### DATE: UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONAGENCY REGION III 1650 Arch Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2029

SUBJECT: Technical Support Document (TSD) for the Pennsylvania Regional Haze State ImplementationPlan

- Mid Atlantic andNortheastVisibility Union (MANE-VU) "Asks" Reasonable Progress Goals



### FROM:

TO: MelissaLinden, Environmental Scientist Office ofAirProgram Planning (3AP30)

SIP Docket File

# a~~~ REVIEWED BY: CristinaFernandez, Associate Director Office ofAir Program Planning (3AP30)



### I. Background

Regional haze is visibility impairment caused by the cumulative effect ofairpollutionfrom

numerous sources over a wide geographic area. Regional haze results inimpaired visibility over
a large region, affecting urban and rural areas including national parks, forests, and wilderness

areas (federal "Class I" areas). Inthe eastern United States, average visual range has been reduced to approximately 30 kilometers or one-fifth ofthe visual range that would existunder natural conditions.

EPA provided grant funding for five Regional Planning Organizations (RPOs) throughout the countryto assist withthe multi-state coordination and cooperationneeded to address regional haze issues. In2001, the Mid-Atlantic andNortheast states, the District ofColumbia, and tribes withinthe region formed the Mid-AtlanticlNortheast Visibility Union (MANE-VU) to coordinate regional haze planning activities for the region.

EPA'sregional Haze rule (RHR) was published inthe

### FederalRegister onJuly 1, 1999. The RHR aims to achieve the national visibility goal setbythe Clean Air Act (CAA) by 2064. The rule addresses the combined visibility effects ofvarious pollution sources over a wide geographic region. The RHRrequires all states, eventhose that do not contain a Class I area, to submit a revisionto their State ImplementationPlan (SIP) containing emissionreduction strategies to improve visibility in Class I areas that their emissions affect. Guidelines for implementation ofthe BestAvailable Retrofit Technology (BART) requirements ofthe federal RHRwere initially proposed onJuly 20,2001 (66 FR38108).

EPA's RHRwas subsequently revised in response to a legal challenge brought by industry and environmental groups. On May24, 2002, the United States Court ofAppeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a ruling vacating the RHRin part and sustaining itinpart. The ruling vacated and remanded to EPA the BARTprovisions ofthe rule. The court's ruling denied industry's challenge to the RHR's goal ofnatural visibility and requirement ofno degradation of visibility. OnMay 5, 2004, EPApublished proposedrevisions to the regional haze rule and guidelines for BARTdeterminations inthe FederalRegister (69 FR25184). The final RHR and BART guidelines were published in the FederalRegister onJuly 6,2005 (70 FR39104). A further revision to the rule was proposed August 1, 2005 (70 FR44154) and finalized October 13,2006 (71 FR 60612), pertainingto requirements for alternative tradingprograms. The regulations can be found at 40 CFRPart 51, subpart P (relating to protection ofvisibility).



### II. Reasonable Progress Goal Requirements

Section 51.308(d) ofthe RHRrequires states to demonstrate reasonable progress toward meeting the national goal ofa return to natural visibility conditions by 2064. As a guide for reasonable progress, the RHR directs states to consider what would be a "uniformrate ofprogress" toward natural conditions for eachmandatory Class I Federal area withinthe state and/or for each mandatory Class I Federal area located outside the State, which maybe affectedbyemissions from sources withinthe State. States with Class I areas are to establish baseline visibility conditions for 2000-2004, natural background visibility conditions in 2064, and the rate of uniform progress between baseline and background conditions. The uniform rate ofprogress is also known as the "glidepath." The RHR stipulatesthat visibility targets andtracking of visibility changes overtime be expressed interms ofthe "deciview"haze metric. Deciviewis an atmospheric haze index that expresses changes invisibility, and is a measurement ofvisibility impairment. See 40 CFR section 51.301. This means thatthe lowerthe deciview value, the betterthe perception ofvisibility.

The RHR also requires states with Class I areas to establish reasonable progress goals (RPGs), expressed in deciviews, for visibility improvement at each Class I area. The goals mustprovide for reasonable progress toward achieving natural visibility conditions, provide for improvement in visibility for the most impaired days overthe period ofthe implementation plan, and ensure no degradation in visibility for the least impaired days overthe same period. See 40 CFR 51.308(d)(I).

