxide s emissio ndat a fo r th e precedin g 3 0 stea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g days

. (3 ) Followin g th e dat e o nwhic hth e initia l performanc e tes t i s complete do r i s require dt o b e complete dunde r § 60. 8 o f thi s part , whicheve r

dat e come s first , th e owne r

o r operato r o f a n affecte d facilit y whic hha s ahea t inpu t capacit y greate r tha n 7 3 M W(25 0 millio nBtu / hour ) an dwhic hcombust s natura l gas , distillat e oil , o r

residua l oi l havin g a nitroge n conten t

of 0.3 0 weigh t

percen t o r les s shal l determin e complianc e wit h th e nitroge noxide s standard s unde r § 60.44 b o n acontinuou s basi s throug h th e us e o f

a30-da y rollin g averag e emissio nrate

. A ne w 30-da y rollin g averag e emissio n rat e i s calculate deac h stea mgeneratin g uni t

operatin g da y a s th e averag e o f

al l of th e hourl y nitroge n oxide s emissio n dat afo r th e precedin g 3 0 stea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g days

. (4 ) Followin g th e dat e o nwhic hth e initia l performanc e tes t i s complete do r require dt o b e complete dunde r § 60. 8 o f thi s part , whicheve r

dat e come s first , th e owne r o r operato r o f a naffecte dfacilit y whic hha s ahea t

inpu t capacit y o f

7 3 M W(25 0 millio nBtu/hour ) o r les s an d whic hcombust s natura l gas , distillat e oil , o r residua l oi l havin g anitroge n conten t o f 0.3 0 weigh t

percen t o r les s shal l upo nreques t

determin e complianc e wit hth e nitroge n oxide s standard s unde r

§ 60.44 b throug hth e us e o f a30-da y performanc e test

. Durin g period s whe n performanc e test s ar e no t requested , nitroge n oxide s emission s dat acollecte dpursuan t t o § 60.48b(g)(l ) o r § 60.48b(g)(2 ) ar e use dt o calculat e a 30-da y rollin g averag e emissio nrat e o n adail y basi s an duse dt o prepar e exces s emissio nreports , bu t

wil l no t b e use dt o determin e complianc e wit hth e nitroge n oxide s emissio nstandards

. A ne w 30

- da y rollin g averag e emissio n rat e i s calculate deac hstea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g da y a s th e averag e o f al l of th e hourl y nitroge noxide s emissio n dat a fo r th e precedin g 3 0 stea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g days

. (5 ) I f th e owne r

o r operato r of a n affecte dfacilit y whic hcombust s residua l oi l doe s no t

sampl e an d analyz e th e residua l oi l fo r nitroge n content , a s specifie di n § 60.49b(e) , th e requirement s of

paragrap h(iii ) of

thi s sectio n appl y an dth e provision s of paragrap h(iv ) of thi s sectio n ar e inapplicable

. (f ) T o determin e complianc e wit hIh e emissio n limi t

fo r nitroge noxide s require db y § 60.44b(a)(4 ) fo r duc t burner s use di n combine dcycl e systems , th e owne r

o r operato r o f a naffecte d facilit y shal l conduc t

th e performanc e tes t require dunde r

§ 60. 8 usin g th e nitroge noxide s an doxyge n measuremen t

procedure s i n 4 0 CFRPar t 6 0 Appendi x A , Metho d20

. Durin g th e performanc e test , on e samplin g sit e shal l b e locate da s clos e a s practicabl e t o th e exhaus t o f th e turbine , a s provide db y sectio n 6.1. 1 o f

Metho d20

. A secon d samplin g sit e shal l b e locate da t th e outle t t o th e stea mgeneratin g unit

. Measurement s o f

nitroge n oxide s an d oxyge n shal l b e take n a t bot hsamplin g site s durin g th e performanc e test , Th e nitroge noxide s emissio n rat e fro mth e combine dcycl e syste mshal l b e calculate db y subtractin g th e nitroge n oxide s emissio n rat e measure da t th e samplin g sit e a t

th e outle t

fro mth e turbin e fro mth e nitroge noxide s emissio n rat e measure da t th e samplin g sit e a t th e outie t

fro mth e stea m generatin g unit

. § 60.47 b Emissio n monitorin g fo rsulfu r dioxide

. (a ) Excep t

a s provide di nparagrap h (b ) o f thi s section , th e owne r o r operato r o f a n affecte dfacilit y subjec t t o th e sulfu r dioxid e standard s unde r § 60.42 b shal l install , calibrate , maintain , an d operat e continuou s emissio n monitorin g system s (CEMS ) fo r

measurin g sulfu r dioxid e concentration s an deithe r oxyge n(O2 ) o r

carbo ndioxid e (CO2 ) concentration s an dshal l recor dth e outpu t of th e systems

. Th e sulfu r dioxid e an deithe r

oxyge no r

carbo n dioxid e concentration s shal l bot hb e monitore d a t th e inle t an doutle t

o f th e sulfu r dioxid e contro l device

. (b ) A s a n alternativ e t o operatin g CEM S a s require dunde r paragrap h(a ) o f thi s section , a n owne r

o r operato r ma y elec t

t o determin e th e averag e sulfu r dioxid e emission s an dpercen t reductio nby : (1 ) Collectin g coa l o r

oi l sample s i n a n as-fire dconditio na t

th e inle t t o th e stea mgeneratin g uni t

an danalyzin g the mfo r sulfu r an dhea t

conten t accordin g t o Metho d19

. Metho d1 9 provide s procedure s fo r convertin g thes e measurement s int o th e forma t t o b e use d i ncalculatin g th e averag e sulfu r dioxid e inpu t rate , o r (2 ) Measurin g sulfu r

dioxid e accordin g t o Metho d6B a t

th e inle t o r outle t t o th e sulfu r dioxid e contro l system

. A n initia l stratificatio ntes t

i s require dt o verif

y th e adequac y o f

th e Metho d6B samplin g4785 0 Federa l Registe r/ Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , .Decembe r 16 , 198 7 /

Rule s an dRegulation s
location

. Th e stratificatio n tes t shal l consis t o f thre e paire drun s o f

asuitabl e sulfu r dioxid e an dcarbo ndioxid e measuremen t

trai n operate da t

th e candidat e locatio n an dasecon dsimila r trai n operate daccordin g t o th e procedure s i n Sectio n 3. 2 an dth e applicabl e procedure s i n Sectio n 7 o f Performanc e Specificatio n 2

. Metho d6B , Metho d6A , o r

acombinatio n o f Method s 6 an d3 o r

Method s 6 C an d3 A ar e suitabl e measuremen t techniques

. I

f Metho d6B i s use dfo r

th e secon dtrain , samplin g tim e an dtime r operatio nma y b e adjuste dfo r

th e stratificatio ntes t

a s lon g a s a n adequat e sampl e volum e i s collected ; however , bot hsamplin g train s ar e t o b e operate dsimilarly

. Fo r th e locatio n t o b e adequat e fo r Metho d6 B 24-hou r tests , th e mea n o f

th e absolut e differenc e betwee n th e thre e paire drun s mus t b e les s tha n 1 0 percent

. (3 ) A dail y sulfu r

dioxid e emissio n rate , E D , shal l b e determine dusin g th e procedur e describe di n Metho d6A , Sectio n 7.6. 2 (Equatio n 6A-8 ) an dstate d i n ng/ J (lb/millio n Btu ) hea t input

. (4 ) Th e mea n 30-da y emissio n rat e i s calculate dusin g th e dail y measure d value s i n ng/ J (lb/millio n Btu ) fo r 3 0 successiv e stea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g day s usin g equatio n 19-2 0 of Metho d19

. (c ) Th e owne r

o r operato r of a n affecte dfacilit y shal l obtai n emissio n dat afor a t leas t 7 5 percen t

o f th e operatin g hour s i n a t

leas t 2 2 ou t o f 3 0 successiv e boile r

operatin g days

. I

f thi s minimu mdat arequiremen t i s no t me t wit hasingl e monitorin g system , th e owne r o r operato r o f th e affecte dfacilit y shal l supplemen t

th e emissio ndat awit h dat acollecte dwit hothe r monitorin g system s a s approve db y th e Administrato r

o r th e referenc e method s an dprocedure s a s describe di n paragrap h(b ) o f

thi s section

. (d ) Th e 1-hou r

averag e sulfu r

dioxid e emissio n rate s measure db y th e CEM S require db y paragrap h(a ) o f thi s sectio n an drequire dunde r

§ 60.13(h ) i s expresse di n ng/ J o r

lb/millio n Btu hea t inpu t an di s use dt o calculat e th e averag e emissio n rate s unde r § 60.42b

. Eac h1-hou r

averag e sulfu r

dioxid e emissio n rat e mus t

b e base do n mor e tha n 3 0 minute s of

stea mgeneratin g uni t operatio n an dinclud e a t leas t 2 dat a point s wit heac hrepresentin g a15

