p. 1



# OAR Box 1778 Prepped by Ollie Stewart

Document

Number: 

# 190)11-1-2 2

Docket Number: 

# A-90-0 6

Printed 10/28/2008 9:51:00 AM Sheet 190 of 276P. 2

* • 1 *

, • W

II-I-2 2 a

NOTE : Thi s ite

m i s missin g attachments .P. 3

k A'J<M6-9 0 TH U 8 = 2 5



## Wisconsin Electric POWER COMPANY FA X NO

. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O P

. 0 2

231W

. MichiQan , RO

. Bo x2CM6

. MiKvoukeo

. W l 5320 1 (414)221-234 5

Jul y 13 , 199 0

Mr . Pau l 0 . Yeun g Environmenta l Enginee r Wisconsi nDepartmen t o f Natura l Resource s Burea uo f Ai r Managemen t P.O . Bo x792 1 Madison , W I 5370 7 Dea rMr

. Yeung : .-." V i^;H— —

EPAA £ S'-' U

COMMENT S O

N TH E PROPOSE D AI RPOLLUTION CONTRO L PERMI T FO RPOR T WASHINGTON POWE RPLAN T (PERMI T NO . 90-POY-037 ) Wisconsi nElectri c Powe r Company (WE ) ha s th e followin g comment s on th e propose dcondition s fo r anai r pollutio ncontro l permi t a t th e Por t Washingto n Powe r Plant , date dJun e 8 , 1990 . p.2 . Sec . I. A

an d p.3 . Sec . l.D : SO , Emissio nLimitation s Th e propose dpermi t languag e on Unit s 1 an d 4 set s fort ha maximu m l bS0 2 /MBt u limit , an d als o require s a minimu m S0 2 remova l rat e b

y sorben t injection . Wisconsi nElectri c agree s tha t pos t renovatio nS0 2 emissionrate s o n Unit s 1 an d4 , a t maximu

m uni t load s a s measure db y feedwate r flow , mus t b e reduce db y 22 % and 13% , respectively . However , S0 2 remova l b y sorben t injectio nshoul d no t b e necessar y

a t lowe r load s wher e emission s ar e belo w th e maximum

hourl y emission s achieve ddurin g th e fal l 198 9 capacit y testing . Th e emissio nrates , achieve ddurin g tha t testing , represen t th e baselin e S0 2 emissio nrates , which , unde r th e net-ou t provision s o f NSPS , canno t b e exceede dafte r th e renovatio nproject . Pursuan t t o 4 0 CF RPar t 60.1 4 an d EPA' s previou s determinations , a modificatio nfo r NSP S purpose s i s define da s an y physica l o r operationa l chang e t o anexistin g facilit y whic hresult s i n a n increas e i n th e emission rate , 1 n term s o f pound s pe r hour , t o th e atmospher e o f any pollutan t t o whic h a standar dapplies . Th e emissio nrat e befor e and afte r th e physica l chang e 1 s evaluate db y

comparin g th e hourl y

emission s unde r curren t maximum capacit y

t o emission s a t maximu

m capacit y afte r th e change . Accordingly , t o avoi d triggerin g NSP S fo r S0 2 o nUnit s 1 an d 4 , Wisconsi nElectri c propose s t o instal l additiona l ai r pollutio ncontro l equipmen t t o offse t th e potentia l emissio nincrease , suc htha t n o increas e woul doccu r i n hourl y emission s a t maximu m capacity . Th e concep t o f n o ne t increas e in hourl y emission s t o avoi d triggerin g NSP S ha s bee nfurthe r reinforce di n EPA' s Jun e 8 , 199 0 lette r fro m William 6 . Rosenbef g t o JohnW . Boston :P. 4