This first setofreasonable progress goals mustbe metthrough measures contained ineach state's long-term strategy coveringthe period from the present until 2018. The long-term strategy includes enforceable emissions limitations, compliance schedules, and othermeasures as necessaryto achieve the reasonable progress goals, including all controls required or expected under all federal and state regulations by 2009 and by 2018. During development ofthe longterm strategy, states are also required to consider specific factors, such as the abovementioned ongoing control programs, measures to mitigate construction activities, source retirement and replacement schedules, smoke management programs for agriculture and forestry, and enforceability ofspecific measures. See 40 CFR 51.308(d)(3).III. MANE-VU's Approach to ReasonableProgress Goals

A summary ofthe reasonable progress goals developed by MANE-

### VU is listed belowin Table 

### 1 and Table 2.

T bl 1 R

a e • easonabl 

## P e rogress G I fi h 20% W oa s ort e 

## ° orst Days Baseline Reasonable Visibility Progress Deciview (deciviews) Goals, 20% improvement Natural (20% worst days expected by Visibility Worst (expected 2018 Conditions Class I Area Days 2000- deciview level (20% worst 2004) by 2018) days) AcadiaNational Park 

### 22.9 19.4 3.5 12.4 Roosevelt/Campobello 

### 21.7 19.0 2.7 12.0 International Park

Moosehorn 

### 21.7 19.0 2.7 12.0 Wilderness Area
Presidential 

### 22.8 19.1 3.7 12.0 RangelDry River Wilderness Area Great GulfWilderness 

### 22.8 19.1 3.7 12.0 Area Lye Brook Wilderness 

### 24.5 20.9 3.6 11.7
Brigantine Wilderness 

### 29.0 25.1 3.9 12.2



### .... Source: 2018 VISibilIty ProjectIOns Report, May2008, (Appendix L ofthe Pennsylvania Submittal).



### T bl 

### 2 R

a e . easonabl P e r02ress G 

### Is fi th 20°1« B t D oa or e 

### ° es ays Reasonable Baseline Progress Visibility Goals, 20% Deciview Natural (deciviews) best days improvement Visibility (20% Best (deciviews) expected by (20% best Class I Area Days) (expected by 2018 days) 2018) (deciviews) AcadiaNational Park 

### 8.8 8.3 0.5 4.7 Roosevelt/Campobello 

### 9.2 8.6 0.6 5.0 International Park

Moosehorn 

### 9.2 8.6 0.6 5.0 Wilderness Area

Presidential 

### 7.7 7.2 0.5 3.7 RangelDry River Wilderness AreaGreat GulfWilderness 7.7 7.2 0.5 3.7 Area Lye BrookWilderness 6.4 5.5 0.9 2.8
Brigantine Wilderness 14.3 12.2 2.1 5.5



## .... Source: 2018 VIsibilIty ProjectIOns Report, May 2008, (Appendix L ofthe Pennsylvania Submittal).

In 2006, MANE-VU conducted an assessment ofthe default and alternative approaches for calculation ofbaseline and natural background conditions atMANE-VU Class I areas. Based on that assessment, inDecember 2006, MANE-VUrecommended adoption ofthe alternative reconstructed extinction equation for use inthe December 2007 regional haze SIPs. Bothnatural conditions andbaseline visibility for the 5-yearperiod from 2000 through 2004 were calculated in conformance with an alternative method recommended bythe IMPROVE Steering Committee.1 Progress toward the 2018 target will be calculated based on 5-year averages calculated in a nationally consistent manner consistentwith EPA's 

### Guidancefor Tracking Progress Under the RegionalHaze Rule (EPA-4541B-03-004, September 2003), as updated by the alternative method for calculating regional haze recommended bythe IMPROVE Steering Committee.

To determine the reasonable progress goals indeciviews, the MANE-VU Class I area states conducted modeling with certain control measure assumptions. The control measuresreflected inthese reasonable progress goals are summarized belowin MANE-VU "Asks." In establishing these reasonable progress goals for 2018, the MANE-VU Class I area states recognize that Pennsylvania and othercontributing states have the flexibility to adopt control measures to implementthese goals between now and 2018. The overall approach toreducing andpreventing emissions that contribute toregional haze will allow each state up to 10 years to pursue adoption and implementation ofreasonable and cost-effective nitrogen oxides (NOx) and S02 control
measures, as appropriate and necessary.

.

Thereasonable progress goals shown above in Tables 1 and 2 represent implementation ofthe regional course ofaction set forth by MANE-VU on June 20, 2007 and entitled, "Statement of the Mid-AtlanticlNortheastVisibilityUnion (MANE-VU) Concerning a Course ofAction Within MANE-VU toward Assuring Reasonable Progress," (Appendix M ofthe Pennsylvania Submittal), also known as the "Ask" Statement. As such, these goals are intended to reflect the pursuit by MANE-VU states, including Pennsylvania, ofa course ofaction, includingpursuing the adoption and implementation ofthe following "emissionmanagement" strategies:

