Tennesse e Ga s Pipelin e a n E t Pas o compan y

Jun e 30 , 200 4 Rober t Donaldson Departmen

t o f Environmenta

l Protectio n Busines s Complianc e Divisio n On e Winte r Stree t Boston , M A 0210 8
Dea r Mr
. Donaldson : Tennesse e Ga s Pipelin e Compan

y (TGP ) submits wit h thi s lette r comment s o n the Massachusett

s Departmen

t o f Environmenta

l Protectio n (DEP ) propose d Ai r Qualit y Regulatio n 31 0 CM R 7.26(40) - (44 ) (Propose

d Rule)
. Thes

e comment

s supplemen

t alis t o f initia l concern s submitted by TG

P i n Octobe

r 2003
. Th

e Octobe r 2003 comment

s wer e base d o n th e review o f

a pre-draf t versio n o f

the Propose

d Rul e an d wer e submitte d t o th

e DE P a t you r request . Severa

l o f th e comment

s submitte d i n Octobe

r hav e bee n addresse

d i n th e Propose d Rule , an

d TG P appreciate s th

e DEP' s consideratio n o f ou r earlie r comments . I n th

e attache d comment

s o n th e Propose d Rule , TG

P endorse s severa

l revision s include d i n th e Propose d Rule
. I n addition , th

e attache d comment

s addres s portion s o f

th e Propose d Rul e tha

t TG P believe s requir

e further consideration an

d revision
. TGP' s comment s ar e base d o n ou r experienc e operatin g turbine s an d interna l combustio n (IC ) engine s o n ou r natura l ga s transmission pipelin e syste mthroughou

t th e Unite d States
. Som

e o f thes e comment

s wer e expresse

d i n th e Octobe r 200 3 correspondence , whil e other

s comment

s addres s issue s not

identifie d i n tha

t letter
. TG P operates natura

l ga s compresso

r station s i n Massachusetts , an d thu s ha s a n interes t i n ensurin g achievabl

e emissio n limit s fo r

ne w ga s turbine s an

d I C engines
. Base

d o n expectation s tha t ne w ga s turbine s or

I C engine s wil l be installe d a t TG P facilitie s i n th

e futur e to ensur

e th e continued reliabl e deliver y o f clean-burnin g natura

l ga s to Massachusett

s an d it s neighborin g states , TG P i s concerne

d wit h severa

l aspect s o f th e Propose d Rule
. I n compariso n t

o apre-draf

t version o f th e rule , the Propose

d Rul e no w include s languag e tha t allow s turbine s an

d I C engine s i n ga s pipelin e servic e to follo w a n alternativ e permittin g proces s b y filin g aComprehensiv e Pla n Applicatio n (CPA ) i n lie u o f complyin g wit h th

e presumptive limit s i n the Propose d Rule
. However , comment

s ar e stil l warranted o n issues related to th e feasibilit y o f

th e presumptive limit s an d othe r rul e requirements , a

s wel l a s th e proces s tha

t resulte d i n applicatio n o f limit s possibl y feasibl e fo r

electrical generatin

g unit s (EGUs ) t o broade

r industrial classes , includin g ga s transmission , withou t

providin g analysi s an

d documentation t

o suppor t suc h aconclusion
. Th e Propose d Rul e apparentl

y i s base d o n aMode l Rul e develope d b y th e Regulator

y Assistance Project (RAP) , an

d simila r document

s fromothe

r states , tha

t wer e developed specificall y fo r "smaller-scal

e electrica

l generation resources. " Base d o n ou r experience , emission s performanc e

Tennesse e Ga s Pipelin e Nin e Gteenwa y Plaz aHouston, Texa

s 7704 6 te l 832.676.260

0fo r

turbine s an

d I C engine s i n EG U servic e fai l t o reflec t th e unique operatin g profile s an d loa d followin g requirements o f simila r equipmen

t i n pipelin e service
. Thus , emission limitation s i n th e Propose d Rule derive d fro mth

e RAP Mode l Rul e an

d simila r EGU-relate d guidance ar e not appropriat e fo r applicatio n t o turbine s an d I C engine s i n pipelin e service
. Whil e th e CP A proces s provide s a

n alternativ e permittin g proces s fo r equipmen

t i n ga s transmission , th

e Propose d Rule implie s tha

t th e emissio n limit s ar

e feasibl e fo r

pipelin e equipment , whic h i s not appropriate
. Ultimately , th e Propose d Rul e ma

y serv e a s aregulator

y guidelin e fo r

othe r areas , an d thu s i t i s importan

t tha t th e Propose d Rul e an d associate

d suppor t documentation properly reflec t th e feasibility o f

th e proposed emissio n limit s fo r non-EG U applications
. TG

P encourages DE

P t o ensur e tha t th e regulatio n include s explanator y tex t or suppor t documentation tha t i s relevan

t to non-EGU source s suc h a s turbine s an

d I C engine s i n ga

s transmission
. W e remain concerne

d tha t th e rule , a s proposed , wil l hav

e th e unintende d effec t

o f inhibitin g th

e developmen

t o f natura l ga s infrastructure i n th

e Commonwealth
. Give n th e growin g deman

d fo r natura l ga s a s th e fue l o f choic e b y businesse s an

d stat e o f th e ar t EGUs , we believ e i t

i s appropriat e tha t th e rul e promote s th

e us e o f proven contro l technologies , but i t i s inappropriat

e t o b e designe d wit h emissio n limit s base d o n futur e assumptions o f technologica

l advances
. W e appreciat

e th e DEP' s consideratio n o f

these comments , an

d offe r our assistanc e i n th e developmen

t o f th e Propose d Rule
. I f yo u have an

y questions , please contact m e a t 832-676

- 7446
.
Fij i C
. Georg

e Principa l / Ai r Grou p Lead , Easter

n Pipeline s Tennesse e Ga s Pipelin e Compan

y

cc : Sandr

aMarlin , TG

P Sa mClowney , TG

P JimSinclair , TG

P Stev e Morawski , TG

P Bo b Hall , TG

P W
. Rober t Keating , Commissioner , M A DT E Davi d O'Connor , Commissioner , M A DOE R

2

i

### Tennesse e Ga s Pipelin e Compan

y Comment

s o n MADE P Draf

tAi r Qualit

y Regulatio

n 31 0 CM R7.2

0 Jun e 30,200 4 Thi s documen

t provide s comment

s fromTennesse

e Ga s Pipelin e Compan

y (TGP ) o n th

e propose d Ai r Quality Regulatio n 31 0 CM R7.26(40 ) - (44 ) (Propose d Rule ) developed b y th

e Massachusett

s Departmen

t o f Environmenta

l Protectio n (DEP ) fo r

contro l o f

emission s from ne w combustion turbine s an d reciprocatin g internal combustio n (IC ) engines
. I n Octobe r 2003 , a t DEP' s request, TG

P submitte d alette

r to th e DE P identifyin g TGP' s preliminar y concerns wit h apre-draf

t versio n o f

th e Propose d Rule
. These comment

s supplemen

t ou r preliminar

y lis t o f concerns fromOctober
. TG P operation s i n Massachusett s include fou r

natura l ga s pipelin e compresso

r station s tha

t delive r natura l ga s t o markets i n th

e Northeast
. Base

d o n expectation s tha

t ne w ga s turbine s o

r reciprocatin g internal combustio n (IC ) engine s wil l b e installe d a

t thes e facilitie s i n th

e future t o ensur e th e continue d reliabl e deliver y o f clean-burnin g natura

l ga s to Massachusett

s an d it s neighboring states , TG

P i s concerne

d abou t th e stringen t limit s i n th

e Propose d Rule
. Turbine s an d I C engine s a

t compresso

r station s hav

e uniqu e operating profile s du e t o th e fac t tha t th e unit s mus t respon d to th e demand s o f th e pipeline , i.e. , th

e unit s ar e load-following
. Turbin e an d I C engine s i n pipelin e servic e mus t hav e th e flexibilit y to operat

e fromver

y lo w load s to ful l loa

d service , an

d equipmen

t must respon d to pipelin e demand

s tha t ca n var y ove r thi s loa d rang e i n a relativel y shor

t time frame. These pipelin e operation s diffe r fromth e typica l operatin g condition s fo r

othe r industries , suc

h a s electrica

l generation
. A s aresult , achievable emission s performanc e an

d contro l technolog y applicability fo r turbine s an

d I C engine s i n pipelin e operation s ar

e differen t

tha n simila r unit s i n electrica

l generation service
. Thi s distinctio n i s du e t o th e breadt h o f operatin g condition s typica l fo r the "loa d following " profil e i n ga s transmission , whic h contrast

s th e characteristi c constan

t load operatio n tha

t i s require d to fee d powe

r into th e gri d fo r electrica l generating unit s (EGUs)
. I n th e Octobe r 200 3 lette

r t o DE P tha t identifie d a

n initia l lis t

o f concern s wit h th

e pre-draf t rule , TG P expresse

d concer n regardin g th

e proposed emissio n limit s an d th e basi s fo r

these standards
. Tha t lette r t o DE P identifie d anumbe

r o f issues , wit h th

e majo r issu e th e infeasibilit y o f

th e emission limit s an

d the imprope

r migratio n o f

a n EG U base

d mode l rul e t o othe

r industria l operations
. TG

P i s please

d tha t severa l issue s raise d i n ou

r Octobe r 200 3 comment

s hav e bee n addresse d i n th e Propose d Rule , including :