AUG-16-9 0 TH

U8=2 7 FA XNO . OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO P . 83 -

Jul y 13 , 199 0 Pag e 2

"T o th e exten t tha t th e control s ar e federall y enforceable , and n o increas e 1

n hourl y emission s woul d occu r a t maximu m capacity , WEPC o ca nuse

thes e option s t o avoi d triggerin g NSP S fo r PM and S0 2 a t Unit s 1 an

d 4. " Wisconsi nElectri c understand s th e department' s concer ntha t potentiall y slightl y lowe r sulfu r fue l coul d b e burnecha t Por t Washingto nthu s requirin g les s S0 2 remova l fro

m th e contro l equipmen t t o achiev e th e pre-renovatio n baselin e emission s limit . Wisconsi nElectri c suggest s th e followin g permi t condition s tha t ar e base d o n feedwate r flow s achieve d b y Unit s 1 an

d 4 durin g th e Fal l 198 9 capacit y

testing . S0 2 remova l b y th e contro l equipmen t wil l occu r a t progressivel y

highe r remova l rate s wheneve r th e feedwate r flo w 1 s abov e th e baselin e feedwate r flow s independen t o f th e coa l bein g burne d o n Unit s 1 an

d 4 . Accordingl y

w e reques t tha t th e S0 2 limit s fo r Unit s 1 and 4 b e revise d a s follows : Uni t 1 Fo r feedwate r flow s greate r than534rs$0-lb/hr , th e minimu m SO , remova l by th e pollutio ncontro l equipmen t shal l b e determine d b y th e followin g relationship : % Remova l - (1.32 5 xIO" 4 ) ( YE^&jQM) where : 1.32 5 x10" 4 unit s ar e % Removal/l bfeedwate r flow/h r Y= measure d feedwate r flow , lb/h r Thi s relationshi p result s i n?Sievin g a 22 % S0 2 remova l rat e a t a feedwate r flow

o f 690,00 0 Ifc/hr . Fo r feedwate r flow s equa l t o or les s thafr^rOO^'lb/hr , th e SO , emissio nrat e wil l b e n o greate r tha n2.44>otmd s pe r millio nBt u hea t input , withou t S0 2 remova l equipmen t require d t o b e i noperation .

Fo r feedwate r flow s greate r tha n580,00 0 lb/hr , th e minimu m SO , remova l b y th e pollutio ncontro l equipmen t shal l b e determine d b y th e followin g relationship : % Remova l - (1.73 3 x10** ) ( Y - 580,000) ;

_ where : 1.733 x IO" 4 unit s are % Removal/l b feedwate r flow/h r Y » measure

d feedwate r flow , lb/h r Thi s relationshi p result s i n achievin g a 13 % S0 2 remova l rat e a t a feedwate r flo wo f 655,00 0 lb/hr

.P. 5

AUG-16-9 0 TH

U8:2 9 m m * OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO P.0 4

Jul y 13 , 199 0 Pag e 3

• Fo r feedwate r flo w equa l t o o r les s tha n580,00 0 lb/hr , th e S0 2 emissio n rat e wil l b e n o greate r tha n2.4 4 pound s pe r millio nBt uhea t Input , withou t S0 2 remova l equipmen t require dt o b e inoperation . If , however , th e departmen t wishe s t o impos e a poundpe r millio nBt u limi t onUnit s 1 an

d4 , th e limi t shoul db e reworde dt o chang e "and " t o wit ha t th e reductio npercentage s stated , an dt o chang e "sorben t injection 1 ' t o a SO * contro l technology . Th e permi t condition s shoul d no t restric t th e S0 2 contro l technologie s tha t ma y b e use db

y W E t o compl y wit hth e ai r permi t give npotentia l advance s 1 nS0 2 contro l technolog y

an dfutur e S0 2 reductio nlegislation . p . 2-3 . Sec . IA-D . an

dp . 4-5 . Sec . I.F. : N0 ] C Emissio nLimitation s Th e departmen t ha s determine dtha t th e existin g arc hfire dPor t Washingto n boiler s a s presentl y

configure dar e Bes t Availabl e Contro l Technolog y fo r N0 X emissions . Th e boilers ' ful l loa dactua l NO . emission s ar e below th e existin g NSP S emissio nrat e o f 0. 6 Ib/MBtu . Thei r inheren t desig ninclude s a delaye d combustio nproces s whic hessentiall y duplicate s th e desig nfeature s o f curren t low N0 Xburners . However , a N0 Xemissio nlimi t whic hwoul db e applicabl e t o eac hboile r o f 0. 4 Ib/MBt u (base do na 3 0 da y average ) ha s bee nInclude d I n th e propose dpermit . Wisconsi nElectri c believe s tha t th e propose dboile r specifi c limi t i s unreasonabl y restrictiv e an