- minut e period

. Hourl y sulfu r dioxid e emissio n rate s ar e no t

calculate di

f th e affecte dfacilit y i s operate dles s tha n 3 0 minute s i n a1-hou r

perio dan dar e no t counte dtowar ddeterminatio n of a stea mgeneratin g uni t

operatin g day

. (e ) Th e procedure s unde r § 60.1 3 shal l b e followe dfo r

installation , evaluation , an doperatio n of

th e CEMS

. . (1 ) Al l CEM S shal l b e operate di nwaste , th e spa n valu e for acontinuou s accordanc e wit hth e applicabl e monitorin g syste mfo r measurin g opacil v procedure s unde r

Performanc e shal l b e betwee n6 0 an d8 0 percent

. Specification s 1 , 2 , an d3 (Appendi x B)

. r 2 j Fo r affecte dfacilitie s combustin g (2 ) Quarterl y accurac y determination s coal j 0 jl , o r natur a l gas , th e spa nvalu e an ddail y calibratio ndrif t test s shal l b e fo r ni t r 0 ge n oxide s i s determine da s performe di n accordanc e wit hProcedur e follows ' 1 (Appendi x F)

. (3 ) Fo r affecte dfacilitie s combustin g coa l o r oil , alon e o r

i ncombinatio n wit h othe r fuels , th e spa nvalu e o f th e sulfu r dioxid e CEM S a t

th e inle t t o th e sulfu r dioxid e contro l devic e i s 12 5 percen t of th e maximu mestimate dhourl y potentia l sulfu r dioxid e emission s of

th e fue l combusted , an dth e spa n valu e o f th e CEM S a t th e outle t

t o th e sulfu r

dioxid e where : contro l devic e i s 5 0 percen t o f th e • ,*

_r . • r
. . i u
. *

. J• •

. . . t"-' 1

- 1 - " 1 " "" •
_xi s th e fractio n o f total heat input derive d maximu mestimate dhourl y potentia l fro mnatura | ga s sulfu r dioxid e emission s o f

th e fue l y i s th e fractjo n o f to ; a l hea l inpu t

derive d combusted

. f ro moi i , an d z i s th e fractio n o

f tota l heat inpu t derive d fro mcoal

. Oi l Fue l Spa n value s (o r nitroge n oxide s (PPM )

. 50 0 50 0 1,00 0 500( x+ y) + 1,000z

§ 60.48 b Emissio n monitorin g fo r particulat e matte r an d nitroge n oxides

. (a ) Th e owne r

o r operato r of a n affecte dfacilit y subjec t t o th e opacit y standar dunde r

§ 60.43 b shal l install , calibrate , maintain , an doperat e a continuou s monitorin g syste mfo r measurin g th e opacit y o f emission s discharge dt o th e atmospher e an d recor dth e outpu t

o f th e system

. (b ) Excep t

a s provide di nparagraph s (g ) an d(h ) o f

thi s section , th e owne r o r operato r o f a n affecte dfacilit y subjec t t o th e nitroge n oxide s standar do f § 60.44b(a ) shal l install , calibrate , maintain , an doperat e acontinuou s monitorin g syste mfo r

measurin g nitroge n oxide s emission s discharge dt o th e atmospher e an drecor dth e outpu t of th e system

. (c ) Th e continuou s monitorin g system s require dunde r

paragrap h(b ) of

thi s sectio n shal l b e operate dan ddat a recorde ddurin g al l period s o f operatio n o f th e affecte dfacilit y excep t fo r continuou s monitorin g syste m breakdown s an drepairs

. Dat ai s recorde ddurin g calibratio nchecks , an d zer o an dspa n adjustments

. (d ) Th e 1-hou r

averag e nitroge n oxide s emissio n rate s measure db y th e continuou s nitroge noxide s monito r require db y paragrap h(b ) o f thi s sectio n an drequire dunde r

§ 60.13(h ) shal l b e expresse di n ng/ J o r

lb/millio n Bt

u hea t inpu t an dshal l b e use dt o calculat e th e averag e emissio n rate s unde r § 60.44b

. Th e 1-hou r

average s shal l b e calculate d usin g th e dat apoint s require dunde r § 60.13(b)

. A t

leas t 2 dat apoint s mus t

b e use dt o calculat e eac h1-hou r average
. (e ) Th e procedure s unde r § 60.1 3 shal l b e followe dfo r

installation , evaluation , an doperatio no f

th e continuou s monitorin g systems

. (1 ) Fo r affecte dfacilitie s combustin g coal , woo do r

municipal-typ e soli d (3 ) Al l spa nvalue s compute dunde r paragrap h(e)(2 ) o f

thi s sectio n fo r combustin g mixture s of regulate dfuel s ar e rounde dt o th e neares t 50 0 ppm
. (f ) Whe nnitroge n oxide s emissio n dat aar e no t

obtaine dbecaus e o f continuou s monitorin g syste m breakdowns , repairs , calibratio n check s an dzer o an dspa n adjustments , emissio n dat awil l b e obtaine db y usin g standb y monitorin g systems , Metho d7 , Metho d7A , o r

othe r approve dreferenc e method s t o provid e emissio n dat afor a minimu mo f

7 5 percen t

o f th e operatin g hour s i neac hstea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g day , i na t

leas t 2 2 ou t of 3 0 successiv e stea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g days

. (g ) Th e owne r

o r operato r o f a n affecte dfacilit y tha t

ha s ahea t

inpu t capacit y of

7 3 M W(25 0 millio n Btu / hour ) o r less , an dwhic hha s a n annua l capacit y facto r

fo r residua l oi l havin g a nitroge nconten t

of 0.3 0 weigh t

percen t o r less , natura l gas , distillat e oil , o r an y mixtur e of

thes e fuels , greate r

tha n 1 0 percen t (0.10 ) shall : (1 ) Compl y wit hth e provision s of paragraph s (b) , (c) , (d) , (e)(2) , (e)(3) , an d (f ) of thi s section , o r (2 ) Monito r

stea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g condition s an dpredic t nitroge noxide s emissio n rate s a s specifie di napla n submitte dpursuan t t o § 60.49b(c)

. (h ) Th e owne r

o r operato r o f a n affecte dfacilit y whic hi s subjec t t o th e nitroge n oxide s standard s of § 60.44b(a)(4 ) i s no t

require dt o instal l o r operat e acontinuou s monitorin g syste m t o measur e nitroge noxide s emissions

. (Approve db y th e Office o f Management

and Budge t undercontro l number

2060-0072)P.28



### Federa l Registe r

/ Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r 16 , 1987 /

Rule s an dRegulation s § 60.49 b Reportin g an d recordkeepin g requirements

. (a ) Th e owne r

o r operato r of eac h affecte dfacilit y shal l submi t notificatio n of th e dat e of

initia l startup , a s provide d b y § 60.7

. Thi s notificatio n shal l include : (1 ) Th e desig n hea t

inpu t capacit y o f th e affecte dfacilit y an didentificatio n o f th e fuel s t o b e combuste di n th e affecte d facility , (2 ) If applicable , acop y o f

an y Federall y enforceabl e requiremen t tha t limit s th e annua l capacit y facto r fo r an y fue l o r mixtur e o f

fuel s unde r § 60.42b(d)(l) , § 60.43(b)(a)(2) , § 60.43b(a)(3)(iii) , § 60.43b(c)(2)(ii) , § 60.43b(d)(2)(iii) , § 60.44b(c) , § 60.44b(d) , § 60.44b(e) , o r § 60.45b(d] , (3 ) Th e annua l capacit y facto r a t whic hth e owne r

o r operato r anticipate s operatin g th e facilit y base do n al l fuel s fire dan dbase do n eac hindividua l fue l fired , and , (4 ) Notificatio n tha t

a n emergin g technolog y wil l b e use dfo r controllin g emission s of

sulfu r dioxide

. Th e Administrato r

wil l examin e th e descriptio n o f

th e emergin g technolog y an dwil l determin e whethe r th e technolog y qualifie s a s a n emergin g technology

. I n makin g thi s determination , th e Administrato r ma y requir e th e owne r

o r operato r o f th e affecte dfacilit y t o submi t additiona l informatio n concernin g th e contro l device

. Th e affecte dfacilit y i s subjec t t o th e provision s of

§ 60.42b(a ) unles s an d unti l thi s determinatio n i s mad e b y th e Administrator

. (b ) Th e owne r

o r operato r o f eac h affecte dfacilit y subjec t t o th e sulfu r dioxide , particulat e matte r an dnitroge n oxide s emissio n limit s unde r § 60.42b , § 60.43b , an d§ 60.44b , shal l submi t t o th e Administrato r

th e performanc e tes t dat afromth e initia l performanc e tes t an dth e performanc e evaluatio n of th e CEM S usin g th e applicabl e performanc e specification s i n Appendi x B