• "Timelyimplementation ofBARTrequirements; and

• "Alow sulfur fuel oil strategy in the inner zone states (NewJersey, NewYork, Delaware, and Pennsylvania, orportions thereof) to reduce the sulfur content of:

o Distillate oil to 0.05% sulfurby weight (500 ppm) by no later than 2012,

\"Baseline and Natural Visibility Conditions, Considerations and Proposed Approach to the Calculation ofBaseline and Natural Visibility Conditions at MANE-VU Class I Areas," NESCAUM, December2006, Appendix E ofthe Pennsylvania Submittal.o #4 residual oil to 0.25% sulfurby weight byno laterthan 2012,

o #6 oil to 0.3

- 0.5% sulfurby weight by no laterthan 2012, and

o Furtherreduce the sulfur content ofdistillate oil to 15 ppm by 2016; and

• "Alow sulfur fuel oil strategy inthe outer zone states (the remainder ofthe MANE-VU region) to reduce the sulfur content of:

o Distillate oil to 0.05% sulfurby weight (500 ppm) byno laterthan 2014,

o #4 residual oil to 0.25%-0.50% sulfurby weight by no laterthan 2018,

o #6 oil to no greaterthan 0.5% sulfurby weightby no laterthan 2018, and

o Furtherreduce the sulfur content ofdistillate oil to 15 ppmby 2018; and

• "A 90% orgreaterreduction in sulfur dioxide (S02) emissions from eachofthe electric generating unit (EGU) stacks identifiedby MANE-VU (Attachment I-comprising a total of 167 stacks, dated June 20, 2007) as reasonably anticipatedto cause or contribute to impairment ofvisibility in eachmandatory Class I Federal areainthe MANE-VUregion. Ifit is infeasible to achieve that level ofreduction from a unit, alternative measures will be pursued in such State; and

• "Continued evaluation ofother control measures including energy efficiency, alternative clean fuels, and othermeasuresto reduce S02 and nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from all coal-burning facilities
, by 2018 and new source performance standards for wood combustion. These measures and othermeasures identified will be evaluated during the consultationprocess to determine ifthey are reasonable and cost-effective."

The MANE-VU states, including Pennsylvania, agreed onthe additional reasonable strategies listed above after consideration ofan analysis ofthe four factors thatthe CAArequires to be considered in determining whether controls are reasonable. This analysis is described in detail in the

### Reasonable Progress Report (Appendix 0 ofthe Pennsylvania Submittal). The

### Reasonable Progress Report summarizes MANE-VU's assessment ofpollutants and associated source categories affecting visibility in Class I areas in and near MANE-VU, lists possible control

measures for those pollutants and source categories, and develops the requisite four factor analysis. Table 3 belowpresents a summary ofthe four factor analysis for the source categories analyzed in the Reasonable Progress Report.



### T bl 3 S

a e . ummaryo fR It f esu s rom 

### th F e ourF t A I . ac or nalYSIS Average Costin 2006 Energy and Primary dollars (per Non-Air Regional ton of Quality Remaining Source Haze Control pollutant Compliance Environmental Useful**Cat~ory** Pollutant Measure(s) reduction) Timeframe Impacts Life Electric S02 Switchto a low IPM®* 2-3 years Fuel supply 50 years or Generating sulfur coal v.2.1.9 following SIP issues, potential more Units (generally <1% predicts submittal permitting sulfur), $775-$1,690. issues, switchto $170-$5,700 reduction in natural gas based on electricity (virtually 0% available production sulfur), coal literature capacity,cleaning, wastewater Flue Gas issues Desulfurization

(FGD)-Wet,

- Spray Dry, or

- Dry. Industrial, S02 Switchto a low $130- 2-3 years Fuel supply 10-30 years Commercial, sulfurcoal $11,000 following SIP issues, potential Institutional (generally <1% based on submittal pennitting Boilers sulfur), available issues, control switchto literature. device energy natural gas Depends on requirements, (virtually 0% Size. wastewater sulfur), switch issues
to a lower sulfur oil, coal cleaning, combustion control, Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD)- Wet,- Spray Dry, orDry. Cement and S02 Fuel switching, $1,900- 2-3 years Control device 10-30 years Lime Kilns Dry Flue Gas $73,000 following SIP energy Desulfurization- based on submittal requirements, Spray Dryer available wastewater Absorption literature. issues (FGD), Wet Depends on

Flue Gas size. Desulfurization (FGD), Advanced Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD). Heating Oil S02 Lowerthe $550-$750 Currently Increases in 18-25 years sulfurcontent in based on feasible. furnacelboiler the fuel. available Capacity issues efficiency, Depends onthe literature. may influence Decreased
state. There is a timeframe for furnacelboiler high implementation maintenance uncertainty ofnew fuel requirements associated standards withthis cost estimate.Residential PM State $0-$10,000 Several years

- . Reduce 10-15 years Wood implementation based on dependent on greenhouse gas Combustion ofNSPS, Ban available mechanism for emlsslOns,

onresale of literature emission mcrease uncertified reduction efficiency of

devices, combustion installer device training certification or inspection program, pellet

stoves, EPA

Phase II certified RWC devices, retrofit

requi

. rement, accelerated changeover requirement,

accelerated changeover inducement. *Integrated Plannmg Model®

IV. Pennsylvania's Demonstration ofImplementing the MANE-VU "Asks"

Pennsylvaniahas reviewed and determined the appropriate BART controls for its 34 sources. These determinations canbe found 

### inAppendix Jofthe Pennsylvania submittal. Some ofthe BART determinations are missing the deciview impact onthe most impacted Class I area and that modeling can be found in Appendix I ofthe Pennsylvania submittal. A summary ofthe BART determined control limits canbe found in Table 4 below.