ddoe s no t properl y

reflec t Informatio nconcernin g th e plant' s NO xemissions . NO xemissio ntestin g wa s performe do nPor t Washingto nUnit s 2- 5 inOctobe r 197 8 b y KV B unde r contrac t b

y EPR I fo r th e purpos e o f establishin g N0 X emissio nrate s representativ e o f arc hfire dboilers . Th e baselin e N O testin g wa s performe da t constant , stead y loa dconditions , an

ddi dno t attemp t t o documen t N0 Xemissio nlevel s unde r varyin g uni t loa dconditions . Th e averag e N0 Xleve l measure do nth e fou r boiler s wa s approximatel y 0. 4 lb/MBtu . Th e 0. 4 Ib/MBt uemissio nrat e wa s the nuse da s a facilit y averag e i nth e preparatio n o f th e BAC T request , an dha s subsequentl y

bee nuse db

y th e departmen t 1n establishin g PS D an

dNSP S limit s fo r N0 X . However , durin g th e testin g unde r simila r operatin g conditions , th e NO x emissio nrate s varie damon g th e fou r unit s tested , wit hsevera l unit s measure d a t mor e tha nth e 0. 4 l bNO x /MBt u level . N0 Xlevel s als o varie dsignificantl y onal l boiler s a s a functio no f boile r operatin g conditions . Base do nth e variabilit y o f N0 Xemissio nrate s amon g th e fou r boilers , and upo nth e dependanc e o f N0 Xemission s onboile r operatin g conditions , W E request s tha t th e N0 Xemissio nlimit s b e revise da s show nbelow . I t shoul db e note dtha t eve nwit hthi s change , thes e emissio nlimit s represen t th e mos t stringen t N0 Xlimit s whic hWE believe s hav e bee nimpose di nPS D permit s fo r pulverize dcoa l fire dboiler s inth e Unite dStates . NSP S Limit : 0.6 0 l bN0 x /MBt u (maximu m acceptabl e leve l average dove r any consecutiv e 3 0 day s o nan y o f th e fou r boilers )P. 6

AUG-16-9 0 TH

U 8:3 2 FA X NO

. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O P

. 0 5

Jul y 13 , 1990 Pag e 4

PS D Limit : 0.5 0 l b N0 x /MBt u (facilit y averag e ove ran y consecutiv e 3 0 da

y period ) p . 3 . Sec
. I. E Th e fugitiv e dus t rul e citatio ni s NR 415.04(1 ) Instea d o f N R415.05(1) . p.4 . Sec . I.F : Metal s Emissio nLimitations ^ Th e departmen t ha s propose d PS D relate d emissio nlimit s fo r arsenic , berylliu m an d mercur y base d onth e fac t tha t thes e substance s ar e containe d i ntrac e amount s i n coal . Fo r th e reason s give nbelow th e company

doe s no t believ e I t shoul d b e subjec t t o an y limit s fo r thes e substances , especiall y arsenic . Arseni c Limit s Wisconsi nElectri c doe s no t believ e i t shoul d b e subjecte d t o an y arseni c emission s limits . W e hav e demonstrate d tha t w e wil l no t emi t significan t amount s o f arseni c followin g plan t renovation . Albei t regulate d unde r NESHAPS , th e arseni c regulation s exclud e fossi l fue l fire d steam generator s a s a sourc e categor y

subjec t t o emissio nlimitations . Therefor e th e arseni c emissio nlimi t shoul d be delete d fro m th e fina l permit . Beryllium . Arseni c an

d Mercur y Limit s Base d o n th e dat a supplie d t o th e departmen t in th e permi t applicatio nan d subsequen t submittals , th e departmen t ha s determine d tha t th e emission s o f beryllium , arseni c an

