# Table

8-9 Summary

of BART Analysis

City

of Dover

Unit

3Steps4.2andStep3—43EvaluateDetermineStep5—Step2—ControlEnergy,OtherEvaluateIdtStep1—IdentifyEffectivenessStep4.1—CalculateNon-AirVisibilityBARTIdentifyTechnicallyforCostEffectivenessforQualityImpactsofControlVIPControlFeasibleTechnicallyControlTechnologiesEnvironmentalControlTechnologiesControlFeasibleImpacts,andTechnologiesTechnologies‘ontrolRemainingTechnologiesUsefulLifeNotanalyzedduetotechnicalUseAdd-OndifficultyControlofNoN/AN/AN/AN/AexpressedbycontrolBaghousetechnolovendors. 

# The Department

has reviewed

the BART analysis performed

by

the City

of Dover.

Based

on this review,

DNREC

is establishing

0.5

% sulfur

as BART

for City

of Dover—

Unit

3. AP-42

states that sulfur content

in residual

fuel

is directly proportional

to

a one

to one ration

with particle emissions._

Therefore, by-reducing

sulfur content

by half reduces

PM

by half. Evaluation

of all

of the

five

(5) factors

shows

that

a sulfur

limit

of

0.5

%

is BART

for

the following

reasons: • Residual

fuel

with

a sulfur content

of

0.5 percent

is cost-effective

for purposes

of improving visibility

at Class

I areas. 22 •

No significant

energy

or non-air

quality environmental

benefits

or dis-benefits

associated with using

lower

sulfur

fuel were identified. A mechanical

tyciune1i 

# are already

in place,

and 0.5%

sulfur

fuel

will reduce

PM emissions by approximately

50%, accordino

to AP

42 • Since

the remaining

useful

life

of the

unit

is expected

to

be greater

than

the

life

of the control options,

no weight

was given

to the remaining

useful

life parameter. • Although

there

are small visibility incremental

benefits

that could

be reasonably

anticipated as

a result

of installation

of other control

options

(<0.1

dv

on

the worst

day impact),

DNREC believes

that

the increased

costs associated

with higher

cost options

are

not justified

by

the minimal

visibility improvement. 8.4.2.4 Conectiv

Edge

Moor

Units

4 and

521EPATechnologyTransferNetworkClearinghouseforInventories&EmissionsFactors,Chapter1Volume3http:Ilvvww.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/chOl/final/cOIs03.pdf22ThisappliesonlytothisBARTanalysis,andthatitdoesnotimplythatwehavedeterminedthatadditionalPMcontrolsarenotcosteffectiveforanyotherfuturepurposeoranalysis. 