. (c ) Th e owne r

o r operato r o f eac h affecte dfacilit y subjec t t o th e nitroge n oxide s standar do f

§ 60.44 b wh o seek s t o demonstrat e complianc e wit hthos e standard s throug hth e monitorin g o f stea mgeneratin g uni t

operatin g condition s unde r

th e provision s o f § 60.48b(g)(2 ) shal l submi t t o th e Administrato r

fo r approva l apla n tha t identifie s th e operatin g condition s t o b e monitore dunde r

§ 60.48b(g)(2 ) an dth e record s t o b e maintaine dunde r § 60.49b(j)

. Thi s pla n shal l b e submitte d t o th e Administrato r

fo r approva l withi n 36 0 day s o f

th e initia l startu p o f

th e affecte dfacility

. Th e pla n shall : (1 ) Identif

y th e specifi c operatin g condition s t o b e monitore dan dth e relationshi p betwee nthes e operatin g condition s an dnitroge n oxide s emissio n rate s (i.e., ng/ J o r lbs/millio n Bt

u hea t input)

. Stea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g condition s include , bu t

ar e no t limite d to , th e degre e o f

stage dcombustio n (i.e. , th e rati o of

primar y ai r

t o secondar y and/o r tertiar y air ) an dth e leve l o f exces s ai r

(i.e. , flu e ga s oxyge n level) ; (2 ) Includ e th e dat aan dinformatio n tha t th e owne r

o r operato r use dt o identif y th e relationshi p betwee n nitroge noxide s emissio n rate s an dthes e operatin g conditions ; (3 ) Identif

y ho w thes e operatin g conditions , includin g stea mgeneratin g uni t load , wil l b e monitore dunde r § 60.48b(g ) o na nhourl y basi s b y th e owne r o r operato r durin g th e perio do f operatio n o f

th e affecte dfacility ; th e qualit y assuranc e procedure s o r practice s tha t

wil l b e employe dt o ensur e tha t

th e dat agenerate db y monitorin g thes e operatin g condition s wil l b e representativ e an daccurate ; an d th e typ e an dforma t

o f th e record s o f thes e operatin g conditions , includin g stea mgeneratin g uni t

load , tha t

wil l b e maintaine db y th e owne r o r operato r unde r § 60.49b(j)

. I f th e pla ni s approved , th e owne r o r operato r shal l maintai nrecord s o f predicte dnitroge n oxid e emissio nrate s an dth e monitore doperatin g conditions , includin g stea mgeneratin g uni t load , identifie di n th e plan

. (d ) Th e owne r

o r operato r o f a n affecte dfacilit y shal l recor dan d maintai n record s o f

th e amount s o f

eac h fue l combuste ddurin g eac hda y an d calculat e th e annua l capacit y facto r individuall y fo r

coal , distillat e oil , residua l oil , natura l gas , wood , an d municipal-typ e soli dwast e fo r eac h calenda r quarter

. Th e annua l capacit y facto r i s determine do na12-mont h rollin g averag e basi s wit hane w annua l capacit y facto r

calculate da t

th e en dof eac hcalenda r

month

. (e ) Fo r affecte dfacilitie s that : (1 ) Combus t residua l oi l havin g anitroge n conten t o f 0. 3 weigh t

percen t o r less ; (2 ) hav e hea t

inpu t capacitie s o f

7 3 M W (25 0 millio nBtu/hour ) o r less ; an d(3 ) monito r nitroge noxide s emission s o r

, stea mgeneratin g uni t

operatin g condition s unde r

§ 60.48b(g) , th e owne r o r operato r shal l maintai n record s o f th e nitroge nconten t

o f th e oi l combuste di n th e affecte dfacilit y an dcalculat e th e averag e fue l nitroge nconten t o n ape r calenda r quarte r basis

. Th e nitroge n conten t shal l b e determine dusin g AST M Metho dD3431-80 , Tes t Metho d fo r Trac e Nitroge n i nLiqui dPetroleu m Hydrocarbon s (IBR—se e § 60.17) , o r fue l specificatio n dat aobtaine dfromfue l suppliers

. I

f residua l oi l blend s ar e bein g combusted , fue l nitroge nspecification s ma y b e prorate dbase do nth e rati o of residua l oil s o f differen t nitroge n conten t i n th e fue l blend

. (f ) Fo r facilitie s subjec t

t o th e opacit y standar dunde r

§ 60.43b , th e owne r

o r operato r shal l maintai nrecord s of opacity

. (9 ) Fo r facilitie s subjec t

t o nitroge n oxide s standard s unde r § 60.44b , th e owne r o r operato r shal l maintai n record s o f

th e followin g informatio n fo r eac hstea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g day : (1 ) Calenda r

date

. (2 ) Th e averag e hourl y nitroge n oxide s emissio nrate s (expresse da s N0 2 ) (ng/ J o r lb/millio nBt

u hea t input ) measure d o r predicted

. (3 ) Th e 30-da y averag e nitroge n oxide s emissio nrate s (ng/ J o r lb/millio n Btu hea t input ) calculate da t

th e en do f eac hstea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g da y fro mth e measure do r predicte d hourl y nitroge n oxid e emissio n rate s for th e precedin g 3 0 stea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g days

. (4 ) Identificatio no f

th e stea m generatin g uni t

operatin g day s whe n th e calculate d30-da y averag e nitroge n oxide s emissio nrate s ar e i nexces s o f th e nitroge n oxide s emission s standard s unde r § 60.44b , wit hth e reason s fo r suc h exces s emission s a s wel l a s a descriptio n of

correctiv e action s taken

. (5 ) Identificatio no f

th e stea m generatin g uni t

operatin g day s fo r

whic h pollutan t dat ahav e no t

bee n obtained , includin g reason s fo r

no t obtainin g sufficien t dat aan dadescriptio n o f correctiv e action s taken

. (6 ) Identificatio no f

th e time s whe n emissio ndat ahav e bee n exclude dfro m th e calculatio no f

averag e emissio n rate s an dth e reason s fo r excludin g data

. (7 ) Identificatio nof

"F " facto r

use dfo r calculations , metho do f determination , an dtyp e of

fue l combusted

. (8 ) Identificatio n o f

th e time s whe n th e pollutan t

concentratio n exceede d ful l spa n o f

th e continuou s monitorin g system

. (9 ) Descriptio no f

an y modification s t o th e continuou s monitorin g syste mtha t coul daffec t

th e abilit y o f

th e continuou s monitorin g syste mt o compl y wit h Performanc e Specificatio n 2 o r 3

. (10 ) Result s o f

dail y CEM S drif

t test s an dquarterl y accurac y assessment s a s require dunde r

Appendi x F , Procedur e 1

. (h ) Th e owne r

o r operato r o f an y affecte dfacilit y i n an y categor y liste di n paragraph s (h ) (1 ) o r

(2 ) o f thi s sectio ni s require dt o submi t

exces s emissio n report s fo r

an y calenda r

quarte r durin g whic hther e ar e exces s emission s fro m th e affecte dfacility

. If

ther e ar e n o exces s emission s durin g th e calenda r quarter , th e owne r

o r operato r shal l submi t arepor t semiannuall y statin g-S785 2 Federa l Registe r / Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r 16 , 198 7 /

Rule s an dRegulation s

tha t n o exces s emission s occurre d durin g th e semiannua l reportin g period

. (1 ) An y affecte dfacilit y subjec t t o th e opacit y standard s unde r § 60.43b(e ) o r t o th e operatin g paramete r monitorin g requirement s unde r

§ 60.13(i)(l)

. (2 ) An y affecte dfacilit y tha t i s subjec t t o th e nitroge n oxide s standar do f § 60.44b , an dtha t (i ) Combust s natura l gas , distillat e oil , o r residua l oi l wit hanitroge n conten t o f 0. 3 weigh t

percen t o r less , o r (ii ) Ha s ahea t

inpu t capacit y o f

7 3 M W(25 0 millio n Btu/hour ) o r les s an di s require dt o monito r

nitroge n oxide s emission s o n acontinuou s basi s unde r § 60.48b(g)(l ) o r

stea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g condition s unde r § 60.48b(g)(2)

. (3 ) Fo r th e purpos e o f

§ 60.43b , exces s emission s ar e define da s al l 6-minut e period s durin g whic hth e averag e opacit y exceed s th e opacit y standard s unde r § 60.43b(f)

. (4 ) Fo r purpose s o f

§ 60.48b(g)(l) , exces s emission s ar e define da s an y calculate d30-da y rollin g averag e nitroge n oxide s emissio n rate , a s determine dunde r