d mercur y afte r th e propose d renovatio nprojec t wil l no t excee d th e su

m o f th e emission s o f thes e trac e metal s i n th e year s representativ e o f plan t operatio nprio r t o th e projec t (1983/84 ) plu s EPA' s PS D significanc e levels . Wisconsi nElectri c concur s wit hthi s analysis , and believe s tha t sinc e futur e post-renovate d plan t operatio ndoe s no t resul t i n anemission s increas e inthes e substances , PS D i s no t applicable . Sinc e PS D i s no t applicable , PS D relate d emissio nlimit s ar e neithe r applicabl e no r required . Th e impositio no f trac e elemen t limit s 1 nth e permi t require s contro l ove r emission s throug hth e us e o f contro l equipmen t o r fue l trac e elemen t content , eithe r o f whic h1 s no t practicable . Althoug hcertai ncontro l equipmen t suc h a: ; ;*ecipitator s wil l reduc e arseni c an d berylliu

m emission s a s a sid e effec t o r .articulat e removal , arseni c an d berylliu

m emission s canno t b e specificall y controlled . Howeve r fo r mercury , sinc e i t 1 s assume d tha t 100 % o f th e mercur y i ncoa l i s volatilized , eve nnon-specifi c contro l vi a precipitator s i s unavailable . _ Th e othe r mean s o f emissio ncontro l consist s o f selectin g an d usin g coa l wit h lo w level s o f thes e trac e metals . Contro l ove r th e leve l o f thes e metal s i n th e coa l is , however , no t available . I t mus t b e realize d tha t thes e substances , arsenic , berylliu m an d mercury , ar e containe d i n coa l i n trace ^ amounts , I.e . les s tha n0.01% . Coa l mine s d o no t analyz e thei r coa l fo r thes eP. 7

AUG-. l 6-9 0 TH

U8:3 4 FA XNO . OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO P . 0 6

Jul y 13 , 199 0 Pag e 5

parameter s a s i t i s mine do r handled , no r d o the y analyz e in-groundfutur e coa l resource s fo r thes e metals . Eve ni f analysi s wer e performe db y th e mine s o nas-mined , o r as-shippe d sample s o f coal , th e severa l week s require dfo r eve na rapi dmetal s analysi s prevent s th e us e o f th e dat a incontrollin g deliverie s o f coa l t o a powe r plant , o r i nmeetin g a specificatio nfo r allowabl e level s o f thes e metals . I n fact , a significan t amoun t o f th e coa l coul db e consume db y a facilit y

prio r t o notificatio nb

y th e min e o f th e leve l o f trac e metals . Withou t thi s measur e o f contro l ove r th e leve l o f trac e meta l inth e fue l source , i t i s virtuall y impossibl e t o guarante e meetin g th e propose demissionlevel s ove r period s o f time . Wisconsi nElectri c i s unawar e o f an y existin g coa l contrac t whic hset s specification s fo r thes e trac e metals . Therefore , Wisconsi nElectri c request s tha t th e emissio nlimit s fo r beryllium , mercur y an darsenic b e remove dfro m th e permit . I f th e department i s Intereste d indocumentin g th e leve l o f thes e metal s i ncoa l withou t th e impositio no f limits , w e wouldagre e t o perform a monitorin g program

involvin g analysi s o f ou r as-fire dcoa l fo r thes e metals . If , however , th e departmen t insist s onimposin g thes e trac e meta l emission limitation s i nthi s permit , Wisconsi nElectri c believe s tha t th e limit s propose di nth e draf t permi t ar e inappropriat e give nth e variabilit y o f thes e metal s experience dbot hi nth e baseline , pre-renovat1o nyears , o r i nth e future , pos t renovatio noperatio no f th e facility . Th e existenc e o f variabilit y

i nmetal s level s withi ncoal , consistin g o f natura l sourc e an d analytica l variability , need s t o b e recognize dan daccounte dfo r i nth e developmen t o f any

emissio nlimits . A . Sourc e Variabilit y I npreparin g th e ai r permi t application , Wisconsi nElectri c di d no t hav e (no r di ddat a exist ) as-fire ddat a o nmetal s level s i nth e specifi c coa l use di nth e PS D baselin e operatin g year s prio r t o renovation . Instead , th e averag e leve l o f thes e metal s reporte di ntypica l easter n Appalachia ncoa l ("Trac e Element s InCoal , Occurrenc e AndDistribution" . EPA-600/7-77-064) , ref . (1) , wer e use dt o approximat e emission s fo r th e actua l coa l fired . DN