T bl 4 BART D t . f**~** P I

a e • e ermlDa Ions or ennsYIvaDla BART Source Name PermitNo. and Pollutant and Emission Emissions Reporting 

### & UnitId Date ofIssue Limit and Monitoring ConocoPhillips Consent Decree, S02: 25 ppmvd (365-day 25 Pa. Code 

### §§ FCCU/CO Boiler Civil Action H-05- rolling average). 127.441, 127.442, Unit ID #COI 0258 PM: 0.5 Ib/l000 lb coke 127.511, and (1/27/05) burn (3-hr average). 

### §§ 123, 135 and 139. Title V Permit 23- NOx: 121.1 ppmvd (365- 40 CFR Parts 60 and 00003 (12/22/08) day) 63. 155.3 ppmvd (7- See ConsentDecree, day). Appendix DD. 40 CFR Part 60 and Part 60 Appendices A, B andF. ConocoPhillips Title V Permit 23- NOx: 0.12 IbIMMBtu. 25 Pa. Code 

### §§ Platform Feed Heater 00003 (12/22/08) S02: O.OlllblMMBtu 127.441, 127.442, UnitID 738 (both limits are onan 127.511, andBART Source Name PermitNo. and Pollutantand Emission Emissions Reporting & UnitId Date ofIssue Limit and Monitoring annual basis). §§ 123, 135 and 139. 40 CFRParts 60 and 63. Sunoco Inc. Consent Decree, S02: 25 ppmvd (365-day See Consent Decree, Marcus Hook Refinery Civil Action 05- rolling average). Appendix EE. FCCU/CO Boiler CV-02866 NOx: 20 ppmvd (365-day 40 CFRPart 60 and Unit ID 101 and (6/16/05) rolling average). Part 60 Appendices A, COBI Title V Permit 23- PM: 1.0 Ib/l000 lb coke B andF. 00001 (11/18/08) burn. Sunoco Inc. Title V Permit 23- NOx: 0.25 IblMMBtu (24- 25 Pa. Code §§ Marcus Hook Refinery 00001 (11118/08) hrbasis). 127.441, 127.442, 17-2A, H-Ol Heater S02: 500 ppmvd. 127.511, and §§ 123, 135 and 139. 40 CFR Parts 60 and 63. United Refining Co. Title V Permit 62- NOx: 0.173 IbIMMBtu. 25 Pa. Code §§ Boiler4 00017 (8/20/07) S02: 24.3 lbslhr. 127.441, 127.442, 127.511, and §§ 123, 135 and 139. 40 CFRParts 60 and 63. United Refining Co. Title V Permit 62- NOx: 0.226 IbIMMBtu. 25 Pa. Code §§ Crude Heater- North 00017 (8/20/07) S02: 207.7 lbslhr. 127.441, 127.442, 127.511, and §§ 123, 135 and 139. 40 CFRParts 60 and 63. Carmeuse Lime Inc. Title V Permit 38- NOx: 6.0 lb/ton lime. 25 Pa. Code §§ Kiln Number 5 05003 (4/27/06) S02: 500 ppmvd. 127.441, 127.442, 127.511, and §§ 123, 135 and 139. 40 CFRPart 64. Lehigh Cement Co. Title V Permit 06- NOx: 367.7 lbslhr. 25 Pa. Code §§ Evansville Plant 05002 (9114/09) S02: 59.4lbs/hr. 127.441, 127.442, KilnNumber 1 PM: 34.8 tonsl12 month 127.511, and period. §§ 123, 135 and 139. PMlO: 87.4 tons/12 month 40 CFRPart 63. period. Lehigh Cement Co. Title V Permit 06- NOx: 367.7 lbslhr. 25 Pa. Code §§ Evansville Plant 05002 (9/14/09) S02: 59.4 lbslhr. 127.441, 127.442, KilnNumber 2 PM: 34.8 tons/12 month 127.511, and period. §§ 123, 135 and 139. PMI0: 87.4 tons/12 month 40 CFRPart 63. period. Lehigh Cement Co. Title V Permit 67- NOx: 8.2 lbs/ton. 25 Pa. Code §§ York Operations 05024 (2/17/06) S02: 500 ppmvd. 127.441, 127.442, White Cement Kiln PM: 0.02 grains/dscf. 127.511, and

### BART SourceName PermitNo. and Pollutant and Emission Emissions Reporting & 

### UnitId Date ofIssue Limit and Monitoring §§ 123, 135 and 139. 40 CFRPart 63. Lafarge Corp. Title V Pennit 39- NOx: 297.7Ibslhr. 25 Pa. Code 

### §§ Whitehall Plant 00011 (12/31/00) NOx: 260.5 lbslhr (TDF). 127.441, 127.442, Kiln K-2 S02: 362 lbslhr. 127.511, and PM: 14.8 lbslhr. 