§ 60.46b(e) , whic h exceed s th e applicabl e emissio n limit s i n § 60.44b

. (i ) Th e owne r

o r operato r o f an y affecte dfacilit y subjec t t o th e continuou s monitorin g requirement s fo r nitroge n oxide s unde r

§ 60.48(b ) shal l submi t aquarterl y repor t

containin g th e infonnatio n recorde dunde r paragrap h (g ) o f thi s section

. Al l quarterl y report s shal l b e postmarke db y th e 30thda y followin g th e en do f

eac hcalenda r quarter

. (j ) Th e owne r

o r operato r o f an y affecte dfacilit y subjec t t o th e sulfu r dioxid e standard s unde r § 60,42 b shal l submi t writte n report s t o th e Administrato r

fo r ever y calenda r quarter

. Al l quarterl y report s shal l b e postmarke db y th e 30thda y followin g th e en do f

eac hcalenda r

quarter

. (k) Fo r eac haffecte dfacilit y subjec t t o th e complianc e an dperformanc e testin g requirement s o f

§ 60.45 b an dth e reportin g requiremen t

i n paragrap h(j ) o f thi s section , th e followin g informatio n shal l b e reporte dt o th e Administrator : (1 ) Calenda r

date s covere di nth s reportin g period

. (2 ) Eac h30-da y averag e sulfu r dioxid e emissio n rat e (ng/ J o r

lb/millio n Bt u hea t input ) measure ddurin g th e reportin g period , endin g with , th e las t 30

- da y perio di n th e quarter ; reason s fo r noncomplianc e wit hth e emissio n standards ; an dadescriptio n o f • corrective , action s taken

. (3 ) Eac h30-da y averag e percen t reductio n i n sulfu r

dioxid e emission s calculate ddurin g th e reportin g period , endin g wit hth e las t

30-da y perio di nth e quarter ; reason s fo r noncomplianc e wit h th e emissio nstandards ; an da descriptio n o f

correctiv e action s taken

. (4 ) Identificatio no f

th e stea m generatin g uni t

operatin g day s tha t

coa l o r oi l wa s combuste dan dfo r whic h sulfu r dioxid e o r

diluen t (oxyge no r carbo n dioxide ) dat ahav e no t bee n obtaine db y a n approve dmetho dfor a t leas t 7 5 percen t

of th e operatin g hour s i n th e stea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g day ; justificatio n fo r

no t obtainin g sufficien t data ; an ddescriptio no f correctiv e actio ntaken

. (5 ) Identificatio n o f

th e time s whe n emission s dat ahav e bee nexclude dfrom th e calculatio no f

averag e emissio n rates ; justificatio n fo r

excludin g data ; an ddescriptio n o f

correctiv e actio n take n if dat ahav e bee n exclude dfo r period s othe r

tha n thos e durin g whic h coa l o r oi l wer e no t

combuste di n th e stea mgeneratin g unit

. (6 ) Identificatio no f

"F " facto r

use dfo r calculations , metho do f determination , an dtyp e o f

fue l combusted

. (7 ) Identificatio n o f

times whe nhourl y average s hav e bee n obtaine dbase do n manua l samplin g methods

. (8 ) Identificatio n o f

th e time s whe n th e pollutan t

concentratio nexceede d ful l spa n o f

th e CEMS

. (9 ) Descriptio no f

an y modification s t o th e CEM S tha t

coul daffec t

th e abilit y o f th e CEM S t o compl y wit hPerformanc e Specificatio n2 o r

3

. (10 ) Result s of

dail y CEM S drif

t test s an dquarterl y accurac y assessment s a s require dunde r

Appendi x F , Procedur e 1

. (11 ) Th e annua l capacit y facto r of eac hfireda s provide dunde r paragrap h (d ) o f thi s section

. (1 ) Fo r eac haffecte dfacilit y subjec t t o th e complianc e an dperformanc e testin g requirement s o f

§ 60.45b(d ) an dth e reportin g requirement s o f paragrap h(j ) o f thi s section , th e followin g informatio n shal l b e reporte dt o th e Administrator : (1 ) Calenda r

date s whe n th e facilit y wa s i n operatio ndurin g th e reportin g period ; (2 ) Th e 24-hou r

averag e sulfu r

dioxid e emissio n rat e measure dfo r eac hstea m generatin g uni t

operatin g da y durin g th e reportin g perio dtha t

coa l o r oi l wa s combusted , endin g i nth e las t 24-hou r perio di nth e quarter ; reason s fo r noncomplianc e wit hth e emissio n standards ; an dadescriptio no f correctiv e action s taken ; (3 ) Identificatio n o f

th e stea m generatin g uni t

operatin g day s tha t

coa l o r oi l wa s combuste dfo r whic hsulfu r dioxid e o r

diluen t (oxyge no r

carbo n dioxide ) dat ahav e no t

bee nobtaine db y a n approve dmetho dfo r a t leas t 7 5 percen t o f th e operatin g hours ; justificatio n fo r

no t obtainin g sufficien t data ; an ddescriptio n of correctiv e actio ntaken

. (4 ) Identificatio n o f

th e time s whe n emission s dat ahav e bee nexclude dfro m th e calculatio no f

averag e emissio n rates ; justificatio nfo r

excludin g data ; an ddescriptio n o f

correctiv e actio n take n i f dat ahav e bee n exclude dfo r period s othe r

tha nthos e durin g whic h coa l o r oi l wer e no t

combuste di n th e stea mgeneratin g unit

. (5 ) Identificatio n o f

"F " facto r

use dfor calculations , metho dof determination , an dtyp e o f

fue l combusted

. (6 ) Identificatio no f

time s whe n hourl y average s hav e bee n obtaine dbase do n manua l samplin g methods

. (7 ) Identificatio n o f

th e time s whe n th e pollutan t

concentratio nexceede d ful ] spa no f

th e CEMS

. (8 ) Descriptio n o f

an y modifications , t o th e CEM S whic hcoul daffec t th e abilit y o f th e CEM S t o compl y wit h Performanc e Specificatio n2 o r 3

. (9 ) Result s of

dail y CEM S drif

t test s an dquarterl y accurac y assessment s a s require dunde r

Appendi x F , Procedur e 1

. (m) Fo r eac haffecte dfacilit y subjec t t o th e sulfu r

dioxid e standard s unde r § 60.42 b fo r

whic hth e minimu mamoun t of dat arequire dunde r

§ 60.47b(f

) wer e no t obtaine ddurin g acalenda r quarter , th e followin g informatio ni s reporte dt o th e Administrato r

i n additio n t o tha t require dunde r

paragrap h(k) o f

thi s section : (1 ) Th e numbe r

of hourl y average s availabl e fo r

outle t emissio nrate s an d inle t emissio nrates

. (2 ) Th e standar ddeviatio n o f hourl y average s fo r

outle t emissio nrate s an d inle t emissio n rates , a s determine di n Metho d19 , Sectio n 7

. (3 ) Th e lowe r

confidenc e limi t

fo r th e mea noutle t

emissio n rat e an dth e uppe r confidenc e limi t

fo r th e mea ninle t emissio nrate , a s calculate di n Metho d 19 , Sectio n 7

. (4 ) Th e rati o o f

th e lowe r

confidenc e limi t fo r th e mea n outle t

emissio n rat e an dth e allowabl e emissio nrate , a s determine di nMetho d19 , Sectio n 7

. (n ) I f apercen t

remova l efficienc y b y fue l pretreatmen t

(i.e. , %R J i s use dt o determin e th e overal l percen t reductio n (i.e. , %R 0 ) unde r

§ 60.45b , th e owne r

o r operato r o f th e affecte dfacilit y shal l submi t asigne dstatemen t

wit hth e quarterl y report : (1 ) Indicatin g wha t

remova l efficienc y b y fue l pretreatmen t

(i.e. , % R

f ) wa s credite dfo r

th e calenda r

quarter ; (2 ) Listin g th e quantity , hea t content , an ddat e eac hpretreate dfue l shipmen t wa s receive ddurin g th e previou s calenda r quarter ; th e nam e an dlocatio n o f th e fue l pretreatmen t

facility ; an dth e tota l quantit y an dtota l hea t conten t o fP.3 0



### Federa l Registe r/

Vol

. 52

. No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r 16

. 198 7 /

Rule s an dRegulation s 4785 3
al l fuel s receive dat

th e affecte dfacilit

y durin g th e previou s calendar quarter ; (3 ) Documentin g th e transport o f th e fue l fro mth e fue l pretreatmen t

facilit y to th e steamgeneratin g unit

. (4 ) Includin g asigne dstatemen t fro m th e owner o r operato r o f th e fue l pretreatmen t

facilit y certifying that

th e percen t removal efficiency achieve db y fue l pretreatmen t

wa s determine di

n accordanc e wit

hth e provision s o

f Metho d1 9 (Appendi x A

) an dlistin g th e hea t conten t an dsulfu r conten t o f eac h fue l befor e an dafte r fue l pretreatmen t (o ) All record s require dunde r thi s sectio n shal l b e maintaine dby th e owne r o r operato r o f th e affecte dfacilit

y fo r aperio do

f 2 year s following th e dat e o f suc hrecord

. (Approve db y th e Offic e o f Managemen

t an d Budge t unde r contro l numbe r 2060-0135 ) 4

. 40 CF RPart 60 , Appendi x A , i s amende db y revisin g Metho d1 9 t o rea d a s follows : Appendi x A t o Part 60—[Amended ]