# 68below0.1delta-dyforbothClassIareas(amaximumvalueof0.06delta-dy,8thhighestor98thpercentiledayineachofthethreemodeledyears2001,2002and2003).TheDepartmenthasreviewedConectiv’sBARTanalysisforUnit4.BasedonthisreviewDNRECisestablishingthatexistingPMcontrols(i.e.,ESP)andaDSTsystematEdgeMoorUnit4areBART.Evaluationofallofthefive(5)factorsshowsthatESP/DSIisBARTforUnit4forthefollowingreasons:•Theadditionofafabricfilterwasnothadahighcost-effectiveforpurposesofimprovingvisibilityatClassIareas.•Energyornon-airqualityenvironmentalbenefitsordis-benefitswerenotconsideredinrulingoutanycontroltechnology.•TheexistingESPiseffectiveatreducingparticulatematteremissions,andtheadditionoftheDSIsystemwillreducecondensableemissions.•Sincetheremainingusefullifeoftheunitisexpectedtobegreaterthanthelifeofthecontroloptions,noweightwasgiventotheremainingusefullifeparameter.•Theincrementalbenefitinvisibilitythatwouldresultfromtheinstallationofafabricfilterwassmall(comparableto0.1dvonthe8thhighestdayimpact).TheDepartmenthasreviewedConectiv’sBARTanalysisforUnit5.BasedonthisreviewDNRECisestablishing0.5%sulfurasBARTforPMatEdgeMoorUnit5.AP-42statesthatsulfurinfuelisaone-to-oneratioflwithparticleemissions.Therefore,byreducingsulfurcontentbyhalfreducesPMbyhalf.Evaluationofallofthefive(5)factorsshowsthatasulfurlimitof0.5%isBARTforthefollowingreasons:•Residualfuelwithasulfurcontentof0.5percentiscost-effectiveforpurposesofimprovingvisibilityatClassIareas.•Amechanicalcycloneisalreadyinplace,and0.5%sulfurwouldreducePMemissionsby50%.AP‘1223statesthatsulfurinfuelisaonetoonerationwithparticleemissions.Therefore,byreducingsulfurcontentbyhalfreducesPMbyhalf.•Therearenosignificantenergyornon-airqualityenvironmentalbenefitsordis-benefitsassociatedwithusinglowersulfurfuel.•Sincetheremainingusefullifeoftheunitisexpectedtobegreaterthanthelifeofthecontroloptions,noweightwasgiventotheremainingusefullifeparameter.•Thisoptionwillprovideasmallvisibilityincrementalbenefit.23EPATechnologyTransferNetworkClearinghouseforInventories&EmissionsFactors,Chapter1Volume3http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/chOl/flnal!cOls03.pdf708.4.2.5NRG-IndianRiverUnit3isacoal-fired,165MWEGUequippedwithcold-sideESP.ThepermittedlimitforPMforUnit3aspertheexistingTitleVoperatingpermitis0.3lb/MMBtu(2-houraverage).ThisemissionlimitwasusedforestimatingmaximumhourlyPM1Oemissionrates.NRGprovidedananalysisoftheavailablecontroltechnologies,anda“fivefactoranalysis”pursuanttotherequirementsof40CFR51.308(e)(1)(ii)(A)forthetechnologicallyfeasibleoptions.Table8-10summarizesthecosteffectiveness.Insummary:Cost.Table8-10CostEffectivenessforVisibilityImprovementforAlternativeControlTechnologiesBrigantineNWAExpectedChangeinTotalAverageCostEmissionVisihilit3’VisibilityCapitalCostDirectCostIndirectCostAnnualizedControlEffectiveness($perRate(lb/ImpactTechnologyMMBtU)(dv)Impact$$$Costchangeindv)from$BaselineBaseline(existingColdsideESP):0.30.173-----EmissionScenario1PulseJetFabricFilter:0.0150.010.163$43,419,200$20,330,504$15,621,995$35,952,499$220,567,479EmissionScenario1WetESPafterFGD:0.010.0070.166$88,270,292$39,882,776$31,759,177$71,641,952$431,578,024EmissionScenario1Baseline(existingColdsideESP):0.30.466-----EmissionScenario2PulseJetFabricFilter:0.0150.4040.062$43,419,200$20,330,504$15,621,995$35,952,499$579,879,016EmissionScenario2WetESPafterFGD:0.010.3670.099$88,270,292$39,882,776$31,759,177$71,641,952$723,656,081EmissionScenario_2Enervandnon-airenvironmentalimpacts—TherearenosignificantenergyornonenvironmentalimpactsforeitherthePulseJetFabricFilter(PIFF)orthewetESP.ThehigherpressuredropinthePJFFwillresultinsomeincreaseinpowerrequirement.ThePJFFwillgeneratedryashinthehopperwhichwillbetransportedtothelandfillonthesiteasiscurrentlydonewiththeashfromexistingESP.TheWetESPconsumeselectricpowersimilartodryESPandthustherewillbenosignificantchangeinpowerdemand.Theadditionalcondensableacidmistgeneratedby71Table8-12SummaryofBARTcontrolmeasuresforPMSourceIControls(BART)OperationalMonitoring,TestingandRecordkeepingCompiianceScheduleandUnitStandardRequirementsINRGxistingBARTshallbeReporting,monitoring,andrecordkeeping3ARTwillbeeffectiveIndianlectrostaticproperoperationrequirementstomaketheBARTmandafterthedateRiver—precipitator(ESP)oftheexistingequipmentandoperationalstandard(i.e.,RGIndianRiver’sUnit3EsP.properoperationoftheexistingESP)egulation1102permit(coal)practicallyenforceableshallbeimposedischangedtoreflectpursuanttoRegulationNo.30SectionARTlimits,butno6(a)(3)(i)(B),Regulation1102,Sectionlaterthan01/01/2013.11.2.9andshallbeincorporatedintoRegulation_30_operating_permit.CityofowSulfurOilBARTshallbeReporting,monitoring,andrecordkeepingARTwillbeeffectiveDover,theuseofoilrequirementstomaketheBARTnandafterthedateMcKeewith0.5%operationalstandard(i.e.,burningoflowityofDover—McKeeRun—Unitsulfur,sulfuroil)practicallyenforceableshallbeun’sRegulation11023imposedpursuanttoRegulationNo.30,ermitischangedto(#6residualSection6(a)(3)(i)(B),Regulation1102,eflectBARTlimits,oil)Section11.2.9andshallbeincorporatedutnolaterthanintoRegulation30operatingpermit.1/01/2013ConectivexistingBARTshallbeReporting,monitoring,andrecordkeepingARTwillbeeffectiveEdgeMoorlectrostaticproperoperationrequirementstomaketheBARTnandafterthedate—Unit4recipitator(ESP)oftheexistingequipmentandoperationalstandard(i.e.,onectivEdgeMoor‘s(coal)mdinstallaionofESPandDSJ..properoperationoftheexistingESPegulation1102permit)rySorbentDST)practicallyenforceableshallbeischangedtoreflectInjection(DSI).imposedpursuanttoRegulationNo.30ARTlimits,butnoSection6(a)(3)(i)(B),Regulation1102,laterthanSection11.2.9andshallbeincorporated)1/01/2013into_Regulation_30_operating_permit.ConectivowSulfurBARTshallbeReporting,monitoring,andrecordkeeping3ARTwillbeeffectiveEdgeMoor)iltheuseofoilrequirementstomaketheBARTnandafterthedateUnit5(#6with0.5%operationalstandard(i.e.,burningoflowonectivEdgeMoor’sresidualsulfur.sulfuroil)practicallyenforceableshallbe.eguIation1102permitoil)imposedpursuanttoRegulationNo.30ischangedtoreflectSection6(a)(3)(i)(B),Regulation1102,3ARTlimits,butnoSection11.2.9andshallbeincorporatedlaterthaninto_Regulation_30_operating_permit.)1/01/201374