• Additio n o f

aprovisio n tha

t allow s unit s a

t natura l ga s compresso

r station s a

n alternativ e t

o complyin g wit h the unachievable limit s i n th e Propose d Rule
. Thi s alternativ e require s th e operato r t o fil e aComprehensive Pla n Applicatio n (CPA ) i n lie u o f complyin g wit h th

e Propose d Rule
. • Remova

l o f emission limit s fo r

particulat

e matte r (PM ) fo r al l gas-fire d equipment
. Th e pre draf t versio n o f

th e rul e include d P M limit s fo r gas-fire d combustio n turbines
. • Additio n o f

aprovisio n tha

t indicate s tha

t complianc e testin g shal l be conducted a t ful l loa d conditions
. 1TG

P support s these changes
. However , TG P believe s tha

t comment s on the Propose

d Rule ar e stil l warrante

d i n regar d to severa

l issues
. TG

P stil l i s concerne

d wit h th e presumptiv e emissio

n limits , an d th e implicatio n tha

t these limit s ma

y be appropriat

e fo r equipmen

t i n natura l ga s transmission
. Whil e filin g aCP A provide s ga

s transmissio n companie s a n alternativ e mechanis mfo r permittin g ne

w turbine s o

r I C engine s a

t compresso

r stations , TG

P believe s tha

t th e rul e developmen

t proces s i s flawed , i n tha t amodel rul e an

d emission limit s base

d on expecte d performanc e fo r

EGU s hav

e bee n inappropriately applie d t o al l industrial categorie s o f turbine s an

d I C engines
. Suc

h a n approac h does no t

conside r th e effec t tha t th e applicatio n ca

n hav e on equipmen

t operatio n an

d performance , an

d establishe s apoo

r preceden t regarding th

e basi s an d suppor t documentatio n an

d analysi s associate

d wit h rulemaking
. W e encourag

e DE P t o provid e background documentation tha t identifie s th

e proces s fo r

thi s rul e development, justifie s th

e basi s fo r

presuming tha

t EG U emission limit s ar

e appropriat

e fo r non EG U application s - includin g variabl e loa d installation s suc

h a s ga s compresso

r stations , an

d clarifie s th

e basi s fo r

an y conclusion s reache

d o n whethe

r non-EGU application s ca n achiev e th e presumptive standards
. I n addition , th e DE P shoul d conside

r tha t b y not properl y definin g appropriat e emission limit s fo r

non-EGU turbine s an

d I C engines , thes

e source categorie s ar

e deprived th

e opportunit

y to compl y wit h apresumptive-limi t base d regulation , an

d onl y lef t wit h th e onerou s optio n o f

case-by-case revie w unde r th e CP A process . Thi s ma

y increas e th

e permittin g an

d complianc e cost

s fo r non-EG U turbine s an

d I C engine s compare

d t o their EG U counterparts . Ou r comment s o n the Propose

d Rul e ar e base d o n th e wealt h o f experience tha

t TG P offer s regarding emission s performanc e an d th e applicatio n o f

emissio n control s fo r

turbine s an

d I C engine s employe

d i n ga s transmissio n service
. TG P i s mainl y concerne

d wit h possible misconception s regardin g th e applicability o f

th e emission limit s to turbin e an d I C engine s i n ga

s transmission service
. Additiona l comment s ar e offere d o n topic s o f

interest , although , unles s th e emission limit s i n th

e Propose d Rul e change , TG

P expect s tha t ne w unit s a t ou r facilitie s wil l hav e t o us e th e CP A process . Th

e issue s identifie d b y TG

P regardin g th

e Propose d Rul e include : 1
. Whil e unit s i n ga

s transmissio n servic e ca

n follo w th

e CP A proces s i n lie u o f

complyin g wit h th e Propose d Rule , i t i s implie d tha

t th e emission limit s i n th

e Propose d Rul e ar e feasible
. Thus , i t i s necessar

y to presen

t acas e against th e proposed presumptiv e limits
. Base d on TG P experience , th

e NO x limit s proposed ar e no t achievabl e fo r I C engine s an

d ga s turbine s i n transmission service
. Th e DE P shoul d clarif

y thi s fac t

i n suppor t documentation , o

r provid e evidence t o th

e contrary . 2
. Th e DE P should conside

r developin g appropriat

e presumptiv e emission limit s fo r subcategorie s o f

equipmen

t tha t include non-EG

U industrial applications
. 3
. Th e Propose d Rul e shoul d clearl y indicat e tha t th e emission limit s onl y apply a t ful l load
. 4
. Th e DE P ha s provide d onl y minima l background informatio n on th e Propose d Rule
. Mor

e detailed background shoul d be mad e availabl e to discus s th

e basi s an d achievabilit

y o f th e standards , an

d the environmenta

l benefit s derive d fromimplementin g th e Propose d Rule
. 5
. TG P discourage s prescriptiv e emission limit s i n 2008 , 2012 , an d beyond , an

d urge s DE

P t o conduc t aTechnolog y Revie w i n advanc e o f eac h phase-i n dat e t o ensur e tha t progres s i n 2

iemission reductio n technolog y i s commensurat e wit h th e forecas t emissio n targe

t an d t o allo w public/stakeholde

r participatio n i n th

e process . 6 . Th e Propose d Rul e does no t

includ e man

y necessar

y implementatio n details
. For example , complianc e monitorin g requirement s ar e not defined
. Monitorin g provision s shoul d b e include d tha

t ar e base d o n th e measuremen

t o r monitorin g o f

operatin g parameters . I n addition , othe

r implementatio n issues , suc h a s allowance s durin g start-u p an d shutdown , should b e addressed
. Further , th

e manufacture

r certificatio n proces s shoul d b e eliminate d o

r revised to provid e ameaningfu l guarante e o f performance , an

d th e DE P shoul d ensur

e tha t certificatio n woul d no t

introduc e unnecessar

y marke t constraints
. 7
. Th e DE P ha s no t provide d an

y market-base

d option s fo r

compliance
. TG

P urge s th e DE P to conside r suc h options , a

s i t wil l enabl

e companie s to deriv e th

e most cost-effectiv e solutio n fo r compliance
. 8
. Fo r emergenc

y turbine s an

d I C engines , th

e maximumannua

l hours o f operatio n allowe d unde r th e Propose d Rul e shoul d b e change

d from30

0 hours t o 50 0 hours
. A 50

0 hou r operating limi t

i s consisten

t wit h emergenc

y generato

r definition s unde

r EP A Titl e V guidance an

d regulation s i n man

y othe r States
. 9
. Th e emission limi t

section s shoul d ad

d aprovisio n tha

t exempt s operation s fromcomplyin g wit h th e emissio n limit s when unforesee n circumstance s aris e tha t ar e beyond th

e contro l o f th e operator . 10
. Additiona l requirement s i n th e Propose d Rul e shoul d b

e delete d or clarified , wit h aclea

r indicatio n o f

nee d an d benefit , includin g requirements relate d to greenhouse ga s emissions , stac k height , an

d sound
. Detaile d Comment

s Commen t 1 : Whil e unit s i n ga

s transmissio n service ca

n follo w th

e CP A proces s i n lie u o f complyin g wit h th

e Propose d Rule , i t i s implie d tha

t th e emission limit s i n th

e Propose d Rul e ar e feasible
. Thus , i t

i s necessar

y to presen

t acas e agains t th e proposed presumptiv e limits
. Base d on TG P experience , th

e NO x limit s propose

d ar e no t achievable fo r

I C engine s an

d ga s turbine s i n transmissio n service
. Th e DE P shoul d clarif

y thi s fac t

i n suppor t documentation , o

r provid e evidence to th

e contrary . Th e Propose d Rul e include s th

e CP A proces s a

s a n alternativ e fo r

permittin g ne

w unit s i n ga

s transmission , rathe

r tha n complyin g wit h th

e emission limit s i n th

e Propose d Rule
. However , th

e Propose d Rule an d associate

d background release

d fo r revie w implie s tha

t these emission limit s ar e achievabl

e fo r turbine s an

d I C engines , an

d doe s not provide an

y analysi s o

r discussion regarding th

e effec t o f industrial applicatio n an d operating condition s o n emission s performance
. I n addition , whil e th

e Propose d Rul e i s primaril y base

d o n th e Regulator

y Assistanc e Project (RAP ) Mode l Rule , an

d simila r guidelin e document

s fromothe

r states tha t addres s requirement

s fo r EGUs , th e DE P ha s no t provide d an

y analysi s o

r documentation tha

t identifie s limitation s associate d wit h backgroun d documents
. Since regulation s frequently migrat e to jurisdiction s i n othe r states o r loca l districts , th

e Propose d Rul e ma

y serv e a s guidance or

background fo r

future regulation s i n othe

r parts o f th e U.S
. I n addition , futur e revie w unde r th e CP A proces s coul d b

e 3complicate d i f i t i s presume

d tha t th e emission limit s i n th

e Propose d Rul e ar e appropriate
. Thus , th e DE P shoul d eithe

r provid e th

e documentation tha

t indicate s tha

t th e propose d emissio n limit s ar e achievabl

e fo r non-EGU sources , o

r indicat e tha t no suc h conclusio n ha

s bee n reached , an d clearly explai n th

e basi s behin d thi s position
. Thi s wil l hel p ensur e tha t feature s an

d requirements o f

th e Propose d Rul e ar e not misconstrued i n th

e future
. Base d on TGP' s operatin g experience , dedicatio n t o researc h an d developmen

t t o advanc e technologie s fo r

ga s transmissio n compresso r drivers , an

d recen t experienc e wit h state-of-the-ar t technology installations , TG P does not

believ e tha

t th e proposed NO x emission limi t fo r eithe r turbine s o r I C engine s i s achievabl e fo r unit s i n ga

s transmission
. I n addition , TG P believe s tha

t th e curren t statu s o f technolog y developmen

t does not suppor t aconclusio n tha

t th e lowe r NO x emission limit s propose

d t o phase-in fo r

I C engine s i n 200 8 an

d 201 2 wil l b e achievabl

e fo r engine s i n ga

s transmission
. Sinc e achievin g th e NO x emission target

s i s likel y contingen

t upo n successfu l applicatio n o f

exhaust after treatmen t suc h a s selective catalyti c reductio n (SCR) , th e TG P concerns ar

e exacerbate

d b y th e knowledg e tha

t post-combustio n emissio n controls , suc h a s SCR, ar e unprove n fo r equipmen

t i n ga s transmission service
. Additionally , whe n ultra-lo w NO x level s ar

e require d fo r

rich-bur n I C engine s tha

t use non-selectiv e catalyti c reductio n (NSCR ) fo r NO x control , th

e emission s o f

othe r exhaus t constituents ma

y be impacted
. Th e emission s performanc e associate d wit h applicatio n o f

emission s contro l technologie s to

. simila r equipmen

t ca n b e impacte d b y factor s suc h a s th e dut y cycl e o f th e unit , th e type an d qualit y o f th e fuel , an d operationa

l characteristic s o f

th e equipmen

t (e.g. , turbin e versu s I C engine , lea

n bur n versu s ric h burn engine , spark-ignite d versu s compressio n ignitio n engine , etc.)
. A combinatio n bot