Metho d 19—Determinatio n o f Sulfu rDioxid e Remova l Efficienc y an d Particulat e Matter , Sulfu rDioxide , an d Nitroge n Oxide s Emissio n Rate s 1. Applicability and

Principle 1. 1 Applicability

. Thi s metho di s applicabl e for

(a ) determinin g particulat e matte r (PM) , sulfu r

dioxid e (SO2) , an d nitroge noxide s (NO, ) emissio nrates ; (b ) determinin g sulfu r

remova l efficiencie s o f fue l pretreatmen t

an dSOj contro l devices ; (c ) determinin g overal l reductio no f potentia l SO 2 emission s fro mstea mgeneratin g unit s o r othe r source s a s specifie di napplicabl e regulations ; an d(d ) determinin g SOj rate s base do nfue l samplin g an danalysi s procedures

. 1. 2 Principle

. 1.2. 1 Pollutan t

emissio nrate s ar e determine dfro mconcentration s o f PM , SOj , o r NO, , an doxyge n(O2) o r carbo ndioxid e (CO2 ) alon g wit hFfactor s (ratio s o f combustio nga s volume s t o hea t inputs)

. 1.2. 2 A noveral l SO 2 emissio nreductio n efficienc y i s compute dfro mth e efficienc y o f fue l pretreatmen t

system s (optional ) an dth e efficienc y o f

SO 2 contro l devices

. 1.2. 3 Th e sulfu r

remova l efficienc y o f

a fue l pretreatmen t

syste mi s determine db y fue l samplin g an danalysi s o f th e sulfu r

an d hea t content s o f

th e fue l befor e an dafte r th e pretreatmen t

system

. 1.2. 4 Th e SO 2 remova l efficienc y o f a contro l devic e i s determine db y measurin g th e SO 2 rate s befor e an dafte r th e contro l device

. 1.2. 5 Th e inle t

rate s t o SO 2 contro l system s an dwhe nSO 2 contro l system s ar e no t used , SO 2 emissio nrate s t o th e atmospher e ma y b e determine db y fue l samplin g an danalysi s (optional)

. 2. Emission Rates of Particulate Matter. Sulfur Dioxide, and

Nitrogen Oxides Selec t fro mth e followin g section s th e applicabl e procedur e t o comput e th e PM , SO2 , o r NO , emissio nrat e (E) inng/ J (lb / millio nBtu)

. Th e pollutan t concentratio n mus t b e i nng/sc m(Ib/scf

) an dth e Ffacto r mus t b e i nscm/ J (scf/millio nBtu)

. I f th e pollutan t concentratio n(C ) i s no t inth e appropriat e units , us e th e followin g tabl e t o mak e th e prope r

conversion :
CONVERSIONFACTOR S FO R CONCENTRATION
Fro m g/sc m mg/sc m Ib/sc f pp m SO 2 pp m NO , pp m SO 2 pp m NO , T o

ng/sc m ng/sc m ng/sc m ng/sc m ng/sc m Ib/sc f Ib/sc f Multipl yb y

10 9 10 " 1.602X10 1 3 2.6 6 x10 6 1.912x10 s 1.660X10- 1 1.194X10" '

A nFfacto r

i s th e rati o o f

th e ga s volum e o f th e product s o f

combustio nt o th e hea t conten t o f th e fuel

. Th e dr y Ffacto r (F„ ) include s al l component s o f combustio nles s water , th e we t

Ffacto r (F„. ) include s al l component s o f

combustion , an dth e carbo nF facto r (F c ) include s onl y carbo ndioxide

. Note : Sinc e F w factor s includ e wate r resultin g onl y fro mth e combustio no f hydroge ni nth e fuel , th e procedure s usin g F „ factor s ar e no t

applicabl e fo r

computin g E fro mstea mgeneratin g unit s wit hwe t scrubber s o r

wit hothe r

processe s tha t

ad d wate r (e.g. , stea minjection ) 2. 1 , Oxygen-Base dFFactor , Dry Basis

. Whe nmeasurement s ar e o nadr y basi s fo r bot hO 2 (%02„ ) an dpollutan t

(C„ ) concentrations , us e th e followin g equation : • E=C d F d[20.9/(20.9-%O2„) ] Eq

. 19- 1 2. 2 Oxygen-Base dFFactor , We t Basis

. Whe nmeasurement s ar e o nawe t basi s fo r bot hO 2 (%0 2w ) an dpollutan t

(C„ ) concentrations , us e eithe r o f th e following : 2.2. 1 I f th e moistur e fractio no f ambien t ai r (BwJ i s measured : E=(C».F W 20.9]/[20.9(1-B wn ) -%O s „ ] Eq

. 19- 2 Instea do f

actua l measurement

. B„ , ma y b e estimate daccordin g t o th e procedur e below

. (Note : Th e estimate s ar e selecte dt o ensur e tha t negativ e error s wil l no t b e large r

tha n —1. 5 percent

. However , positiv e errors , o r over-estimatio no f

emissions , o f

a s muc ha s 5 percen t ma y b e introduce ddependin g upo n th e geographi c locatio no f th e facilit y an dth e associate drang e o f

ambien t moisture) : 2.2.1. 1 B„ a =0.027

. Thi s valu e ma y b e use d a t an y locatio na t

al l times

. 2.2.1. 2 B„

. = Highes t

monthl y averag e o f Ba atha t occurre dwithi nth e previou s calenda r yea r a t th e neares t

Weathe r

Servic e Station

. Thi s valu e shal l b e determine d annuall y an dma y b e use da s a nestimat e for th e entir e curren t

calenda r

year
. 2.2.1. 3 Bwi^Highes t

dail y averag e of

B w , tha t occurre dwithi nacalenda r mont ha t

th e neares t Weathe r

Servic e Station , calculate d fromIh e dut u fro mth u pus l .' I years
. Thi s valu e shal l b e compute dfor eac hmont hitncl ma y b e use da s a nestimat e for th e curren t respectiv e calenda r

month

. 2.2. 2 I f th e moistur e fractio n(ll„, | o f lli e effluen t ga s i s measured : E= C w F d(20.9/[20.9( 1 B» h) 'VO-J l l'.(|

. 19- 3 2. 3 Oxygen-Base dFFactor

. Dry / We i Basis

. 2.3. 1 Whe nth e pollutan t umr.entiullo ni s measure do nawe t

basi s (C„ ) an d() • concentratio ni s measure do nadr y basi s (%02 d ) , us e th e followin g equation : E==!(C„F d )/( 1 Dw J| /

[20.9/(20. 9 '\,0-,) | Eq

. 19- 4 2.3. 2 Whe nth o pollutan t eoneenli-alio nI s measure do nadr y basi s (C rt) an dlli e () » concentratio ni s measure do nawe t basi s (%0 2w )

. us e th e followin g equation : E= [C d F d 20.9)/|20.9 * 0,„/( l B.,) |

Eq

. 19- 5 2. 4 Carbo nDioxid e Base dFl-'ur'ur

. Dr y Basis

. Whe nmeasurement s ar e o nadr y basi s for bot hCO j ("iCO:,, ) an dpollutan t

(C J concentrations , us e Ih e followin g equation : E= C d K c (100/"iCO2 d ) Eq

. 19- 0 2. 5 Carbo nDioxide-Uase dFFactor

. We t Basis

. Whe nmeasurement s ar e o nnwe t basi s fo r bot hCO 2 (%COs» ) an dpollutan t (C„ ) concentrations , us e th u folhtvvin ^ equation : E^C».F r (100/%CO 2 „. ) Eq

. 1 9 7 2. 6 Carbo nDioxide-Base dFFactor , Dry / We t Basis

. 2.6. 1 Whe nIh e pollutan t concentratio ni s measure do nawe t

basi s (C J an d(.() » concentratio ni s measure do nadr y basi s (%CO- d )

. us e Ih e followin g equation : E* = ICF C /( 1 - B„J ] (100/%CO. d ) K(|

. 19-1 1 2.6. 2 Whe nth e pollutan t concentratio ni s measure do nadr y basi s (C d ) an dCO s concentratio ni s measure do nawe t basi s (%C02») , us e th e followin g equation : E= C d (l-B„.)F c (l00/%CO 2 „ ) Eq