Rha s use dthi s data , i nconjunctio nwit hth e fue l burne dfo r thos e baselin e years , i ndeterminin g th e propose dlimit s containe di nth e permit . Us e o f th e averag e level s o f trac e metal s 1n coa l fo r th e establishmen t o f "no t t o b e exceeded " plan t emissio nlimit s doe s no t tak e int o accoun t th e histori c o r futur e natura l variabilit y o f thos e metal s i ncoal . Meta l level s hav e an dwil l continu e t o var y withi nth e rang e reporte di nth e literatur e fo r tha t sourc e o f coal . Establishmen t o f emissio nlimit s fo r thes e metaT s mus t tak e int o accoun t tha t natura l variability .P. 8

AUG-16-9 0 TH

U8:3 6 FA XNO . OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ' P..0 7

Jul y 13 , 199 0 Pag e 6

B . Analytica l Variabilit y

Inadditio nt o th e natura l variabilit y observe d withi ncoal , significan t variabilit y

i n th e measure d leve l o f metal s in coa l i s cause d b y th e lac k o f analytica l precisio nan d accurac y

i n th e approve d method s o f analysis . Th e analytica l method s employe d consis t o f burnin g a sampl e o f coa l i n a controllh j manner , collectin g volatil e an d non-volatil e product s o f combustion , an d analyzin g thes e residue s fo r th e particula r metals . A

numbe r o f approve d analytica l method s ar e availabl e t o analyz e th e metal s i n th e residue , eac hhavin g a differen t leve l o f precisio nan

d accuracy . Th e variabilit y observe d du e t o th e lac k o f analytica l precisio napplie s directl y t o th e dat a use d t o determin e pas t metal s emissions , an

d wil l appl y

t o th e calculatio no f futur e metal s emissio nrates . A recen t publicatio n(attached ) entitle d "Interlaborator y Variabilit y an d Accurac y

i n Trac e Elemen t Analysi s o f Coal " b y Messrs . J . Lengye l an d E . Obermille r o f th e Consolidatio nCoa l Company , date d October , 1987 , ref . (2) , provide s informatio non laborator y variabilit y

and accurac y fo r a numbe r o f metal s i n coal , includin g beryllium , arsenic , and mercury . Th e variabilit y an d accurac y

level s reporte d wer e determine d by

sendin g ou t a

n NB S coa l standar d and othe r coa l sample s t o fiv e reputabl e commercia l coa l testin g labs , usin g a numbe r o f approve d analytica l method s fo r metal s analysis . A summary o f th e dat a o n th e analysi s o f easter nbituminou s coa l i s provide d on Tabl e 2 o f th e attached , ref . (2) . In tha t table , th e overal l mean , standar d deviatio n an d coefficien t o f variatio nar e provide d fo r eac hmetal . Thi s dat a show s tha t substantia l variabilit y exist s in th e analysi s o f thes e metal s i n coal , reflectin g th e leve l o f uncertaint y i n th e entir e procedure . Thi s analytica l variabilit y mus t b e factore d int o th e developmen t o f an

y emissio nlimi t i n orde r t o protec t agains t "fals e positive " analysi s du e t o analytica l reason s whic hwoul d sugges t fals e excessiv e emissio nrates *

C . Impac t o f Variabilit y o n Propose d Emissio n Limit s Th e effec t o f analytica l variabilit y i n determinin g th e level s o f metal s i ncoa l i s t o creat e a

n overal l "erro r band " i n th e calculate d concentration . Th e effec t o f th e natura l variabilit y i n metal s conten t withi nth e coa l dat a use d t o calculat e th e propose d emissio nlimit s i s t o creat e a rang e in metal s emission s bot hbefor e an d afte r th e renovation . In th e even t tha t th e departmen t wishe s t o impos e limit s on beryllium , arsenic , an

d mercur y 1n th e fina l permit , th e limit s develope d mus t reflec t thes e two source s o f natura l variatio n- neithe r o f whic hca n b e controlle d b y Wisconsi nElectri c o r th e supplie r o f th e fuel . Accordingly , th e baseline , pre-renovat1o nlevel s o f thes e metal s i ncoa l shoul d b e revise d a s follows :P. 9