h equipment-base

d an d operating-base

d variable s wil l impact

th e choice o f emission contro l an

d the emission s performanc e fo r variou s contro l technologies
. I t i s no t apparen t tha t suc h issue s hav

e bee n considere

d i n proposin g th

e emission limit s i n th

e Propose d Rule - o r i f application s othe

r tha n EGU s hav

e eve n bee n thoughtfull y considered
. I f th e DE P ha s base d th e limit s o n EGUs , thi s fac t shoul d b e clearly indicated , along wit h clarificatio n o n th e lack o f evidence regardin g feasibilit y o f these limit s fo r

non-EG U sources , suc

h a s ga s transmission
. TG P experience indicate s tha t the propose

d NO x emission limi t

i s not feasibl e fo r

unit s i n ga

s transmission
. Whil e TG

P ca n offe r awealt h o f evidence an

d dat at o suppor t thi s positio n fo r turbine s an

d I C engine s i n ga

s transmission , th

e followin g ke y issues summarize th e applicatio n o f post combustion control s - whic h wil l b e necessar

y to achiev

e th e emission level s i n th

e propose d standard :
• Applicatio n o f

SC Ra t asingl e turbin e facilit y i n ga s transmissio n ha

s bee n fraught wit h problems , includin g th

e nee d fo r extensive facility-specifi c re-engineering , amultitud e o f regulator y variance s fromthe loca l agency , th

e replacemen

t an d reformulatio n o f

th e catalyst , and , ultimately , th

e relaxatio n o f

emission limit s fo r

NO x an d ammoni ato level s significantl y highe

r tha n th e standard

s i n th e Propose d Rule
. Fo

r example , th

e emission limit s includ

e a n ammoni asli p limi t

o f 2 0 ppmv . Nearl y te

n year s after it s initiation , thi s facilit y ha s proven to b e mor

e o f aresearc h test be d fo r th e catalys t vendo r tha n afunctional industria l facilit y operatin g wit h afeasibl e contro l technology
.
• SC R ha s no t bee n demonstrated o n load-followin g I C engine s i n ga s transmission
. On

e installatio n i n Californi awas decommissione d du e to operationa

l problems
. I n addition , th e 4

iEP

A ha s acknowledged tha

t SC R i s no t aproven technolog y fo r

load-followin g I C engines
. Further , i n attemptin g to adap t SC R to I C engines , technology vendors hav e introduce d syste mchanges tha

t ma y increas e th

e likelihoo d o f

emission s o f

deleteriou s nitrogen compound

s suc h a s ammonia , cyanide , an

d nitrou s oxide
. • NSCR-equipped I C engine s wil l likel y onl y achieve th e propose d limi t unde r selec t operatin g conditions
. I n addition , mos t ga s transmissio n installation s us e lea n bur n engines , whic h offe r operatin g cost , performance , an d emission advantages
. Further , recen t researc h indicate s tha

t NO x reductio n fromrich-bur n engine s ca

n coincide wit h increase s i n th e emission s o f

specie s suc

h a s ammoni aan

d nitrou s oxide , especiall y when hig h level s o f

NO x reduction s ar

e required
. These othe

r nitroge n specie s ar

e forme d du

e to reaction s tha

t ca n occu r unde r mor e fuel-ric h operating conditions , resultin g i n NO x conversio n to species othe r tha n th e desired produc t

- molecula

r nitrogen
. Othe

r species tha

t ca n b e forme d includ e ammoni a(NH3 ) an

d nitrou s oxide (N2O) , whic h hav e bee n measure d i n recen

t emission tests , an

d potentiall y cyanid

e species (CN)
. A s lowe r NO x emission s ar

e pursue d unde r th e Propose d Regulation , NSCR-equipped engine s ma

y appea r to be aviabl e optio n fo r

complianc e wit h ultra-lo w NO x limits
. However , th

e I C engin

e air-to-fue l rati o require d to achiev e th e lowes t NO x emission s mus

t b e mor e "fue l rich " (i.e. , mor

e oxyge n deficient)
. Thi s fue l ric h environmen t i s als o th e operating mod

e mos t conduciv e to increase s i n emission s o f nitrogenou s specie s suc

h a s ammonia
. I t

i s conceivabl e tha

t nomina l incrementa

l reduction s i n NO x unde r suc h operation s ma

y actuall y result

i n aconsiderable , an

d perhap s nearly identical , incrementa l increase i n emission s o f

othe r undesirable exhaus

t species
. Suc

h phenomen

amust be characterized , an

d thes e potentiall y collatera l deleteriou s effect s shoul d b e considere d b y th e DE P i n judgin g the "environmenta l benefit " fromemission limit s i n th e Propose d Rule
. TG P ca n provide additional discussion an d informatio n o

n these topic s i f

needed
. I n lie u o f

post
combustion controls , t o minimiz e emission s fromturbine s an d engine s i n compressio

n service , lea n premixe d combustio n i s employed fo r ga s turbine s an

d lo w emission combustio n i s use d fo r lean-bur n I C engines
. These controls , base d o n modifyin g th

e combustio n proces s t

o minimiz e th e amoun t o f NO x created , ar

e technicall y feasibl e fo r

load-followin g ga

s transmissio n application s an

d result i n substantia

l reduction s i n NOx
. However , these technologie s canno t achiev e th e NO x emissio n limi t

i n th e Propose d Rule
. Lackin g credibl e an d documente

d informatio n to th

e contrary , th

e Propose d Rul e o r associate d suppor t documentatio n should clearly indicat

e tha t th e presumptiv e emission limit s hav e not bee n prove n feasibl e fo r

non-EG U applications
. Commen t 2 : Th e DE P shoul d develo

p appropriat

e presumptiv e emission limit s fo r subcategorie s o f

equipmen

t tha t includ e non-EG

U industrial applications
. Th e presumptive limit s i n th e Propose d Rul e provid e aregulator y targe t tha t reduce s th

e burde n associate d wit h acquirin g apermi t usin g case-by-case review
. I n failin g t o conside r appropriat

e limit s fo r non-EG U turbine s an

d engines , th

e DE P ha s not afforde d operators i n ga

s transmission th e abilit y t o avoi d case-by-case revie w an d thu s likel y increase

d permittin g an

d complianc e cost s fo r thi s equipmen

t relativ e to simila

r equipmen

t i n EGU applications
. 5Th

e CP A alternativ e require s case-by-cas e revie w an

d doe s no t include presumptiv e emission limit s - whic h ca

n simplif y the permittin g process . TG P i s no t awar e o f an y subjectiv e technica

l revie w tha

t indicate s th

e proposed NO x limit s ca n b e achieve d fo r natura l gas-fire d unit s i n ga

s transmission service
. Thus , turbine s an d I C engine s i n ga

s transmissio n ar

e no t afforde d th

e lesse r permittin g burde

n associate

d wit h complyin g wit h presumptiv e limits
. Suc h a n optio n i s not availabl e t

o ga s transmissio n unti l th

e DE P undertake s a

n effor t t o provid e appropriat

e emission limit s fo r

non-EGU sources , whic h woul d necessaril y result i n severa l applicatio n an

d equipment-specifi c subcategorie s o f turbine s an

d I C engine s wit h associate d emission limits
. B y failin g to conduc

t atechnica

l revie w o f

emission limi t

applicability t o non-EG

U sources , th

e DE P ha s no t provide d sources , suc

h a s ga s transmission units , th

e opportunit

y to pursu e th e les s costly permittin g pat

h afforde d EG U unit s unde r th e Propose d Rule
. Th

e DE P should develo

p presumptiv e limit s fo r

non-EGU industrial categories
. TG P ca n participat

e i n thi s proces s an

d provide informatio n an

d dat at o suppor

t appropriat

e emission limit s fo r

equipmen

t i n variable loa d ga s transmission service
. Commen t 3 : Th e Propose d Rul e shoul d clearly indicat e tha t th e emission limit s onl y appl y a t ful l load
. Th e Propose d Rul e ha s adde d arequiremen

t i n section 7.26(43)(e)(3)(c ) t o conduc t th e complianc e test

a t th e ful l design load o f

th e I C engin

e o r turbine
. Du

e to question s abou

t emission s performanc e a

t off-loa d conditions , TG

P ha d suggeste

d suc h aprovisio n to th

e DE P i n preliminar

y comment

s o n th e pre-draf

t regulatio n i n Octobe

r 2003
. However , th

e nex t requiremen

t i n th e Propose d Rule , i n section 7.26(43)(e)(3)(d) , provide s th e DE P th e ability to requir e emission s o

r othe r testin g to assur

e compliance
. Thi s provisio n coul d be interprete d t o allo w th e DE P th e requir e emissio n test

s a t condition s othe

r th e ful l design load
. Experienc e show s tha

t I C engin e an d turbin e emission profile s an d contro l effectivenes s var y acros s equipmen

t subcategorie s an

d a s loa d varies , an

d ther e i s ofte n atradeof

f betwee n emission s o f

NO x an d CO
. EP A ha s acknowledge

d th e dependenc

e o f performanc e on operatin g load durin g th

e SI P Cal l process , an

d awealt h o f dat aalso establishe s th

e impac t o f loa d o n emission s o f

C O an d NOx
. Depending upo n th e pollutant , th

e equipment , an

d th e loa d condition , th

e functiona l relationship betwee n loa d an d emission s ca

n differ
. For example , fo r

aga s turbine , NO x typicall y decrease s a s loa d decreases , wit h a

n increase i n C O possible
. However , lo w emission s fromcurren t generation turbine s hav

e bee n achieve d primaril y through design advances t o contro l air-fue l mixing
. Typica l turbin e vendo r guarantees fo r dr y lo w NO x (DLN ) combustio n technology ar e provide d fo r

operatio n abov

e 0°F an d abov e 50 % rated load
. Engineerin g design strive s to achiev e a s broa d o f a n effectiv e operating rang e a s possible , bu

t typicall y focuse s o n optimizin g emission s a t ful l load
. Thus , variabl e loa d an d reduce d loa d operatio n ca

n result i n les s tha

n optima l performanc e fo r

a t least som e exhaus t species
. For

curren t generatio n lo w NO x turbines , apilo t flame i s typicall y use

d to ensur e stabl e combustion durin g load changes an d a t reduce d load , especiall