. 1 9 9 2. 7 Direct-Fire dRehea t Fue l Burning

. Th e effec t o f direct-fire drehea t

fue l burnin g (fo r th e purpos e o f

raisin g th e temperatur e o f th e exhaus t effluen t fro mwe t

scrubber s t o abov e th e moistur e dew-point ) o nemissio nrate s wil l b e les s tha n±1. 0 percen t and , therefore , ma y b e ignored

. 2. 8 Combine dCycle-Ga s Turbin e Systems

. Fo r

ga s turbinc-steu mgenerato r combine dcycl e systems , determin e th e emission s fro mth e stea mgeneratin g uni t o r th e percen t

reductio ninpotentia l SO 2 emission s a s follows : 2.8. 1 Comput e th e emissio nral e fromth e stea mgeneratin g uni t

usin g th e followin g equation : E*,„=E c0 - t

(H,/II„)(F WE J Eq

. 1 9 1 0 where : E b o = pollutan t

emissio nrat e fromth e stea m generatin g unit , ng/ J (lb/millio nBtu)

. E c o = pollutan t

emissio nrat e i ncombine d effluent , ng/ J (lb/millio nBtu)

.P.3 1



### 4785 4 Federa

l Register/

Vol . 52, No . 24 1 /

Wednesday , December16, 198 7 / Rules and Regulations
E,=pollutan t

rat e fro mga s turbine , ng/ J (lb / millio n Btu)

. H b =hea t inpu t rat e t o th e steam;generatin g uni t fro mfuels fire di n th e stea m generatin g unit , J/h r

(millio n Btu/hr)

. H„ = hea t inpu t rat e t o ga s turbin e fro mal l fuel s fire di n th e ga s turbine , J/h r (millio n Btu/hr)

. 2.8.1. 1 Us e th e tes t

method s an d procedure s sectio n o f

Subpar t G Gt o obtai n E c o an dE

B . D o no t us e F w factor s fo r determinin g E„ o r

E„. I f a n SO 2 contro l devic e i s used , measur e E mafte r th e contro l device

. 2.8.1. 2 Suitabl e method s shall : b e used 1 t o determin e th e hea t

inpu t rate s t o th e stea m generatin g unit s (H„ ) an dth e ga s turbin e (H,)

. 2.8. 2 I f acontro l devic e i s used , comput e th e percen t

o f potentia l S0 2 emission s (% P J usin g th e following , equations : E b i =E d -(H,/H b )(E d -E g ) Eq

. 19-1 1 %P, = \Q0[l-E

bo lE bi y Eq

. 19-1 2 where : E*,i=pollutan t

rat e fro mth e stea mgeneratin g unit , ng/ J (lb/millio n Btu ) E c i=pollutantrat e i n combine deffluent , ng/ J (lb/millio n Btu)

. Us e th e tes t method s an dprocedure s section , o f

Subpar t G Gt o obtai n E c lan dE„

. D o no t us e F w factor s for

determinin g E , o r E * 3: F Factors Us e a n averag e Ffacto r accordin g t o Sectio n 3. 1 o r

determin e a n applicabl e F facto r accordin g t o Sectio n 3.2

. I f combine d fuels ar e fired, prorat e th e applicabl e F factor s usin g th e procedur e i n Sectio n 3.3

. 3. 1 Averag e FFactors : Averag e Ffactor s (F d , F„ , o r

F J fro mTabl e 19- 1 ma y b e used

.

TABL E 19-1.— F FACTOR S FO R VARIOU S FUEL S >

Fue l typ e

Coal : Anthracit e 2 Bituminou s 2 Lignit e Oil 3 Gas : Propan e Butan e Woo d Woo d Bar k Municipa l Soli d Wast e • F
dscm/ J

2.71x10' ' 2.63x10" ' 2.65x10- ' 2.47x10- ' 2.43x10" ' 2.34X10" ' 2.34x10" ' 2.4 8 X TO" ' 2.5&X10" ' 2.57x10" ' d dscf/10 6

Bt u

10,10 0 9,78 0 9,86 0 9,1.90 8,71 0 8,71 0 8,71 0 9,24 0 9,60 0 9,57 0 F

wscm/ J

2.8 3 xtO- T 2.86x10- '

, 3.2 1 X10" ' £77X10" '
; 2.85x10" ' 2.74X10" ' 2.79X10" ' wscf/1 0 6

Bt u

10,54 0 10,64 0 11,95 0 10,32 0 10,61 0 10,20 0 10,39 0 F

scm/ J

0.530x10"' ' 0.484x10" ' 0.513X10" ' 0.383X10" ' 0.287X10" ' 0.321x10- ' 0.33 7 X TO" ' 0.492x10" ' 0.516X10- ' 0.488x10" ' c scf/10 6 Bt u

1,97 0 1,80 0 1,91 0 1,42 0 1,040 1,19 0 1,25 0 1,83 0 1,92 0 1,82 0

1 Determine d a t standar d conditions : 2 0 ° C (6 8 °F ) an d 76 0 m m H g (29.9 2 in

. Hg) i 2 A s classifie d accordin g t o AST M D388-77

. 3 Crude , residual , o rdistillate

.
3. 2 Determine dFFactors

. I f the

. fue l burned : i s no t liste di n Tabl e 19- 1 o r

if th e owne r

o r operato r choose s t o determin e a n Ffacto r rathe r tha n us e th e value s i n Tabl e 19-1 , us e th e procedur e below : 3.2. 1 Equations

. Us e th e equation s below , a s appropriate , t o comput e th e Ffactors : F d= K[(K

hd %H ) + (K

C %C) + (K,%S ) + [K„%N) - (K o %,0)]/GC V Eq

. 19-1 3 F«=Kl(K hw %H ) + (K C %C) • + (K.7&S) + (K n %N)

- (K„%0) + (K.%H2O)]/GCV w Eq , 19--1 4 F C =K(K CC %C)/GC V Eq . 19-1 5 (Note..— Omi t

th e %H 2 0 term , in ; th e equation s fo r

F „ if % H andi% 0 includ e th e unavailabl e hydroge man doxygen , i n th e form 0fH 2 O. ) where : F d ,F w ,F c =volume s o f

combustio n component s pe r uni t o f hea t content , scm/ J (scf

/ millio n Btu)

. %H , %C , %S , %N, %0: an d %H 2 0=concentration s o f hydrogen , carbon , sulfur , nitrogen , oxygen , an d wate r fro ma n ultimat e analysi s o f fuel , weigh t percent

. GCV=gros s calorifi c valu e ofth e fue l consisten t

wit hth e ultimat e analysis , kJ / k g (Btu/lb)

. K=conversio n factor , 10" 5 (kJ/J)/(% ) [10" 6 Btu/millio n Btu)

. K h d= 22. 7 (scm/kg))[(3.6 4 (scf/lb)/(%)J

. 1^=9.5 7 (scm/kg)((1.5 3 (scf/lb)/(%)]

. K , = 3.5 4 (scm/kg ) [(0.5 7 (scf/lb)/(%)] : K n =0.8 6 (scm/k g [0;1 4 (scf/lb)/(%)]'

. K„=2.8 5 (scm/kg ) |U.4 6 (scf/lb)/(%)) „ K hw =34.7 4 (scm/kg ) [(5.5 7 (scf/lb)/(%)]

. K„=1.3 0 (scm/kg ) [(0.2 1 (scf/lb)/(%)]

. 1^=2. 0 (scm/kg ) [(0.32 1 (sef/lb)/(%)J

. 3.2. 2 Us e applicabl e samplin g procedure s i n Sectio n 5.2. 1 o r

5.2. 2 t o obtai n sample s fo r analyses

. 3.2. 3 Us e AST M D3176-7 4 (incorporate db y reference—se e § 60.17)

. fo r ultimat e analysi s o f th e fuel

. 3.2. 4 Us e applicable , method s i n Sectio n &2. 1 o r 5.2.2

. t o determin e th e hea t conten t o f soli do r liqui dfuels

. Fo r

gaseou s fuels , us e AST M D1826-7 7 (IBR—se e § 60:17 ) t o determin e th e hea t

content

. 3. 3 FFactor s for

Combinatio n o f

Fuels.