### §§ 123, 135 and 139. 40 CFR Parts 60 and 63. Lafarge Corp. Title V Pennit 39- NOx: 202.3 lbslhr. 25 Pa. Code 

### §§ Whitehall Plant 00011 (12/31/00) NOx: 166.0 lbslhr (TDF). 127.441, 127.442, KilnK-3 S02: 195.0 lbslhr. 127.511, and PM: 7.3 lbslhr. 

### §§ 123, 135 and 139. 40 CFR Parts 60 and 63. CEMEXInc. Title V Pennit 37- NOx: 6.2 lbs/ton clinker 25 Pa. Code 

### §§ Wampum Plant 00013 (3/5/07) (May-Sep 6.0 lbslton). 127.441, 127.442, Kiln No. 3 S02: 500 ppmvd. 127.511, and PM: 0.02 grains/dscf. 

### §§ 123, 135 and 139. 40 CFRPart 63. ESSROC Cement Title V Pennit 37- NOx: 4761bslhr. 25 Pa. Code 

### §§ BessemerPlant 00003 (1/18/07) S02: 500 ppmvd. 127.441, 127.442, KilnNo. 5 PM: 0.02 grains/dscf. 127.511, and 

### §§ 123, 135 and 139. 40 CFRPart 63. Keystone Cement Co. Title V Pennit48- NOx: 529 lbslhr 25 Pa. Code 

### §§ EastAllen Plant 00003 (8/31/01) S02: 500 ppmvd 127.441, 127.442, Kiln No. 2 PM: 0.02 grains/dscf 127.511, and 

### §§ 123 and 139. 40 CFRPart 63. ISG Plate LLC Title V Pennit 15- S02: 500 ppmvd. 25 Pa. Code 

### §§ Coatesville Plant 00010 (1/7/08) 127.441, 127.442, Electric Arc Furnace D PM: 0.02 grains/dscf 127.511, and (primary baghouse). 

### §§ 123, 135 and 139. PM: 0.0052 grains/dscf 40 CFRPart 64. (secondarybaghouses). AK Steel Corp. Title V Pennit 10- NOx: 75 lbslhr. 25 Pa. Code 

### §§ Butler Works 00001 (2/13/06) S02: 500 ppmvd. 127.441, 127.442, Electric Arc Furnaces: PM: 0.0036 grains/dscf. 127.511, and #2, #3, and#4 

### §§ 135 and 139. 40 CFRPart 64. PH Glatfelter Co. Title V Pennit 67- NOx: 0.66 IblMMBtu (30- 25 Pa. Code 

### §§ Spring grove Plant 05004 (11/8/07) day rolling average). 127.441, 127.442, No.1 PowerBoiler S02: 3.71b1MMBtu (30- 127.511, and day rolling average). 

### §§ 123, 135 and 139. PM: 3.6 x Heat Input 40 CFRParts 63 and (lbsIMMBtu) raised to a 64. negative 0.56 power.

### BART SourceName PermitNo. and Pollutant and Emission Emissions Reporting & 

### Unit Id Date ofIssue Limit and Monitoring Appleton Papers Inc. Title V Pennit 07- NOx: 0.63 IbIMMBtu. 25 Pa. Code §§ Spring Mill Plant 05001 (10/1/07) S02: 4.0 IblMMBtu (over 127.441, 127.442, No.3 PowerBoiler any 1-hrperiod). 127.511, and PM: 3.6 x Heat Input §§ 123, 135 and 139. (lbsIMMBtu) raised to a 40 CFRParts 63 and negative 0.56 power. 64. Dyno Nobel Inc. Title V Pennit 63- NOx: 396tons/12-month 25 Pa. Code §§ DonoraPlant 00070 (12/31/07) period. 127.441, 127.442, Ammonia Oxidation N02: 5.5 lb/ton acid 127.511, and Plant product (expressed as §§ 135 and 139. 100% HN03). 40 CFRParts 64 and 70. Allegheny Energy Title V Pennit 30- PM: 0.075 IblMMBtu for 25 Pa. Code §§ Hatfields Ferry Power 00099F (9/12/07) each boiler. 127.441, 127.442, Main Boilers (#1, #2, 127.511, and and#3) §§ 123, 135 and 139. PPL Brunner Island Title V Pennit 67- PM: 0.1 IblMMBtu for 25 Pa. Code §§ BrunnerIsland 05005 (4/16/07) each boiler. 127.441, 127.442, Boilers 2 and 3 127.511, and §§ 123, 135 and 139. Exelon Generation Title V Pennit23- PM: 0.1 IblMMBtu for 25 Pa. Code §§ Eddystone Plant 00017 (12/29/04) each boiler. 127.441, 127.442, Boilers 3 and 4 127.511, and 