y fo r industrial scal

e turbines
. Reduce d loa d event s requir e a n increas e i n th

e percen t o f th e fue l fe dto th

e pilo t to ensur e flam e stability
. Th

e pilo t flam e combustio n doe

s no t provide th

e sam e leve l o f emission s performanc e a s th e primar y flame. Thus , variabl e an d reduce d loa d event s wil l resul

t i n les s tha

n optima l 6emission s fromga s turbine s - an

d ca n include poore

r emission s performanc e fo r som e pollutant s tha n wha t i s typica l a

t ful l load
. Th e emission limit s i n th

e standar d ar e apparentl

y base d on EG U performance , an d ar e thu s likel y base

d o n anomina l ful l loa

d operating condition
. I f

thi s i s th e case , the Propose

d Rule should clarif

y tha t sinc e th e background informatio n i s base d o n ful l loa

d conditions , emission limit s onl y apply a

t ful l load , an

d tha t complianc e test

s shoul d b e conducted onl y a t ful l loa d an d th e provision s i n sectio n 7.26(43)(e)(3)(d ) ar e no t intended to supersed

e thi s requirement
. Commen t 4 : Th e DEP ha s provide d onl y minima l backgroun d informatio n o n th

e Propose d Rule
. Mor e detaile d background should be mad e available t o discus s th

e basi s an d achievability o f

th e standards , an

d th e environmenta

l benefit s derive d fro m implementin g th

e Propose d Rule
. Th e Propose d Rul e include s onl y minima l background related t o environmenta

l benefits , an

d technica l an d economic justificatio n fo r th e regulation
. Mor

e detaile d documentation should b e mad e available fo r

revie w an

d commen

t tha t provides :

• Th e justificatio n fo r

th e proposed requirements ;
• Th e technica

l basi s fo r the propose

d emission limits ;

• Th e likelihoo d tha

t technolog y advances wil l achiev e th e lowe r emissio n limit s tha

t phase-i n ove r time ;
• Th e projecte d costs fo r

contro l technolog y an

d complianc e implementation ;
• Th e environmenta

l benefi t derive d fromth

e regulation
. Th e introductor

y tex t release d wit h th e Propose d Rul e provide s generi

c claim s o f

a"positiv e impact upon ai r quality " an

d complianc e cost

s tha t wil l b e n o greate r a s project s mee

t up-to-dat e technology standards
. However , ther e i s n o basi s o r justificatio n fo r

these statements . Since th e Propose d Rul e i s primaril y (i f

no t solely ) base

d o n emission level s associate d with EGUs , an d doe s no t conside r complicatin g factor s fo r

othe r industrial applications , supporting backgroun

d documentatio n i s especiall y important
. Fo

r example , mor

e challengin g operationa

l requirement

s relate d t o load variabilit y ma y preclud e th e applicatio n o f

technolog y develope

d fo r EGUs , whic h operat

e wit h amor

e unifor mload profile
. Whil e th e Propose d Rul e no w include s aprovisio n tha

t allow s non-EG

U unit s to follo w a

n alternativ e permittin g process , th e Propose d Rul e an d associate

d tex t impl y tha

t th e emission standard

s ar e achievable fo r

al l industria l categories
. Sinc e regulator y preceden

t i n aparticulat

e stat e o r regio n ca n migrat e to othe r jurisdictions , i t

i s importan

t tha t th e Propose d Rul e doe

s not impl y inappropriat

e conclusion s regardin g non-EGU sources . I n addition , ther

e ar e circumstance s tha

t coul d impact

th e environmenta

l benefi t fromth e Propose d Rule
. For

example , increasingly stringen t emission limit s hav

e resulted i n som

e t o conclud e tha t "rich-burn " engine s wit h NSC R offe r environmenta

l advantage s ove

r lea n bur n units , sinc e NSC R i s presume

d to effectivel y decreas

e engin e NOx
. However , a

s discusse d i n Commen t 1 , whe n ver y lo w emissio n level s ar

e required , i t

i s possible tha

t emission s o f

othe r 7exhaus

t species suc

h a s ammoni aan

d nitrou s oxid

e wil l increase
. I n fact , i t i s possible tha

t attempt s to achiev

e margina

l incrementa

l reduction s i n NO x coul d trigge r increase s i n deleteriou s specie s - an

d offse t or negat e an y presume d environmenta

l advantage
. Th

e potentia l fo r these emission s wil l increas e unde r variabl e loa

d operation
. Suc

h "trade-offs " should b

e recognized an

d properl y considered b y th e DEP , rathe

r tha n makin g th

e simpl e presumption o f

a positiv e impact

upo n air quality
. A t aminimum , th

e DE P shoul d specificall y include background tha t acknowledge s th

e technica l basi s fo r th e Propose d Rule
. I f

EG U base

d performanc e serve s a

s th e basi s fo r th e emissio n levels , thi s should b

e reported
. Lackin g an

y specifi c dat

atha t indicate s suc

h performanc e ca

n b e achieve d i n othe r industrial applications , th e DE P shoul d clearl y discus s thi s i n suppor t documentation fo r

th e Propose d Rule
. Thi s wil l provide historical documentation s o tha t other s ca n understan

d tha t inclusio n o f

othe r industria l categorie s i s no t

consisten t wit h th e RA P Mode l Rule , i s counte

r t o th e curren t understanding o f

technology performanc e fo r industrial categorie s suc h a s ga s transmission , an

d wa s stipulate d b y th

e DE P withou t specifi c documentation t o validat e th e feasibility o f

suc h assumptions
. Commen t 5 : TG P discourage s prescriptiv e emission limit s i n 2008 , 2012 , an d beyon d an d urge s DE P to conduct

aTechnology Review i n advanc e o f eac h phase-i n dat e t o ensur e tha t progres s i n emission reductio n technolog y i s commensurat e wit h th e forecas t emissio n targe

t an d to allo w public/stakeholde r participatio n i n th

e process . Th e NO x emission limit s fo r I C engine s ar

e base d o n forecas t

improvement s i n technology , an d phas e i n incrementally lower emissio n limit s i n 200 8 an d 201 2 (o r

abou t 3 an d 7 year s after th e projecte d initia l complianc e requirement)
. Th e Propose d Rul e include s aprovisio n fo r a technology revie w i n advanc e o f the 201 2 standar

d to determin

e i f th e propose d standard

s shoul d b e amende d du e to technolog y advancing a t aslowe r pac e tha n envisione d a

t th e tim e o f rul e development
. However , n o suc h revie w i s planned i n advanc e o f th e 200 8 standard
. Th e emission targets proposed fo r equipmen

t installe d afte r

200 8 ar e considerabl

y lowe r tha n th e limit s fo r equipmen

t installe d afte r

th e initia l regulator

y deadlin e (currentl y state

d a s six months after th e effectiv e date) , an

d contro l technology developmen t i s no t evolvin g a

t apac e to suppor

t th e propose d emission limits
. Thus , atechnology revie w analogou s to th e revie w require d prio r t o th e implementatio n o f

th e 201 2 (i.e. , seve

n year ) standar d i s als o appropriat

e prio r t o implementatio n o f

th e 200 8 (i.e. , three year

) standard
. A provisio n analogou s to th e provisio n fo r 201 2 i n 31 0 CM R7.26(43)(b)(2 ) should be adde d to th e Propose d Rul e fo r

200 8 to ensur

e tha t availabl e technolog y ca

n achieve th

e propose d standard
. Thi s revie w wil l als o provide th e opportunit

y t o conside r an y operationa

l constraints o

r technolog y limitation s tha t hav e bee n identifie d durin g th

e implementatio n o f

th e initia l phas

e o f th e NO x standard
. Th e basi s fo r th e increasingly stringen

t regulation s i s questionable , a t best
. I t i s notabl e tha t th e propose d emission targets i n th

e Propose d Rule ar e apparentl

y draw n fromth

e RA P Rule an

d simila r effort s i n othe

r states . These effort s appea r t o bas e futur e yea

r emission limit s on aggressiv e researc h goal s fromprominen

t I C engin e researc h programs . For

example , th

e U.S
. Departmen

t o f Energy (DOE ) Advance d Reciprocatin g Engine System s (ARES ) progra

mha s a 8201 0 researc h targe t o f 0.1 0 grams/bhp-h

r o f NO x (0. 3 lb/MW-hr)
. A n interi mgoa l fo r 200 4 i s demonstration o f

NO x emission s o f

0.2 5 g/bhp-hr
. Similarly , th

e Californi aEnerg

y Commission (CEC ) ha s implemente d th

e Advance d Reciprocatin g Interna l Combustio n Engine s (ARICE ) researc h progra mtha t include s a0.1 0 g/bhp-h

r goa l fo r NO x emission s i n 2010 , wit h astretc h goa l o f 0.0 5 g/bhp-hr
. Thes e level s ar e simila r to th e Propose d Rul e NO x limit s fo r