. I f combination s o f

fuels ar e bumed',

. use
- th e followin g equations , a s applicabl e unles s otherwis e specifie di n applicabl e subpart : 

### Eq . 19-1 6

w

### k- l k

w k 

### Eq

. 19-1 7

n C R- 1 

### K



### C K 

### Eq

. 19-1 8

where : X k = fractio n o f

tota l hea t

inpu t from , eac h typ e o f fue l k

.P.3 2



### Federa l Register/

Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r

16 , 1987 /

Rule s an dRegulation s 4785 5

n=numbe r

o f fuel s bein g burne di n combination

. 4. Determination of

Average Pollutant

Rates 4. 1 Averag e Pollutan t

Rate s fro mHourl y Values

. Whe n hourl y averag e pollutan t rate s (E h ) , inle t o r outlet , ar e obtaine d(e.g. , CEMS values) , comput e th e averag e pollutan t rat e (E a ) fo r th e performanc e tes t

perio d(e.g. , 3 0 days ) specifie di n th e applicabl e regulatio n usin g th e followin g equation :

E 

## a = ( W * E 

## h J

j - l Eq . 19-1 9

where : E„=averag e pollutan t

rat e for th e specifie d performanc e tes t

period , ng/ J (lb/millio n Btu)

. E h =hourl y averag e pollutant , ng/ J (lb/millio n Btu)

. H = tota l numbe r o f operatin g hour s fo r

whic h pollutan t rate s ar e determine di n th e performanc e tes t

period

. 4. 2 Averag e Pollutan t

Rate s fro mOthe r tha n Hourl y Averages

. Whe n pollutan t rate s ar e determine dfro mmeasure dvalue s representin g longe r

tha n 1-hou r

period s (e.g. , dail y fue l samplin g an danalyse s o r Metho d 6 B values) , o r

whe n pollutan t

rate s ar e determine dfro mcombination s o f 1-hou r an d longe r tha n 1-hou r

period s (e.g. , CEM S an d Metho d6 B values) , comput e th e averag e pollutan t rat e (E a ) fo r

th e performanc e tes t perio d(e.g. , 3 0 days ) specifie di n th e applicabl e regulatio n usin g th e followin g equation :



### Eq

. 19-2 0

where : E d= averag e pollutan t rat e for eac hsunip'.in g perio d(e.g. , 24-hr

Metho d6 B sampl e o r 24-h r fue l sample ) o r

fo r eac hfue l lo t (e.g. , amoun t

o f fuel bunkered) , ng/ J (lb / millio n Btu)

. n d =numbe r

o f operatin g hour s o f

th e uffecte d facilit y withi n th e performanc e tes t perio dfo r

eac hE ddetermined

. D = numbe r

o f samplin g period s durin g th o performanc e tes t

period

. 5. Determination

of Overall Reduction

in Potential Sulfur Dioxide Emission 5. 1 Overal l Percen t

Reduction

. Comput e th e overal l percen t

SO 2 reductio n (%R 0 ) usin g th e followin g equation : %R„=10 0 [1.0-(1.0-%R,/100)(1.0-%R„/t00) ) Eq

. 19-2 1 where : %R r =S0 2 remova l efficienc y fro mfuel pretreatment , percent

. %R B =S0 2 remova l efficienc y of th e contro l device , percent

. 5. 2 Pretreatmen t

Remova l Efficienc y (Optional)

. Comput e th e SO aremova l efficienc y fro mfue l pretreatmen t (96R f ) fo r th u averagin g perio d(e.g. , 9 0 days ) a s specifie di n th e applicabl e regulatio n usin g th e followin g equation :



### % *R f 

### - 100 (1. 0 - [ I (%S pj

### /GCVpj 

### ) L p j 

### ]/ [ £ (%S rj

### /GCV r1 

### ) l_ ri 

### ] } Eq. 19-2 2

where : %S„ , %S r =sulfu r

conten t o f th e produc t

an d ra w fue l lots , respectively , dr y basi s weigh t percent

. GCV D , GCV r =gros s calorifi c valu e fo r th e produc t an dra w fue l lots , respectively , dr y basis , kg/k g (Btu/lb)

. Lp, L,=weigh t

of th e produc t

an dra w fue l lots , respectively , metri c to n (ton)

. n = numbe r

of fue l lot s durin g th e averagin g period

. Note : I n calculatin g %R,

. includ e % S an d GC V value s fo r

al l fue l lot s tha t

ar e no t pretreate dan dar e use ddurin g th e averagin g period

. 5.2. 1 Soli dFossi l (Includin g Waste ) Fuel

Samplin g an dAnalysis

. Note : Fo r

th e purpose s o f

thi s method , ra w fue l (coa l o r

oil ) i s th e fue l delivere dt o th e desulfurizatio n (pretreatment ) facility

. Fo r oil

. th e inpu t oi l t o th e oi l desulfurizatio n proces s (e.g. , hydrotreatment ) i s considere dt o b e th e ra w fuel

. 5.2.1. 1 Sampl e Incremen t Collection

. Us e AST M D2234-7 6 (IBR—se e § 60.17) , Typ e I , Condition s A , B , o r

C , an dsystemati c spacing

. A s use di n thi s method , systemati c spacin g i s intende dt o includ e evenl y spaced , increment s i n tim e o r

increment s base do n equa l weight s of

coa l passin g th e collectio n area
. A s aminimum , determin e th e numbe r an d weigh t o f increment s require dpe r gros s sampl e representin g eac hcoa l lo t accordin g t o Tabl e 2 o r Paragrap h7.1.5. 2 o f

AST M D2234-76

. Collec t

on e gros s sampl e fo r

eac h lo t o f ra w coa l an don e gros s sampl e fo r eac h lo t of produc t coal

. 5.2.1. 2 AST M Lo t

Size

. Fo r

th e purpos e o f Sectio n 5. 2 (fue l pretreatment) , th e lo t siz e o f produc t coa l i s th e weigh t

o f produc t coa l fro mon e typ e o f

ra w coal

. Th e lo t

siz e o f ra w coa l i s th e weigh t

o f ra w coa l use dt o produc e on e lo t

o f produc t coal

. Typically , th e lo t siz e i s th e weigh t

o f coa l processe di n a1-da y (24-hour ) period

. I f mor e tha n on e typ e of coa l i s treate dan dproduce di n 1 day , the n gros s sample s mus t b e collecte dan d analyze dfo r

eac htyp e o f

coal

. A coa l lo t

siz e equalin g th e 90-da y quarterl y fue l quantit y fo r astea mgeneratin g uni t ma y b e use di

f representativ e samplin g ca n b e conducte dfo r eac hra w coa l an dproduc t coal

. Note : Alternativ e definition s o f lo t size s ma y b e used , subjec t

t o prio r approva l o f

th e Administrator

. 5.2.1. 3 Gros s Sampl e Analysis

. Us e AST M D2013-7 2 t o prepar e th e sample , AST M D3177-7 5 o r

AST M D4239-8 5 t o determin e sulfu r conten t (%S) , AST M D3173-7 3 t o determin e moistur e content , an dAST M D2015-7 7 o r

AST M D3286-8 5 t o determin e gros s calorifi c valu e (GCV ) (al l method s cite d IBR—se e § 60.17 ) o n adr y basi s fo r eac h gros s sample

. 5.2. 2 Liqui dFossi l Fuel—Samplin g an d Analysis

. Se e Not e unde r Sectio n 5.2.1

. 5.2.2. 1 Sampl e Collection

. Follo w th e procedure s fo r

continuou s samplin g i n AST M D270-6 5 (Reapprove d1975 ) (IBR—se e § 60.17 ) fo r eac hgros s sampl e fro meac hfue l lot

. 5.2.2. 2 Lo t

Size

. Fo r

th e purpos e o f

Sectio n 5. 2 (fue l pretreatment) , th e lo t siz e o f a produc t oi l i s th e weigh t

o f produc t oi l fro m on e pretreatmen t

facilit y an dintende da s on e shipmen t (shi p load , barg e load , etc.)

. Th o lo t siz e o f ra w oi l i s th e weigh t

o f eac hcrud e liqui dfue l typ e use dt o produc e alo t o f produc t oil

. Note : Alternativ e definition s of lo t size s ma y b e used , subjec t

t o prio r approva l o f

th e Administrator

. 5.2.2. 3 Sampl e Analysis

. Us e AST M D129-6 4 (Reapprove d1978) , AST M D1552-83 , o r AST M D4057-8 1 t o determin e th e sulfu r conten t (%S ) an dAST M D240-7 8 (al l method s cite dIBR—se e § 60.17 ) t o determin e th e GC V o f eac hgros s sample

. Thes e value s ma y b e assume dt o b e o n adr y basis

. Th e owne r o r operato r o f a n affecte dfacilit y ma y elec t t o determin e th e GC V b y samplin g th u oi l combuste do n th e firs t

stea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g da y o f

eac hcalenda r

mont hun d the n usin g th e lowes t

GC V valu e o f

th o thre e GC V value s pe r

quarte r fo r th e GC V of

al l oi l combuste di n tha t

calenda r

quurter

. 5.2. 3 Us e appropriat e procedures , subjec t t o th e approva l o f

th e Administrator , t o determin e th e fractio n o f tota l mas s inpu t derive dfro meac htyp e o f fuel