## M 123, 135 and 139. EME Homer City Title V Pennit 32- PM: 0.1 IblMMBtu for 25 Pa. Code §§ Homer City Plant 00055 (1/30/04) each boiler. 127.441, 127.442, Main Boilers (#1, #2, 127.511, and #3) §§ 123, 135 and 139. PPL Montour LLC Title V Pennit47- PM: 0.1 IblMMBtu for 25 Pa. Code §§ Montour SES 00001 (5/2/06) eachboiler. 127.441, 127.442, Boilers 1 and 2 127.511, and §§ 123, 135 and 139. ReliantEnergy LLC Title V Pennit48- PM: 0.1 IbIMMBtu. 25 Pa. Code § § Portland Generating 00006 (5/31/06) 127.441, 127.442, Boiler#2 127.511, and §§ 123, 135 and 139. First Energy Corp. TitleV Pennit 04- PM: O.llblMMBtufor 25 Pa. Code §§ Bruce Mansfield PIt 00235 (11/22/02) each boiler. 127.441, 127.442, Main Boilers (#1, #2, 127.511, and #3) §§ 123, 135 and 139. Allegheny Energy Title V Pennit 63- PM: O.llbIMMBtu. 25 Pa. Code §§ Mitchell Power 00016 (3/26/02) 127.441, 127.442, Station 127.511, and Boiler#3 §§ 123, 135 and 139. Orion Power Midwest Title V Pennit 37- PM: 0.1 IbIMMBtu. 25 Pa. Code § § New Castle Plant 00023 (1123/07) 127.441, 127.442, Boiler#5 127.511, and

### BART Source Name PermitNo. and Pollutantand Emission Emissions Reporting & 

### Unit Id Date ofIssue Limit andMonitoring §§ 123, 135 and 139. Reliant EnergyNE Title V Permit 03- PM: 0.1 IblMMBtu for 25 Pa. Code 

### §§ Keystone Power Plant 00027 (12/18/06) each boiler. 127.441, 127.442, Boilers 1and 2 127.511, and 

### §§ 123, 135 and 139. PPL Martins Creek Title V Permit48- PM: 0.1 IblMMBtu for 25 Pa. Code 

### §§ Martins CreekPlant 00011 (4/15/08) each boiler. 127.441, 127.442, Boilers 3 and 4 127.511, and**§~** 123, 135 and 139. ReliantEnergyNE Title V Permit 32- PM: 0.1 IblMMBtu for 25 Pa. Code 

### §§ ConemaughPlant 00059 (3/28/08) eachboiler. 127.441, 127.442, Boilers 1 and 2 127.511, and 

### §§ 123, 135 and 139. TrigenEdison Station Title V Permit: NOx: 0.5 IblMMBtu for 25 Pa. Code 

### §§ Philadelphia V06-11 (1/29/07) each boiler. 127.441(c), (d), Boilers 3 and 4 PM: 0.1 IblMMBtu for 127.442, 127.463(e), each boiler. 127.511(c), 

### § 139, and S02: 0.5% sulfur (#6 fuel PhiladelphiaCounty oil), 0.2% sulfur (#2 oil). AMS Regulation I Sec. II and III. Trigen Schuylkill Title V Permit: NOx: 0.36 IblMMBtu (30- 25 Pa. Code 

### §§ Station V06-007 (10112/06) day rolling avg). 127.441(c), (d), Philadelphia PM: 0.1 IbIMMBtu. 127.442, 127.463(e), Boiler# 26 S02: 0.5% sulfur (#6 fuel 127.511(c), 

### § 139, and oil). PhiladelphiaCounty AMS Regulation I Sec. 

# nand III. Sunoco Chemicals Title V Permit: NOx: 0.3 IbsIMMBtu. 25 Pa. Code 

### §§ Frankfort Plant V95-047 (4/17/03) PM: 0.1 IbIMMBtu. 127.441(c), (d), Philadelphia S02: 0.52 IbsIMMBtu. 127.442, 127.463(e), BoilerNo. 3 127.511(c), 

### § 139, and Philadelphia County AMS Regulation I Sec. II and III. Sunoco Refinery, Inc Consent Decree, S02: 25 ppmvd (365-day See ConsentDecree, Philadelphia Civil Action 05- rolling average). Appendix EE. FCCU/CO Boiler CV-02866, NOx: 20ppmvd (365-day 40 CFRPart 60 and Unit ID 1232 (6116/05) rolling average). Part 60 Appendices A, Title V Permit: PM: 0.5 Ibl1000 lb coke B andF. V95-038 (1/17/02) burn. AMS Plan ApproVal: 04322 (2/28/06) Sunoco Refinery Inc. ConsentDecree, NOx: 0.020 IblMMBtu See ConsentDecree, Philadelphia Civil Action 05- (24-hrbasis). Appendix EE. Process Heaters CV-02866 S02: 500 ppmvd. 40 CFRPart 60 and (6/16/05) Part 60 Appendices A,