I C engines o f 0. 3 lb/MW-h r

i n 200 8 an

d 0.1 5 lb/MW-h r

i n 2012
. Wit h phased-i

n emissio n limit s i n futur e year s simila r to goal s fro mlong-ter

mresearc h an d developmen

t programs , i t

i s appropriat

e to contemplat

e th e probabilit

y o f succes s an

d th e timelines s o f

R& D progres s whe

n considering whethe

r atechnolog y revie w i s appropriat e prio r t o phasin g i n an y lower emissio n limit
. Experienc e indicate s tha t an y objectiv e revie w o f

multi

yea r developmenta

l program s wil l conclud

e tha t researc h target s fo r technolog y advancemen

t ar e seldo machieved , and , a

t aminimum , ar

e typicall y not

achieve d withi n th

e timeframe forecas t

a t th e initiatio n o f

along-ter

mresearc h program . Suc

h long-ter mgoal s ar

e typicall y intended to aggressivel

y driv e technolog y forward , an d th e goal s ar e ofte n recas

t a s th e progra mproceed

s t o bette r reflec t th e fundamenta

l issue s an

d applicatio n challenge s tha t ar e discovered a

s th e researc h progra munfolds
. TG P question s th

e basi s fo r

th e schedule

d phase-i n emission requirements i n th e Propose d Rule , an d al l regulator

y phase-in s shoul d b e precede d b y atechnolog y revie w to assess whethe r th e presume d progres s i n technolog y advancement s ha s bee n achieved
. However , TG P strongly urge s th e DE P to refrai n fromprescribin g futuristi c emission limit s i n an y rulemaking
. Instead , TG P recommend

s completin g technolog y review s i n 2008,2012 , an d subsequen

t 5-yea r review cycles , wit h ampl

e opportunit

y fo r publi c participatio n an

d input
. Commen t 6 : Th e Propose d Rul e doe

s not include man

y necessar

y implementatio n details
. Fo r example , complianc e monitorin g requirements ar e no t defined
. Monitorin g provision s shoul d be include d tha t ar e base d o n th e measuremen

t o r monitorin g o f operatin g parameters . I n addition , othe r implementatio n issues , suc h a s allowance s durin g start-u p an d shutdown , shoul d be addressed
. Further , th e manufacture

r certificatio n proces s shoul d b e eliminate d or

revise d to provide a meaningfu l guarante

e o f performance , an

d th e DE P shoul d ensur

e tha t certificatio n woul d no t

introduc e unnecessar

y marke t constraints
. Regulation s tha

t includ e emission standard s fo r specifi c categorie s o f

equipmen

t typicall y include provision s tha

t addres s implementatio n an d complianc e issues , includin g complianc e testing , monitorin g requirements , an d definitio n o f

exemp t operation s o

r allowance s provide d durin g event

s suc h a s startu p an d shutdown
. Currently , th e Propose d Rul e include s onl y minimal referenc e to potentia

l monitorin g or

complianc e testin g requirements
. I n addition , th e Propose d Rule doe s not discus s startu

p an d shutdown , o

r othe r event s tha t shoul d be exemp

t frommeetin

g emission limi t

requirements
. Th

e Propose d Rul e shoul d bette

r defin e suc

h implementatio n issues
. Finally , certificatio n pe r 31 0 CM R7.26(43)(e)(l ) present s avendo r requiremen

t tha t ma y not be addresse

d i n th e curren t marketplac e an

d does not

defin e th e condition s o

r constraints (e.g. , operating load) unde r whic h th e certificatio n applies
.

9Complianc e Testing

Th e testin g provision s i n 31 0 CM R7.26(43)(e)(3 ) indicat e tha t complianc e tests must

follo w EPA , Californi aAi r

Resource s Boar

d (CARB) , o

r equivalen

t test methods
. However , th

e specifi c method

s ar e no t referenced
. Further , additiona l detail s related t o th

e requirements fo r conducting acomplianc e test ar e lacking
. I f

th e inten t i s to requir

e operator s o f ne w equipmen

t t o conduc t a n initia l performanc e tes t and/o r subsequen

t complianc e testing , th

e timin g an

d requirement

s fo r these tests shoul d be specificall y identifie d i n th e regulation , includin g items suc h a s test methods fo r

eac h regulate d pollutant , test plannin g an

d reporting , an

d schedul e fo r tes t completion
. Th

e Propose d Rul e shoul d b

e revise d t

o clarif y th e complianc e test requirement

s fo r subject equipment
. Monitorin g Th e monitorin g provision s i n 31 0 CM R7.26(43)(e)(2 ) onl y not e tha t th e DE P ma y requir e emission s monitorin g or

othe r monitorin g fo r

complianc e assurance . Th e Propose d Rule shoul

d b e revise d to include mor

e specifi c detai l o n monitorin g requirements or options
. Since recen

t federa l action s indicat

e tha t EP A accept s th e monitorin g o f

operating parameter

s fo r complianc e assurance , th

e regulatio n shoul d allo w operator s to fulfil l monitorin g requirements usin g parameter-base

d monitoring
. Fo r example , th

e federa l Phas e I I NO x SI

P Cal l include s provision s fo r th e reductio n o f

NO x tha t wil l affec t

I C engine s a

t ga s pipelin e compresso

r station s an

d storag e facilities
. I n developing th

e requirements fo r

the Phas e I I NO x SI

P Call , EP A ha s considered recen

t informatio n tha

t i s contrar

y t o som e o f th e previousl y availabl e informatio n o n NO x emission s an d contro l performanc e fo r equipmen

t i n ga s transmission service
. Thi s ha s resulte d i n change

s t o th e requirement

s i n origina l NO x SI

P Call , an d EPA' s curren

t thinkin g i s reflecte d i n th e Phas e I I NO x SI

P Call
. Th e Phas e I I NO x SI

P Call , Interstate Ozon

e Transport : Respons

e t o Cour t Decision s o

n th e NOx SI P Call , NOx SI P Cal l Technica l Amendments , an d Sectio n 12 6 Rules ; Fina l Rule s (6 9 F R 21604) , wa

s finalize d o n Apri l 21 , 2004
. Prior to this , du

e t o the ongoin g evolutio n o f th e EP A positio n an

d th e timin g o f

NO x reduction s bein g considere d i n SI P Cal l states , on Augus t 22 , 2002 , EP

A release d aGuidance Memorandum
. Th e Memorandu

mfromMs
. Lydi a Wegman , Director , EP

A Ai r Qualit y Strategie s an

d Standard

s Division , Offic e o f

Ai r Qualit y Planning an

d Standards , wa

s entitled , Stat

e Implementatio n Plan (SIP) Cal l fo r Reducing Nitroge n Oxide s (NOx)--Stationar y Reciprocatin g Interna l Combustio n Engines , an

d addresse

d t o Ai r Divisio n Director s a

t EP A Regiona

l Offices
. Th

e fina l Phas

e I I Rul e an

d thi s mem

o provide EPA' s curren

t thinkin g an

d encourages states to provide flexibilit y i n th e implementatio n o f

engin e NO x reductio n strategies
. A copy o f th e EP A mem o i s attache

d to these comments . I n additio n to discussing emission s an d recommendin

g regulator

y flexibility , th e fina l rul e identifie s acceptabl e approaches fo r

complianc e monitoring : ".
. .acceptabl

e monitorin g i s no t

limite d to thos e monitorin g methods suc h a s continuou s o

r predictiv e emission s measuremen t system s tha t rel y o n automate

d dat acollectio n from instruments
. Non-automate d monitorin g ma y provid e areasonabl

e assuranc

e o f complianc e fo r

I C engine s provide d suc h periodi c monitorin g i s sufficien t t o yiel d reliabl e dat afo r th e relevan t tim e period s determined b y th e emission standard. " (6 9 F R 21622)
1 0I n addition , i n recen t MAC T standards , EP

A ha s propose d periodi c testin g an

d monitorin g o f operating parameter

s fo r avariet y o f source types . Fo

r example , th

e combinatio n o f

paramete r monitorin g an

d periodi c testin g i s consisten t wit h th e monitorin g approac

h tha t ha s bee n selecte d b y EP A i n anumbe

r o f MAC T standard

s tha t contemplat

e th e us e o f catalyti c device s t

o contro l emissions
. Simila

r contro l device s ma

y be necessar

y t o comply wit h th

e proposed CO an

d VO C emissio n limits
. Th e Propose d Rul e shoul d be revise d to include mor e specificity regardin g acceptabl e option s fo r complianc e monitoring , an d th e approaches accepte

d shoul d include paramete r monitoring
. Exemp t Practice s Th e Propose d Rul e provide s no languag e related t o standar

d operating condition s tha t canno t achiev e th e proposed emissio n limits , o r ho w suc h event s woul d be addressed
. For example , regulation s fo r

turbine s typicall y include provision s regarding startu p an d shutdown events . I t

i s commonl y accepte d tha t emission s ar

e highe r fo r som e perio d durin g startu

p an d shutdown , thu s exemption fromcomplyin g wit h th e emission limit s i s necessar y durin g thi s tim e period
. I n addition , i t

i s wel l established tha

t load changes an

d reduce d loa d operatio n result

i n differen t emission profile s the n operatio n a t nominal ful l load conditions
. I t i s imperativ e tha

t th e Propose d Rul e include s definition s fo r relevan t operationa

l events , an

d clarifie s applicabilit

y an d constraints regardin g emissio n performanc e requirements durin g common operationa l events . Certificatio n I n subsectio

n 31 0 CM R7.26(43)(e)(l) , certificatio n requirement s ar e presente d tha t include a statemen t fromth e engine or

turbin e manufacture

r tha t th e unit , "i s capabl

e o f complyin g wit h th e emissio n limit s fo r

15,00 0 hours o f operatio n or

th e firs t 3 year s o f operation. " Suc

h a statemen t ha s littl e relevanc e unles s associate d operationa

l constraints an

d material s tha

t suppor t th e clai mar e bette r defined
. I n addition , al l manufacturers ma y not be positione d o

r willin g t o fulfil l suc h arequirement
. Th

e DE P shoul d conside

r th e burde n tha t suc h arequirement , i n a single state , wil l plac e o n vendors an d operators . Additionally , th e DE P shoul d conside

r th e potentia l fo r th e requiremen

t t o limi t th e turbin e marke

t availabl e t o operator

s base d not on actua l performance , bu t

vendor decision s to foreg o sale

s i n asingle stat

e rathe r tha n fulfil l thi s requirement
. I n fact , i t

i s appropriat

e fo r th e potentia l marke t impacts associate

d wit h emission s certificatio n to b

e include d i n discussion o f th e economi

c impacts o f

th e Propose d Rule
. Regardin g th e certificatio n statement, i t i s possible tha

t aturbin e o

r I C engin e ma y achiev e th e emission limit s i n som

e instances , bu t

not others
. Fo

r example , ther

e ma y be case s whe n suc h performanc e i s onl y possibl e a t rate d loa d wit h nomina

l ambien t conditions
. Th

e certificatio n statemen t i n th e Propose d Rul e does no t

appea r t o requir e th e definitio n o f

an y suc h constraints
. I n addition , astatemen

t tha t auni t "i s capable " o f

achievin g aperformanc e targe t i s not a definitiv e requirement
. An y meaningfu l certificatio n should be commensurat e wit h a performanc e guarante

e an d requir e manufacturer s to stat

e that , withi n adefine d se t o f operationa

l constraints , th

e uni t "will " compl y wit h th

e standard
. Lackin g suc

h commitmen

t fromth e manufacturer , certificatio n wil l onl y provide afals e assuranc e o f equipmen

t performance
.