. 5. 3 Contro l Devic e Remova l Efficiency

. Comput e th e percen t

remova l efficienc y ("',R 0

### 4785 6 Federa l Register/

Vol

. 52 , No

. 24 1 /

Wednesday , Decembe r 16 , 1987 /

Rule s an dRegulation s

of th e contro l devic e usin g th e followin g equation : %R g =100[1.0-E oo /E al ] Eq

. 19-2 3 where : E ao . E a l= averag e pollutan t rat e of th e contro l device , outle t

an dinlet , respectively , for th e performanc e tes t

period , ng/ J (lb / millio n Btu)

. 5.3. 1 Us e continuou s emissio n monitorin g system s o r

tes t methods , a s appropriate , t o determin e th e outle t

SO 2 rate s and , i

f appropriate , th e inle t

SO 2 rates

. Th e rate s ma y b e determine da s hourl y (E*, ) o r othe r samplin g perio daverage s (E d )

. Then , comput e th e averag e pollutan t

rate s for

th e performanc e tes t

perio d(E a o an dE ai ) usin g th e procedure s i n Sectio n 4

. 5.3. 2 A s a n alternative , as-fire dfue l samplin g an danalysi s ma y b e use dt o determin e inle t

SO 2 rate s a s follows : 5.3.2. 1 Comput e th e averag e inle t S0 2 rat e (Ed-) for eac hsamplin g perio dusin g th e followin g equation : E di = K (%S/GCV ) Eq

. 19-2 4 where : E di =averag e inle t

SO 2 rat e for

eac hsamplin g perio dd , ng/ J (lb/millio n Btu ) % S=sulfu r

conten t of as-fire dfuel lot , dr y basis , weigh t

percent

. GC V = gros s calorifi c valu e o f th e fue l lo t consisten t

wit hth e sulfu r

analysis , kj/k g (Btu/lb)

. K = 2xlO'[(kg)(ng)/(%)(J)]{2xl0 4 (lb)(Btu / (%))(millio n Btu) } Afte r calculatin g E d i us e th e procedure s i n Sectio n 4. 2 t o determin e th e averag e inle t SO 2 rat e fo r th e performanc e tes t

perio d(E ai )

. 5.3.2. 2 Collec t

th e fuel sample s fro ma locatio n i n th e fuel handlin g syste mtha t provide s asampl e representativ e of th e fue l bunkere do r

consume ddurin g astea m generatin g uni t

operatin g day

. Fo r th e purpos e o f

as-fire dfue l samplin g unde r Sectio n 5.3. 2 o r

Sectio n 6 , th e lo t

siz e fo r coa l i s th e weigh t

of coa l bunkere do r consume ddurin g eac hstea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g day

. Th e lo t

siz e for oi l i s th e weigh t o f oi l supplie dt o th e "day " tan k o r consume ddurin g eac hstea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g day

. Fo r reportin g an dcalculatio n purposes , th e gros s sampl e shal l b e identifie dwit hth e calenda r da y o n whic hsamplin g began

. Fo r stea mgeneratin g uni t

operatin g day s whe n a coal-fire dstea mgeneratin g uni t i s operate d withou t coa l bein g adde dt o th e bunkers , th e coa l analysi s fro mth e previou s "a s bunkered " coa l sampl e shal l b e use dunti l coa l i s bunkere dagain

. Fo r stea mgeneratin g uni t operatin g day s whe n a n oil-fire dstea m generatin g uni t

i s operate dwithou t

oi l bein g adde dt o th e oi l "day " tank , th e oi l analysi s fro mth e previou s da y shal l b e use dunti l th e "day " tan k

i s fille dagain

. Alternativ e definition s of fue l lo t siz e ma y b e used , subjec t

t o prio r approva l of

th e Administrator

. 5.3.2. 3 Us e AST M procedure s specifie di n Sectio n 5.2. 1 o r

5.2. 2 t o determin e th e sulfu r content s (%S ) an dgros s calorifi c value s (GCV)

. ft Sulfur Retention Credit

for Compliance Fuel I f fue l samplin g an danalysi s procedure s i n Sectio n 5.2. 1 ar e bein g use dt o determin e averag e S0 2 emissio n rate s (E a5 ) t o th e atmospher e fro macoal-fire dstea m generatin g uni t

whe n ther e i s n o SO 2 contro l device , th e followin g equatio n ma y b e use dt o adjus t th e emissio n rat e for

sulfu r retentio n credit s (n o credit s ar e allowe dfor oil-fire d systems ) (E dl ) for

eac hsamplin g perio dusin g th e followin g equation : E di =0.9 7 K

(%S/GCV ) Eq

. 19-2 5 where : E d i = averag e inle t

SO 2 rat e for

eac hsamplin g perio dd , ng/ J (lb/millio n Btu ) % S = sulfu r

conten t of as-fire dfue l lot , dr y basis , weigh t

percent

. GCV=gros s calorifi c valu e of th e fue l lo t consisten t

wit hth e sulfu r

analysis , kj/k g (Btu/lb)

. K = 2 x 10 7 |(kg)(ng)/(%)(J) ] {2 X 10<(lb)(Btu / (%))(millio n Btu) } Afte r calculatin g E d i us e th e procedure s i n Sectio n 4- 2 t o determin e th e averag e SO 2 emissio n rat e t o th e atmospher e for th e performanc e tes t

perio d(E ao )

. 7. Determination of

Compliance When Minimum Data Requirement Is Not Met 7. 1 Adjuste dEmissio n Rate s an dContro l Devic e Remova l Efficiency

. Whe n th e minimu mdat arequiremen t i s no t met , th e Administrato r

ma y us e th e followin g adjuste d emissio n rate s o r

contro l devic e remova l efficiencie s t o determin e complianc e wit hth e applicabl e standards

. 7.1. 1 Emissio n Rate

. Complianc e wit hth e emissio n rat e standar dma y b e determine db y usin g th e lowe r

confidenc e limi t

of th e emissio n rat e (E a0 * ) a s follows : E a „*=E ao -to.95S 0 Eq

. 19-2 6 where : S 0 = standar ddeviatio n o f th e hourl y averag e emissio n rate s for

eac hperformanc e tes t period , ng/ J (lb/millio n Btu)

. to.95=value s show n i n Tabl e 19- 2 for th e indicate dnumbe r

of dat apoint s n
. 7.1. 2 Contro l Devic e Remova l Efficiency

. Complianc e wit hth e overal l emissio n reductio n (%R„

) ma y b e determine db y usin g th e lowe r confidenc e limi t

of th e emissio n rat e (E a0 * ) an dth e uppe r confidenc e limi t

of th e inle t pollutan t

rat e (E,,* ) in calculatin g th e contro l devic e remova l efficienc y (%R B ) a s follows : %R,=100[1.0-E. o */E,i* ] Eq

. 19-2 7 E ai * = E a i + to.95S , Eq

. 19-2 8 where : S | = standar ddeviatio n of th e hourl y averag e inle t pollutan t

rate s for

eac h performanc e tes t

period , ng/ J (lb/millio n Btu)

.
TABL E 19-2.—VALUE S FO R T 0 9 5

n 1

2 3 4 5 6
7 t o .95

6.3 1 2.4 2 2.3 5 2.1 3 2.0 2
1.9 4 n 1

8 9 1 0 1 1 12-16.

. 17-21.

. t o .9 5

1.89 1.86 1.8 3 1.8 1 1.7 7
1.7 3

> n 1

22-26.

. 27-31.

. 32-51.

. 59-91.

. 92

- 151

. 15 2 o r more t o .95
1.7 1 1.70 1 m 1.67 1 6 6
1.6 5

1 Th e value s of thi s tabl e are correcte d lo r n- 1 degree s of freedom

. Us e n equa l t o th e numbe r(H ) of hourl yaverag e dat a points

.
7. 2 Standar dDeviatio n of Hourl y Averag e Pollutan t Rates

. Comput e th e standar d deviatio n (S c ) of

th e hourl y averag e pollutan t rate s usin g th e followin g equation : 

# -\/(i/H) - (I/

H ) { A r V j= l ( E

h j 

## - E a 

## ) 2 

## ]/( H 1 ) ) Eq . 19-2 9

where : S = standar ddeviatio n o f th e hourl y averag e pollutan t rate s for

eac hperformanc e tes t period , ng/ J (lb/millio n Btu)

. H r = tota l number s o f hour s i n th e performanc e tes t

perio d(e.g. , 720 hour s fo r 30-da y performanc e tes t period)

. Equatio n 19-2 9 ma y b e use dt o comput e th e standar ddeviatio n for bot hth e outle t

(S„ ) and , i f applicable , inle t

(Sj ) pollutan t

rates

. [F RDoc

. 87-2821 6 File d12-15-87;.8:4 5 am ) BILLIN G CODE 6560-50- M