AUG-16-9 0 TH

U8:3 9 FA XNO . OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO P . 0 8

Jul y 13 , 199 0 Pag e 7

1 . Arseni c

Averag e leve l i

ncoa l fo r year s 83/84 : 2 5 ppm , ref . (1 ) Maximu m leve l i ncoa l fo r year s 83/84 : 10 0 ppm , ref . (1 ) Calculat e natura l variabilit y facto r by : Maximu m leve l 83/8 4 = 10 0 pp m . Averag e leve l 83/8 4 2 5 pp m = * Calculat e analytica l variabilit y facto r by : Reporte d coefficien t o f variatio n« = 42.6% , ref . (2 ) Combin e natura l an

d analytica l variabilit y by : (2 5 ppm)(4)(1.426 ) = 142. 6 pp m A s Thi s valu e represent s a reasonabl e leve l o f arseni c emission s fro m th e pre-renovatio ncoa l source , considerin g bot hnatura l an d analytica l variability . 2 . Mercur y Averag e leve l i ncoa l fo r year s 83/84 : 0.2 0 ppm , ref . (1 ) Maximu m leve l i ncoa l fo r year s 83/84 : 0.4 7 ppm , ref . (1 ) Calculat e natura l variabilit y facto r by : Maximu m leve l 83/8 4 = 0.4 7 oo m « , g Averag e leve l 83/8 4 0.2 0 pp m Calculat e analytica l variabilit y facto r by : Reporte d coefficien t o f variatio n= 33.3% , ref . (2 ) Combin e natura l an

d analytica l variabilit y by : (0.2 0 ppm)(2.35)(1.333 ) = 0.6 3 pp m 3 . Berylliu

m Averag e leve l i ncoa l fo r year s 83/84 : 1. 3 ppm , ref . *(1 ) Maximu m leve l i ncoa l fo r year s 83/84 : 2. 6 ppm , ref . (1 ) Calculat e natura l variabilit y facto r by :P.1 0

AUG-16-9 0 TH

U8:4 0 • FA XNO . OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO P.0 9

Jul y 13 , 199 0 Pag e 8

Maximu

m leve l 83/8 4 - 2. 6 po m

_7 Averag e leve l ?L "' - 1. 3 pp m Calculat e anal v

liabilit y

facto r by : Reporte d coefficien t . . variatio n- 85.5% , ref . (2 ) Combin e natura l an

d anaijtlcal^variabilit y by : (1. 3 ppm)(2)(1.855 ) * 4.8 2 oo m Thes e revise d pre-renovatio nbaselin e meta l level s wer e the nuse d t o recalculat e th e allowabl e emissio nlimit s fo r futur e operatio n o f Unit s 1- 4 a s show

nonTabl e 1 , attached . D . Monitorin g Technique s Th e draf t permi t requires : 1 ) tha t coa l samplin q an a ^ilyse s fo r thes e metal s b e routinel y

performe d t o documen t comp : snc e th e propose d emissio nlimit s and ; 2 ) tha t initia l complianc e an d - quen t complianc e (every

I years ) be determine d b y samplin g •-*.. flu e ga s (Sectio nII.4.1) . Wisconsi nElectri c object s t o th e requiremen t fo r th e ga s emission s testin g fo r thes e metal s o nth e basi s tha t h e level s o f th e trac e element s i nth e flu e ga s downstrea m o f th e ES? ar e predicte d t o b e extremel y

lo w (IO" 5 t o 10" 7 lb/MBtu ) an d tha t i t i s doubtfu l whethe r th e unapprove d analytica l metho d reference d i nth e propose d permi t woul d b e capabl e o f reliabl y measurin g thes e lo

w levels . E . Averagin g Tim e
I nadditio nt o modifyin g th e propose d limit s a s show nabove , Wisconsi n Electri c request s tha t th e averagin g tim e fo r showin g complianc e wit h an y metal s emissio nlimi t b e change d fro m th e propose d 9 0 da y

perio d t o a nannua l period . Thi s longe r averagin g tim e wil l mor e accuratel y reflec t lon g ter