### BART Source Name PermitNo. and Pollutantand Emission Emissions Reporting & 

### UnitId Date ofIssue Limit andMonitoring Title V Pennit: B andF. V95-038 (1/17/02) Allegheny Ludlum ACHD Rules and Corp. Operating Pennits: Pennitted PTE: RegulationsAllegheny County 0025603-000- PM: 68tpy Article XXI, Part C, Basic Oxygen 82900 Operating Pennits (All**Furnace~** (9/29/94) PM: 230 tpy Major & Minor) 0025603-000- §2103.l2.i,j &k, Slab Grinder 65304 PM: 13 tpy Issuance, Standard (12/14/73) Conditions-Standard Plate Burner/Torch 0025603-000-1160 PM: 14 tpy, NOx: 194 tpy Monitoring Cutter (12/14/73) Requirements, 0025603-000- Standard Loftus Soaking Pits 22803, Recordkeeping 0025603-000- Requirements, & 22804 Standard Reporting (12/14/73) Requirements. Article XXI, Part H, §2108.01.e, Reports Required-Emissions Inventory Statements. US Steel Clairton See above citations of Allegheny County ACHD Rules and Clairton Coke Works Operating Pennits: Pennitted PTE: Regulations. Desulfurization Plant 7035003-010- S02: 590 tpy; NOx: 27 tpy 25600 Boiler#2 (12/14/73) S02: 1508 tpy; NOx: 1285 7035003-010- tpy Rl Boiler 00800 (11128/79) S02: 796 tpy: NOx: 525 Tl Boiler 7035003-010- tpy 01300 (5/11/77) S02: 572 tpy; NOx: 358 7035003-010- tpy 00600 (7/12/77) Orion Power See above citations of Cheswick Plant Operating Pennit: Pennitted PTE: ACHD Rules and Allegheny County 1065009-003- S02:67,452 Regulations. BoilerNo. 1 00100 typ;NOx:IO,840 tpy (12/8/81) PMIO: 361 tpy

Pennsylvaniahas 15 ofthe 167 stacks that were identified by MANE-VU. The controls being implemented onthese 15 stacks are listed in Table 5 below.

### T bl 5 P 

### a e . 

### I
., P ennsylvaDia s f 

### h 167 S ks ortJon 0 

### t e tac Facility Unit Unit Facility Identified Anticipated Anticipated Name & ID Type ID Stacks Controls & Reduction StackID in Permit inS02 Appendix I Status Emissions 

### Armstrong 2 Coal 43086 D031782 Steam 90% Brunner 2 Coal 45820 D03140C12 WetScrubber 95% Island Steam in 2009 PA 26 Plan Approval No. 67- 05005D Brunner 3 Coal 45821 D031403 WetScrubber 95% Island Steam in 2009 Plan Approval No. 67- 05005D Cheswick 1 Coal D082261 WetScrubber 95% AC 04 Steam in 2010 Hatfields 2 Coal 43072 D03179COI WetScrubber Ferry Steam in 2009 95% PA 35 Plan Approval No. 30- 00099F Homer City 1 Coal 49780 D031221 95% PA 37 Steam Homer City 2 Coal 49781 D031222 95% PA 37 Steam Keystone 1 Coal 49769 D031361 Wet Scrubber 95% PA 39 Steam in 2009 Plan Approval No. 03- 00027B Keystone 2 Coal 49770 D031362 WetScrubber 95% PA 39 Steam in 2010 Plan Approval No. 03- 00027B Martins 2 Coal 45859 D03148C12 N/A 

### Creek Steam PA 08 Montour 1 Coal 45872 D031491 WetScrubber 95% PA 07 Steam in oQeration.Plan Approval No.:47- 00001B Montour 2 Coal 45873 D031492 Wet Scrubber 95% PA 07 Steam in operation. Plan Approval No.:47- 00001B Portland 1 Coal 45735 D031131 PA 09 Steam Portland 2 Coal 45736 D031132 Steam Shawville 1 Coal 49763 D03131CSI Steam



### Table 6. Additional Sources Controlled to Demonstrate90% S02Reduction in 167 Stacks Facility Unit Unit Facility Identified Anticipated Anticipated Name ID Type ID Stacks Controls & 

### Reduction in Permit S02 Status Emissions WPSRes. 1-4 Coal D03152CS2 Wet Sunbury Steam D03152CS3 Scrubberin 95% Six Boilers D03152CS4 2010 with a (Units 1-4) new stack that will exhaust all six boilers. Plan Approval No. 55- 00001C Reliant 3 Coal 49765 D03131CS2 FGD-Dry Shawville 4 Steam 49766 Scrubber 95% Units 3 & 4 (spray dryer absorber) in 2010. Plan Approval No. 17- 00001D