1 1I f

th e regulatio n i s to requir

e certification , th

e DE P shoul d ensur

e tha t turbin e an

d I C engin

e vendor s woul d commit

t o ameaningfu l certificatio n proces s i n atimel y fashion
. Lackin g suc h commitmen

t fro mth e vendors , the certificatio n proces s coul d result i n hollo w promise s regarding emission s performance
. Additionally , thi s requiremen t coul d introduc e marke

t factor s tha t wil l resul t i n increase

d cost s fo r operator s tha t nee d t o procur e ne w equipment
. Commen t 7 : Th e DE P ha s no t provide d an

y market-base

d option s fo r

compliance
. TG

P urge s th e DE P t o conside

r suc h options , a

s i t wil l enabl

e companie s t

o deriv e th

e mos t cost-effectiv e solutio n fo r compliance
. Th e implementatio n o f

market-base

d reduction s fo r

stationar y sourc e emission s ha

s bee n successfu l unde r th e Clea n Ai r Ac t Amendments o f

1990
. Market-based programs , suc h a s th e Aci d Rai n Progra

man d OT C NO x Budge

t Progra mhav e succeede

d i n th e cost-effectiv e implementatio n o f

emissio n reduction s t o improv e ai r quality
. Th

e NO x SI P Cal l Budge

t Progra mwil l continu e the us

e o f market-base

d reduction s o f

NO x emission s fo r

contro l o f

ozon e precurso r emission s i n th

e easter n U.S
. Massachusett

s ha s asuccessful market-base d progra mfo r certificatio n o f

Mas s Ban

k ERCs
. Fo

r example , thes

e ERC s ca

n be use d to achiev

e equivalen

t mas s emission s complianc e wit h existin g NO x RAC T limits
. I n fact , thi s complianc e strateg y ha s bee n employed fo r

RAC T compliance on aturbine a

t TGP' s Compresso

r Statio n 26

4 i n Charlton , MA
. Requirements o f NO x RAC T ca n als o be me

t vi aemission averaging , pe r 31 0 CMR7.0

0 Appendi x B(4)
. Since flexibl e approaches hav

e bee n deeme d acceptabl

e fo r NO x RAC T cases , asimila r degre e o f flexibilit y should b e provide d to compl y wit h th e requirements o f

th e Propose d Rule
. I n th e Propose d Rule , requirement s fo r

stationar y I C engine s an

d turbine s d

o no t provid e operator s th e benefit s an

d flexibilit y provide d b y market-base d o r flexibl e contro l options
. Fo r example , flexibilit y coul d allo w aregulate d sourc e to choos

e to instal l contro l o n aparticula r uni t i f warranted , o

r conside r factor s suc

h a s equipmen

t utilizatio n rate s an

d opt t o purchase NO x allowance s i f

thi s offer s amor

e cost-effectiv e solution
. Additionally , emission s averagin g withi n afacilit y or

acompan

y wil l als o provid e th

e flexibilit y tha

t allow s operator

s to choos

e th e contro l option s tha

t mak e th e mos t economi c sense , withou t sacrificin g environmenta l performance
. Commen t 8 : Fo r emergenc

y turbine s an

d I C engines , th

e maximu mannua

l hour s o f operation allowe d unde

r th e Propose d Rul e should be change

d fro m30

0 hour s t o 50 0 hours
. A 50 0 hou r operatin g limi t

i s consisten

t wit h emergenc

y generato

r definition s unde r EP A Titl e V guidance an

d regulation s i n man

y othe r States
. Th e Propose d Rul e establishe s requirements fo r emergenc

y I C engine s an

d turbine s i n 31 0 CMR 7.26(42)
. Subsectio

n (d)(1 ) state s tha

t emergenc

y unit s shal l no t

b e operate d mor e tha n 30 0 hour s durin g an

y rollin g 12-mont

h period
. Thi s "definition " o f emergenc

y generato

r i s differen t tha n th e 50 0 hou r criterio n tha

t ha s becom e fairl y standar

d i n regulator

y definition s throughou

t th e Unite d States
. For

example , anumbe

r States agencies an

d loca l district s us

e 50 0 annua l

1 2hour

s a s th e maximu mfo r

emergenc y units
. I n addition , guidance issue d b y EP A fo r "emergenc

y generators " unde

r th e Titl e V progra

mindicate s tha

t 50 0 hours i s a

n appropriat

e defaul t assumptio

n fo r emergenc y generators . Wit h th

e standar d limitatio n i n plac e throughou t th e U.S. , ther

e ha s neve r bee n a n indicatio n tha

t th e 50 0 hou r limi t ha s resulte d i n operation s tha t wer e not necessar y o r wer e someho w tryin g t o tak e advantag

e o f th e 50 0 hou r allowance
. Fo

r consistenc y wit h th e standar d regulator

y definitio n o f

"emergenc

y generator" , th

e Propose d Rul e shoul d chang

e th e 30 0 hou r criteri ai n subsectio

n (d)(1 ) to 50

0 hours
. Th e lowe r criteri ai n th

e Propose d Rul e i s not

necessary , a

s othe r provision s provide assuranc e tha t emergenc y unit s ar e no t operate d unles s th

e situatio n demand

s operation
. For

example , section 7.26(42)(a

) indicate s tha

t loa d shavin g units , peaking powe

r units , an d unit s i n a

n energ y assistanc e progra mar e no t emergenc y units
. Section 7.26(42)(d)(2 ) require s tha t operation an

d maintenance (e.g. , occasiona l start-u p fo r testing ) b e conducted consisten

t wit h th e manufacturer' s recommende d procedures
. Th

e definitio n o f

"emergency " i n section 7.26(41 ) specificall y identifie s th

e situation s tha

t ar e considered a

n emergenc

y an d thu s whe

n th e uni t ca n be operated
. Thus , wit h operatio n o f emergenc

y unit s limite d b y othe

r provision s i n th

e Propose d Rule , i t i s no t necessar y to introduc e a

n hour-base

d threshol d tha

t differ s fro m establishe d practice
. Emergenc y generato

r limit s hav

e typicall y bee

n base d on 50 0 hour s throughou

t th e Unite d States
. I n addition , othe

r provision s provide clea

r limitation s tha

t preven t unnecessar

y operation o f emergenc

y engine s an

d turbines
. Thus , th

e DE P shoul d chang

e th e allowe d hour

s o f operation fo r

emergenc

y unit s to 50

0 hours
. Commen t 9 : Th e emissio n limi t

section s shoul d ad

d aprovisio n tha

t exempt s operation s from complyin g wit h th

e emission limit s whe

n unforesee

n circumstance s aris e tha t ar e beyond th

e contro l o f

th e operator . Th e Propose d Rul e include s ver

y stringen t emission limit s tha

t becom e mor e difficul t

to achiev e a s th e emission standards decreas e ove r time
. A s emission limit s becom e mor e stringent , th

e possibilit y increase s tha

t unforesee

n circumstance s coul d result i n a n impac t o n operationa

l performanc e tha

t result s i n ashort-ter

mincreas e i n emission s abov e th e emissio n limit
. Th

e Propose d Rule shoul d include aprovisio n tha t provide s a

n exception fo r

complyin g wit h th

e emission limit s when emission performanc e i s impacted b y circumstance s tha t ar e beyon d th e contro l o f th e operator . Exception s woul d b e limite d to thos e situation s tha t aris e fro msudde

n an d reasonabl

y unforeseeable event

s beyond th

e contro l o f

th e operator . T o addres s exceptions , th e Propose d Rul e shoul d ad

d aprovisio n to section 7.26(42)(b)(3 ) an d section 7.26(43)(b)(5)
. Thi s "exceptio n provision " shoul d indicat e tha t shor t ter memission s increase s abov

e th e emissio n limi t

tha t ar e unavoidable ar

e no t subject to th e emission limit s i f th e emission increas e i s du

e to asituatio n arisin g fro masudde n an d reasonabl

y unforeseeabl

e even t beyon d th e contro l o f

th e operator , suc

h a s act s o f God
. Th e exemp t event s woul d no

t include noncomplianc e cause d b y circumstance s withi n th e contro l o f

th e operator , suc

h a s

' Septembe r 6 , 199 5 Memorandum

, "Calculatin

g Potentia l t o Emi t (PTE ) for Emergenc y Generators" , fro mJoh

n Seitz, Director

, EP A Offic e o f

Ai r Qualit y Plannin g an d Standard

s 1 3improperl y designe d o r installe d equipment , lack o f preventiv e maintenance , careles s o r imprope r operation , o

r operato r error . Th

e provisio n ca

n include arequiremen

t tha t th e operato r doe s everythin g reasonabl

y availabl e to ensur

e tha t exces s emission s ar

e minimized
. I n addition , areportin g an

d recordkeeping requiremen t ca n b e adde d t o th e Propose d Rul e to ensur

e tha t an y suc h event s ar e reporte d t o th

e DEP
. Commen t 10 : Additiona l requirements i n th e Propose d Rul e shoul d be deleted o r clarified , wit h aclea r indicatio n o f

nee d an d benefit , includin g requirements related t o greenhouse ga

s emissions , stac

k height , an

d sound
. Th e requirements relate d t

o severa l provision s i n th

e Propose d Rul e lack

clarity , or

their inten t an d nee d i s no t identified
. These provision s include greenhouse ga s emissio n requirements , stac k heigh t requirements , an

d soun d requirements
. Th

e rul e shoul d delet

e these requirements o

r clarif y th e intent , need , an

d benefi t o f eac h requirement
. Greenhouse Ga

s Emission s Ther e i s currently no t

aregulator

y requiremen

t i n th e Unite d States fo r

emission s o f

greenhous

e gase s (GHGs ) suc

h a s carbo n dioxide
. Action s tha t hav e bee n undertake

n hav e bee n voluntar

y an d premise d o n a n open-marke

t or emission s tradin g typ e o f approach
. The DE

P should clarif

y th e intent an d nee d fo r thi s requirement , an

d provide background tha t supports th

e standar d an d th e prescriptiv e approach
. Since othe r initiative s ar

e underwa

y tha t wil l likel y initiat e GH G programs i n northeas

t state s includin g Massachusetts , includin g thi s issu e i n th e Propose d Rul e i s prematur e an d ma y ultimatel y conflic t