m variabilit y

i nth e metal s conten t i nth e coal . Inth e even t th e Departmen t want s t o retai nanarseni c emission s limitation , i t shoul d rea d 6.2 3 x10' 5 poun d pe r millio nBT Uhea t input . p . 6 . Sec . II. 2 "Initia l operation " i s define d a s th e firs t tim e a uni t i s pu t bac k int o commercia l operatio nafte r renovation . p.7-8 , Sec . II.6. . 9. . 10. . an d 1 1 Thes e condition s shoul d b e clarifie d wit hrespec t t o determinin g electrica l operatin g dat a fo r th e precipitators . Durin g th e sourc e performanc e tests , a rang e fo r eac ho f th e electrica l operatin g parameter s wil l b e obtaine d whic h wil l demonstrat e effectiv e operatio no f th e ESPs . Th e allowabl e variance sP.1 1

IG-16-9 0 TH

U8:4 2 FA XNO . OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO P.1 0

Jul y 13 , 199 0 Pag e 9

expresse da s percent s i nth e propose dpermi t shoul dthe nb e applie dt o thi s rang e fo r eac hparameter . Als o i t shoul db e state dtha t th e expecte d variance s appl y

a t th e performanc e tes t load , i.e. , a t o r nea r ful l load . p . 8. . Sec . 11.1 4

W e d o no t understan dth e nee dt o hav e a C O monito r oneac hboiler . W e shoul d hav e th e optio no f installin g a monito r o neac hstack . p . 9 . Sec . 11.1 7 Th e ter m "a t th e en

do f eac hday " shoul dbe remove dfrom thi s condition . W e wil l repor t exces s emission s i naccordanc e wit hN R439.03(4)(a) , WAC . p . 9 . Sec . II.18. a W e d o no t understan dth e nee dt o repor t dail y averag e opacities . W e wil l repor t eac hmeasure d6 minut e averag e opacit y valu e greate r tha n20 % i n accordanc e wit hNR439.07(3)(h)2.a. , WA C an dconditio n19.a . p . 10 . Sec . 11.2 0 Thi s conditio nshoul dstat e specificall y th e N R440.2 0 requirement s applicabl e t o N0 Xemission s fro

m Unit s 1 an

d4 . p . 10 . Sec . 11.2 1 WE request s thi s conditio nb e delete dbecaus e w e ar e require dt o mee t pollutan t emissio nlimits , a s oppose dt o fue l typ e restrictions . p . 10 . Sec . II.22. C Any referenc e t o tota l fluoride s an dlea dshoul db e delete da s ther e ar e n o emissio nlimit s fo r thes e substance s i nth e permit .
n . 11 . Sec . 11.2 3 Th e renovatio nwor k bein g performe di s no t phase dconstruction . A s w e state d i nMr . Steinberg' s Ma y

7 , 1990 , letter , "(W) e wan t t o clarify , however , tha t commencemen t o f construction , a s define din4 0 CF R52.21 , wil l begi na t o r nea r th e star t o f th e projec t o na numbe r o f boile r relate dsystem s whic har e commo nt o al l fou r unit s (e.g. , boile r wate r makeu psystem , boile r wate r chemistr y upgrades , an

dstructura l stee l modification s t o accommodat e removal/replacemen t o f rea r steam drums) . Wor k o nthes e an dothe r commo n activitie s relate dt o al l fou r unit s wil l continu e durin g th e entir e three yea r renovatio nproject. " Thi s conditio nshoul db e accordingl y deleted .P.1 2

AUG-16-9 0 TH

U8:4 4 FA XNO . OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO • P.-1 1 •

Jul y 13 , 199 0 Pag e 1 0

NO ^ BAC T Comment s

Ina Ma y 2 , 199 0 memo fro

m Mr . Alle nHubbar d (DNR ) t o Do nTheile r (DNR) , h e conclude d "tha t th e existin g combustio ntechnique s an d operatin g practice s employe d a t th e Por t Washingto nPowe r Plan t represen t th e bes t availabl e contro l technolog y