On September 25,2010, the PennsylvaniaEnvironmental Quality Board (EQB) proposed the Commonwealth's statewide low-sulfurheating and distillate oil regulation, inresponse to the MANE-VU "Ask"that states adopt a low-sulfur 

### fuel oil strategy. Inthis proposal Pennsylvania calculated the S02 emissionreductions 

### inthe phased in approach thatMANE-VU agreed upon. These calculated reductions are listed inTable 7 below. This infonnation canbe found ontheMANE-VUModelingforReasonable Progress Goals: Model Performance Evaluation in Appendix S ofthe Pennsylvania submittal.



### T bl 7 P

a e • I . S02 E

.. R d f f: h P 

### ennsyJvama mission e uc Ions rom t e roposedL Siti RI ow- u ur ue Tons from reduction Tons from reduction Tons from reduction Total Tons of of#2 from 500 to 15 from baseline to of#2 from 2002 level Reduction ppm 0.25% for #4 and 0.3- to 500 ppm 0.5% for #6

4,034 3,924 20,795 28,753



# v. EPA's analysis ofPennsylvania's Share ofReductions for Reasonable Progress

Pennsylvania did find more thanthe 90 percentreduction required in S02 reductions withthe use ofadditional sources. EPA finds that Pennsylvaniadoes satisfythis part ofthe MANE-VU Ask

as demonstrated inTable 8 below.

T 

### bl 8 C I I f



### a e • a cu a Ion 0

### fP I
., 900f« 

### SO R d f**~** 

### th 167 

### St ks 

### ennsyJvama s 0 

### 2 e uc Ions or e ac Facilities in 167 2002 2018 

### reductions Armstrong 16741 1674.1 15066.9 BrunnerIsland 2 17686 884.3 16801.7 BrunnerIsland 3 39266 1963.3 37302.7 Cheswick 40232 2011.6 38220.4 Hatsfield Ferry 2 53016 2650.8 50365.2 Homer City 1 45760 2288 43472 Homer City 2 55356 2767.8 52588.2 Keystone 1 87714 4385.7 83328.3 Keystone 2 62906 3145.3 59760.7 Martins Creek 2 22057 0 22057 Montour 1 61010 3050.5 57959.5 Montour 2 50448 2522.4 47925.6 Portland 1 9740.2 9740.2 0 Portland 2 14568.8 14568.8 0 Shawville 1 7144.7 7144.7 0



### Additional Facilities for 167, 90% 

### S02control Sunbury 1-4 (entire facility) 25219.4 1260.97 23958.43 Reliant Shawville 3 and 4 (entire facility) 38243.8753 1912.2 36331.68



### Totals 647108.9753 61970.67 585138.31



### ExtraTons of Percent Reduction 90.42345761 

### Reduction 2477.826688Although Pennsylvaniawas not able to finalize their low sulfur fuel oil strategy, EPAhas determined that additional federally enforceable measures will be implementedpriorto the 2018 timeframe. These additional measures and associated emission reductions are demonstrated belowin Table 9.

Table9. Additional S02Emission Reductions

Source SourceType S02Emission Enforcement Reduction Mechanism (tons) Portland Generating Electric 19,690 Section 126 Station Units 1 and 2**~eneratinK**unit Final Ru1e EssroclBessemer Cementkiln 593 Federal
consent decree (Closure) EssroclNazareth Cementkiln 290 Federal
consent decree Additional reductions Electric 2,478 Pennsylvania from 167 stack generating units Regional obligation Haze SIP Total S02Emission 23,051 reduction (tons)

The Commonwealthhas not finalized its low-sulfur fuel strategy. However, following Pennsylvania'S SIP submittal onDecember20,2010, additional point sources have become subjectto federally enforceable S02 emission limits due to facility closures and federal actions as shown above inTable 9. These additional point source S02 reductions are 5,702 tons less than thereductions projected to result from adoption ofa low-sulfur fuel oil strategy; however, this shortfall is not anticipatedto interfere withthe ability ofother states to meettheir respective reasonable progress goals. Additional federal measures are also anticipated to occurpriorto 2018 that will have additional S02 co-benefits such as the Mercury AirToxic Standard that would result in additional reductions not quantified here. The federal consent decree for Essroc facilities is found in Appendix A ofthis TSD as well as a spread sheet ofanticipated reductions from that
consent decree. The final actiontaken onNewJersey's section 126 petition onPortland Generating Station can be found inAppendix B ofthis TSD.

Pennsylvaniawill berequired toreview all ofthese emissionreductions quantified intheir SIP during the 5 year look backprocess and will need to ensure there are no shortfalls atthat time.