wit h o r be counter-productiv e t o th e implementatio n o f othe r initiative s tha

t ar e focuse d o n GHGs
. Should DE

P procee d wit h plan s t o regulat

e o r contro l greenhouse gases , amarket-base d approac h shoul d be adopted
. Prescriptiv e requirements on auni t leve l stifle s creativ e programs tha t hav e prove n to b e successful a

s par t o f th e Aci d Rai n an

d NO x Budge

t Allowanc e programs . I n addition , globa

l climate chang

e associate

d wit h GH G emission s i s no t alocalize d ai r

qualit y problem , i.e. , an

y potential impac t

occur s o n amuc

h broade r scal e an d does not

warran t uni t o r facilit y specifi c prescriptiv e measures . "Comman

d an d control " uni t

leve l limit s ca

n ignor e practice s o

r project s undertake

n b y a compan y o n othe r emission s or

proces s equipmen

t withi n th e stat e and/o r th e country . TG

P oppose s an y specifi c unit-leve l o

r facility-leve l emission limi t o n an y greenhouse ga

s pollutant
. An y attempt

s t o regulat

e suc h pollutant s shoul d be backe d b y adequat

e technica

l an d scientifi c data, an d b e modeled afte r

successful policie s an

d regulation s base

d o n market-base

d approaches
. I n addition , i n introducin g GH G requirements i n Massachusetts , th e DE P should provide aclea

r "roa d map " o n it s GH G implementatio n an d complianc e strategie s - bot h i n th e near-ter man d long-term , an

d identif y ho w these limit s wil l b

e integrated int o othe

r programs currently unde

r consideratio n i n th

e northeast

U.S
. Stac k Heigh t Th e DE P should clarif

y th e basi s fo r

requirin g an

d definin g stac

k heigh t requirements i n 31 0 CMR7.26(43)(d)(3)
. I n addition , i n 31 0 CM R7.26(43)(d)(3)(a) , referenc e to th e ter m 1 4

i"conditio n o f ai r pollution " shoul d be delete d o r th e ter mshoul d b

e clearl y defined
. Subsection s (3)(b ) an d (3)(c ) includ e specifi c requirements relate d t o stac k parameters , an

d subsectio

n (3)(d ) indicate s circumstance s tha t requir e modelin g to determin

e i f impacts excee

d aNational Ambient Ai r Qualit y Standard

s (NAAQS) , an

d provide aclea

r indicatio n o f

requirements
. Th

e provision s i n subsectio

n (3)(a) ar

e ambiguou s an

d subject to interpretation
. Thus , thi s section shoul d be clarified
. Th

e best solutio n i s to delet

e tex t referrin g to " aconditio n o f ai r pollution"
. Soun d Th e DE P should clarif

y requirement s fo r

"sound " limitations , whic h ar e ambiguous
. Th

e Propose d Rule currentl y require s operation s t o compl y wit h th

e nois e requirements i n 31 0 CM R 7.10 , bu t thes e requirement s ar

e unnecessaril

y vague . Whe

n installin g ne

w I C engine s or

ga s turbine s a t compresso

r stations , standar

d industr y practice s ar

e employed t o limi t

th e nois e tha

t emanate s fro mth e operatin g equipment
. Thes e practice s ca

n include the use silencers to attenuat e nois e fro mintak

e and exhaus

t lines , an d soun d insulatio n fo r

building s tha

t enclos e th

e equipment
. Th e cite d nois e requiremen

t does no t provide an

y specifi c indicatio n o f

th e typ e o r degre e o f nois e contro l tha

t i s required , performanc e criteria , or measuremen

t method s o

r practice s to validat e acceptabl

e performance
. Whil e 31 0 CM R7.1 0 ma y hav e bee n developed fo r

broa d applicabilit

y an d thu s include s genera

l text , th e Propose d Rul e specificall y addresse s engin e an d turbine applications
. Thus , i t i s appropriat

e fo r nois e requirements t o specif y practice s o

r requirement

s tha t ar e the normfo r

suc h industrial installations , or , alternatively , delet e thi s requiremen

t fro mth e regulation
.
Attachment : MemorandumfromMs
. Lydi aWegman , Director , EP A Ai r Qualit y Strategie s an d Standards Division , Offic e o f Ai r Qualit y Plannin g an

d Standards , Stat

e Implementatio n Pla

n (SIP) Cal l fo r

Reducing Nitroge n Oxide s (NOx ) - Stationar y Reciprocatin g Interna l Combustio n Engines , Augus t

22 , 2002
.

1 5

# < • — ' UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y

RESEARC H TRIANGL E PARK , N C 2771 1 

### AU G % 2 200

2
MEMORANDU M OFFIC E O F AI R QUALIT Y PLANNIN G AN D STANDARD S SUBJECT : Stat

e Implementatio n Pla

n (SIP ) Cal l fo r

Reducin g Nitroge n Oxide s (NO x )-

- Stationar y Reciprocating Interna

l Combustio

n Engine s

Th e purpose o f

thi s memorandu

mi s to provid

e guidanc e to Slate s tha

t choose t o adop t rule s coverin g stationar

y reciprocatin g interna

l combustion engine s (I C engines ) a s par t o f thei r respons e t o th e NO xSI P call
. Althoug h th

e schedul e fo r submitta l o f th e SIP s addressin

g I C engine s unde

r th e NO xSI P cal l i s th

e subject o f on-going rulemaking , I a mawar e tha t severa l State s ar e takin g step s towar

d complianc e wit h th

e requirement

s o f th e SI P call
. Thi s memorandu

maddresse

s question s o

n th e I C engin

e sourc e categor y tha t hav e bee n raised recentl y b y severa l States a s wel l a s b y th e affecte d industr

y i n variou s discussion s an d meetings
. Specifically , EP

A i s providin g guidance o n th e followin g issue

s related t o I C engines : Stat

e flexibility , periodi c monitoring , ne w sourc e review , an

d earl y reductions
. Th

e EP A i s als o clarifyin g tha

t th e guidance i n thi s memorandu mreflect s EPA' s curren

t view s an d supersed

e th e view s underlyin g th

e propose d requirements i n th

e Federa l implementatio n pla

n propose d Octobe r 21.199 8 regarding IC engines
. Thi s guidanc e i s effectiv e immediately
. Stal e Flexibility Fo r purpose s o f

complyin g wit h th

e NO xSI P call , aStat

e i s fre e t o choose whateve

r mix o f control s wil l mee

t it s budge t an d i s fre e no

t to regulat e I C engine s a

t all
. Wher

e States choos

e t o regulat e large I C engines , EP

A encourages th

e States t o allo w owner

s an d operators o f

large IC engine s th

e flexibility t

o achiev e th e NO xtons/seaso

n reduction s b

y selecting fro mamon

g a variet y o f technologie s o

r acombinatio n o f

technologie s applie d t

o variou s size s an

d type s o f

I C engines
. Flexibility woul d b e helpfu l a

s companie s tak

e int o accoun t tha t individua l engine s o

r engin e model s ma

y respon d differentl y to contro l equipment
. Tha t is , whil e certain control s ar e know n t o hav e aspecifi c averag

e contro l effectivenes s fo r a n engin e population , som

e individua

l engines tha

t instal l th e control s woul d b

e expecte d t o b e abov e an d som e belo w tha

t averag e contro l level , simply becaus e i t i s a n average . Availabl e technologie s include combustio n modifications , suc

h a s pre-combustion chamber s o r hig h energ

y ignition , an

d post-combustion controls , suc

h a s non-selective catalyti c reduction
. FROM : I,ydi aN
. Wegman , Director tOL^-^ l Ai r Qualit y Strategie s an

d Standards ' Divisio n TO : Ai r

Divisio n Director Region s I- V & VI I

Internet Addres s (URL

) • http://www.epa.go

v Recycled/Recyclabl e . Printe d wit h Vegetabl e Oi l Base d Ink s o n Recycle d Pape r(Minimu m 25 % Postconsumer )

l2



### Durin g th e SI P developmen

tproces s th e State s ma y establis h a NO x

### tons/seaso

n emission s decreas e targe tfo r individua

l companie

s an d the n provid e th e companie

s wit h th e opportunit y t o develo p a pla n tha twoul d achiev e th e neede d emission

s reductions

. Th e companie s ma y selec tfrom a variet

y o f contro l measure s t o appl y a tthei r variou s emissio n unit s i n th e Stat e o r portio n o f th e Stat e affecte d unde r th e NO x

### SI P call . Thes

e contro l measure s woul d b e adopte d a s par to f th e SI P an d mus tyiel d enforceabl

e an d demonstrabl

e reduction

s equa l t o th e NO x

### tons/seaso

n reduction

s require d b y th e State . Wha tis importan

tfrom EPA' s perspectiv e i s tha tth e State , throug h a SI P revision , demonstrat

e tha tal l th e contro l measure s containe d i n th e SE P ar e collectivel

y adequat e t o provid e fo r complianc

e wit h th e State' s NO x 

### budge tdurin g th e 200 7 ozon e season . Periodi c Monitorin

g Th e NO x

### SI P cal l require s th e Stat e t o provid e fo r monitorin

g th e statu s o f complianc

e wit h an y contro l measure s adopte d t o mee tth e NO x

### budget. 1 

### Titl e V ai r operatin g permi t program s recogniz e SI P emission

s limitation

s a s applicabl

e requirement

s tha tmus tb e include d i n operatin g permits . Titl e V permi tprogram s requir e SI P emission

s limitation

s (an d othe r applicabl e requirements

) in permit

s t o b e accompanie

d b y periodi c monitorin

g sufficien

tt o yiel d reliabl e dat a from th e relevan ttim e perio d tha ti s representativ

e o f a source' s complianc

e wit h th e emission s limitation

. I n addition , th e complianc

e assuranc e monitorin

g rule

2

### ma y appl y t o thes e emission

s limitation

s a tcertai n emission

s unit s a tTitl e V majo r sources . Acceptabl

e monitorin g i s no tlimite d t o thos e monitorin

g method s suc h a s continuou

s o r predictiv

e emission s measuremen

tsystem s tha trel y o n automate

d dat a collectio n from instruments

. Nonautomate d monitorin

g ma y provid e a reasonabl

e assuranc e o f complianc

e fo r I C engine

s provide d suc h periodi c monitorin

g is sufficien

tt o yiel d reliabl e dat a fo r th e relevan ttim e period s determine d b y th e emissio n standard

. Usin g parametri

c dat a ma y b e appropriate

, a s th e sourc e owner s an d operator s i n permittin g authorities ' jurisdictio

n migh talread y b e collectin g dat a tha tcoul d b e use d t o indicat e complianc e a s par to f normal , ongoin g operations

. Whe n usin g parametri

c dat a t o satisf y th e periodi c monitorin

g requirement

, Titl e V permit

s shoul d specif y a n operatin g rang e fo r eac h paramete r o r combinatio

n o f condition s whic h wil l provid e a reasonabl

e assuranc

e tha tth e sourc e i s i n complianc

e wit h th e underlyin

g requirement

. Th e propose d rang e shoul d b e supporte d b y documentatio

n indicatin

g a site-specifi

c develope

d relationshi

p betwee n paramete

r indicato r range s an d complianc

e wit h th e emissio n limit , althoug h i tis no trequire d tha tth e rang e b e se t suc h tha ta n excursio n from th e rang e will prov

e noncomplianc

e wit h th e associate

d limit . Operationa

l dat a collecte d durin g performanc

e testin g i s a ke y elemen ti n establishin

g indicato r

'Se e 4 0 CF Rsectio

n 51.121(i) .
2 

### See4 0 CF Rpar

t64 .3



### ranges ; however

, othe r relevan tinformatio

n i n establishin

g indicato r range s woul d b e engineerin g assessments

, historica l data , an d vendo r data . Th e permi tshoul d als o includ e som e mean s o f periodicall

y verifyin g th e continuin

g validit y o f th e paramete

r ranges . Ne w Sourc e Revie w (NSR ) Wher e source s choos e t o instal l combustio

n modificatio

n technolog

y t o reduc e emission

s o f NO x

### a tnatura l gas-fire d lean-bur n I C engines

, EP A believe s thi s actio n shoul d b e considere

d b y permittin

g authoritie

s fo r exclusio n from majo

r NS Ra s a pollutio

n contro l projec t(PCP) . Combustio n modificatio

n technolog

y fo r thes e I C engine

s is simila r t o th e "low-NO x

### burner " technolog y alread y liste d a s a typ e o f projec ttha tma y b e considere

d fo r exclusio n from majo

r NS Runde r EPA' s PC

P exclusio n policy. 3 

### Combustio

n modificatio

n technologie

s t o reduc e NO x 

### emission s a tnatura l gas-fire d lean-bur n I C engine

s include , fo r example , pre-combustio

n chambers , lo w emissio n combustion

, hig h pressur e fue l injection , an d hig h energ y ignition . I t shoul d b e note d that , a s th e ai r t o fue l rati o increase s t o ver y lea n conditions

, carbo n monoxid

e an d hydrocarbo

n emission

s ma y increas e slightl y a s exces s ai r cool s combustio

n temperature

s an d inhibit s complet e combustion

. Pursuan tt o EPA' s policy

, i f th e sourc e is locate d i n a nonattainmen

tarea , th e Stat e o r th e sourc e mus tprovid e offsettin g emission

s reduction

s fo r an y significan tincreas e i n a nonattainmen

tpollutan tfrom th e PCP. Unles s informatio

n regardin

g a specifi c cas e indicate s otherwise

, installatio

n o f combustio n modificatio

n technolog

y fo r th e purpos e o f reducin g NO x

### emission

s a tnatura l gasfired lean-bur

n I C engine

s ca n b e presumed

, b y it s nature , t o b e environmentall

y beneficial

. Thi s presumptio

n arise s from EPA' s experienc

e tha tcombustio

n modificatio

n technolog

y is a n effectiv e pollutio n contro l technolog

y whe n applie d t o ne w an d modifie d natura l gas-fire d leanbur n I C engines

. Therefore

, unde r EPA' s PC

P exclusio n policy , th e combustio

n modificatio

n control s ma y b e exempte d from NS Rprovide

d tha tth e safeguard

s an d procedura

l step s containe d i n th e exclusio n polic y memorandu

m ar e met . Earl y Reduction

s b v I C Engine

s Fo r larg e I C engines

, developmen

to f th e NO x

### SI P cal l budge tinvolve d (1 ) obtainin

g a 199 5 emission

s inventory

, (2 ) applyin g NO x

### reasonabl

y availabl e contro l technolog

y (RACT ) control s t o majo r source s in certai n areas , includin g th e Ozon e Transpor

tRegion , (3 ) projectin g emission s t o 2007 , (4) modifyin

g tha tsubinventor

y t o represen ta n uncontrolle

d leve l o f emissions , an d (5 ) calculatin

g a percentag

e reductio n from th e uncontrolle

d 200 7 baselin e t o determin e th e NO x

### ton s reductio n t o includ e i n th e States ' budge

tcalculations

. Becaus e thi s methodolog

y use s th e uncontrolle

d value , an y emissio n reductio n from a larg

e I C engin e ma y b e considere d fo r credi ttowar d meetin g th e NO x

### SI P cal l requirements

. Creditabl

e reduction

s ma y
Memorandu

m from Joh

n Seit z t o EP A Regiona l Offic e Ai r Directors

, "Pollutio n Contro l Project s an d Ne w Sourc e Revie w (NSR ) Applicability, " Jul

y 1,1994 .

i4



### includ e emissio n control s i n plac e durin g o r prio r t o 199 5 a s wel l a s afte r 199 5 fo r th e larg e engines . Th e applicabl

e contro l requirement

s mus tb e adopte d a s par to f th e SI P an d mus tyiel d enforceabl e an d demonstrabl

e reductions

. Fo r smalle r I C engines

, th e firs tthre e step s abov e wer e complete

d a s par to f th e NO x

### SB ? cal l budge tcalculation

, bu tth e subinventor

y wa s no tmodifie d t o represen ta n uncontrolle

d leve l o f emissions , an d n o percentag

e reductio n wa s applie d t o th e 200 7 baselin e in detenninin

g th e States ' budgets

. Thus , th e 200 7 baselin e fo r th e smalle r I C engine

s ma y includ e control s a tI C engines , fo r example , tha twer e subjec tt o NO x

### RACT . Suc

h control s woul d no tb e creditabl e towar d meetin g th e NO x

### SI P cal l reduction

s becaus e the y ar e par to f th e 200 7 baseline . Wher e th e control s ar e no tpar to f th e 200 7 baselin e i n th e NO x

### SB ? cal l inventory 4 

### , State s ma y us e emissio n reduction

s achieve d afte r 199 5 a tth e smalle r engine s a s par to f thei r NO x

### SB ? cal l budge tdemonstration

. Th e applicabl

e contro l requirement

s mus tb e adopte d a s par to f th e SI P an d mus tyiel d enforceabl

e an d demonstrabl

e reductions

. Federa l Implementatio

n Pla n (FTP ) O n Octobe r 21,1998 , EPA propose

d FB ? requirement

s fo r State s tha tfaile d t o mee tth e NO x

### SI P cal l requirement

s publishe d o n Octobe r 27,1998 . I

n subsequen

tlitigation

, th e issu e o f th e leve l o f contro l fo r I C engine

s wa s remande d t o EPA . O n Februar y 22,200 2 EP A publishe d a propose d rul e regardin g th e NO x

### SB ? cal l an d leve l o f contro l fo r I C engines

. Th e view s i n th e Februar y 2 2 proposa l an d i n th e guidanc e i n thi s memorandu

m reflec tEPA' s curren

tview s regardin g I C engine

s an d supersed

e th e view s underlyin

g th e propose d requirement

s i n th e FB ? wit h respec tt o I C engines

. Fo r example , althoug h th e FB? propose

d selectiv e catalyti c reductio n (SCR ) fo r lean-bur n engines , i n th e Februar y 2 2 notic e w e propos e ther e is currentl

y a n insufficien

tbasi s t o identif y SC Ra s a highl y cost-effectiv

e contro l technolog

y fo r lean-bu m engine s i n variabl e loa d operation

s an d w e propos e tha tlo w emissio n combustio

n technolog

y i s a highl y cost-effectiv

e contro l technolog

y fo r th e lean-bur n engines . A s a result

, EP A woul d nee d t o repropos

e th e FB ? requirement

s fo r I C engine

s prio r t o issuin g a final FB ? concernin

g th e I C engines . A FB? reproposa

l woul d nee d t o b e consisten

twit h th e final rul e o n th e NO x SB ? cal l an d contro l level s fo r I C engines

.

*Th e 200 7 baselin e NO x SB ? Call emissio

n inventor

y ma y b e downloade

d from th e followin g site : i^://fh3.epa.gov/EmisInventory/NOxSB?Call_Mar2_2000 /5



### Pleas e fee l free t o contac tm e o r Dou g Gran o o f m y staf f a t(919 ) 541-329 2 i f yo u hav e an y question s o r wis h t o discus s an y issue s relatin g t o thi s memorandum

. cc : Ro b Brenner , OAR Ann a Wood , OPAR Sara h Dunham

, OA P Kevi n McLean , OG C Richar d Biondi, OEC A To m Helms , OPS G

i

## Fa x Transmitta l

Pages : 2 3 Date : Jun e 30 , 200 4 Nam e of Recipient : Rober t Donaldso n Compan y o f Recipient : Complet e Address : Fa x Number : 

## 617-566-106 3 Nam e of Sender : Kare n Lemell e Phon e Number : 832-676-744 6 Fa x Number : 

## 832-676-155 6 Comments : I f thi s transmissio n i s no t receive d i n goo d order , pleas e cal l Kare n Lemell e (832 ) 676-744 8 o radvis e b y fa x (832 ) 676-1556
.

Thi s facsimil e an d an y document s transmitte d wit h i t fro m E l Pas o Corporatio n o rIt s affiliate' s ar c confidentia l an d intende d solel y fo rth e us e o f th e recipien t t o who m the y ar c addressed
. I f yo u hav e receive d thi s facsimil e i n error , pleas e notif y th e sende ra t th e phon e numbe rliste d o n th e covershee t o rth e E l Pas o operato ra t (1 ) 713-420-2600
. Othe rE l Pas o contac t informatio n ca n b e foun d o n th e Interne t a t www.clpasa.com
.