(BACT ) fo r th e NO xemission s fro m thi s facility' s arch fire d boilers. " Wisconsi nElectri c agree s withthi s conclusion . However , w e hav e th e followin g technica l comment s o ntha t determination . Page s 6 , 7 , 8 - Technica l Feasibilit y o f Contro l Alternative s fo r Por t Washington' s Boiler s - Selectiv e Catalyti c Reductio n(SCR) . Mr . Hubbar d concludes , a s o f Ma y 2 , 1990 , "tha t SC Ri s technicall y feasibl e fo r controllin g NO xemission s fro m th e arch-fire d furnace s a t WEPCO' s Por t Washingto nPowe r Plant. " I nmakin g tha t determination , w e believ e tha t Mr . Hubbar d underestimate d th e advers e impac t o f one . o f th e primar y technica l reason s fo r excludin g thi s technolog y fo r Por t Washingto n- tha t bein g th e potentia l fo r SC Rfires . Wisconsi nElectri c adequatel y describe d th e hig hpotentia l fo r a nSC Rcatalys t fir e 1na previou s submitta l date d Februar y 14 , 1990 . Expandin g upo ntha t submittal , depositio no f unburne d fue l o r fue l carbo n1 nSelectiv e Catalyti c Reductio n(SCR ) reactor s present s a seriou s hazar d t o personne l an d equipmen t du e t o a highris k o f fir e o r explosion . Durin g operatio no f an

y coa l fire d boiler , smal l amount s o f coa l an d evolve d carbo nwil l pas s throughth e combustio nchamber . I nth e presenc e o f an ignitio nsourc e an

d oxygen , thes e material s wil l combust , o r i nanenclose d space , produc e anexplosion . SC Rreactor s provid e a receptacl e i nwhic hcombustibl e materia l ma y collect , vi a impingemen t oncatalys t an d structura l surface s o r by droppin g ou t i n area s o f lowe r velocity . Sufficien t localize d collection s o f combustibl e materia l ha s occurre d a t operatin g SC Rsystem s t o produc e fire s with subsequen t damag e t o equipment , personne l injury , an d apparentl y

a t leas t on e fatality . Japanes e experienc e withSC Rfire s wa s site d inou r Februar y 199 0 SC Rrevie w

(referenc e Numbe r 10) . Thi s fir e occurre d o na uni t which , t o ou r knowledge , ha s lowe r carbo nlevel s i nth e flu e ga s tha nPor t Washington . SC Rreactor s operat e a t o r very nea r th e ignitio ntemperatur e o f fixe d carbo n i ncoal , an

d abov e th e ignitio ntemperatur e fo r volatile s evolve d fro m coal . Durin g off-lin e periods , isolatin g th e reacto r t o maintai nit s temperatur e an d heatin g o f th e reacto r ha s bee nrecommende d t o preserv e th e functiona l lif e o f th e catalys t by

inhibitin g bot htherma l cyclin g o f tha,catalys t and moistur e born e migratio no f catalys t poisons . Althoug hcontro l scheme s and dampe r closure s woul d attemp t t o isolat e th e reacto r fro m ai r (20 % oxygen ) flow s o n uni t trips , and start-up , occasion s woul d stil l aris e wne nn rt o suppor t combustio nwoul d b e availabl e inisolate d pocket s o r e nmasse . Th e presenc e o f th e combustio ningredient s o f fuel , hea t an d ai r woul d mak e fir e possibl e an d probable .P.1 3 

# r AUG-1.6-9 0 TH

U8 = 4 6 FA XNO . OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO P.1 2

Jul y 13 , 199 0 Pag e 1 1

Inou r Februar y

199 0 review

o f SC Rtechnology , w e state dtha t th e fir e hazar d fo r SC Rreactors , i f applie da t Por t Washingto nPowe r Plan t woul db e particularl y

acute . W

e outline dtha t th e combinatio no f relativel y hig h level s o f carbo nrelease db y th e lo w NO xarc hfire dboiler s (60 0 lb . coal/hour) , smal l amount s o f ra w fue l (25 0 lb . coal/hour ) an dvolatile s (100 0 pp m methane ) discharge dfro m th e mil l ventag e system , variabl e ga s flow s and numerou s start s an

dstop s fro

m cycli c opeieatio

nwoul dbrin g th e combustio n ingredient s int o th e reacto r o na frequen t basis . Th e quantit y o f combustibl e materia l availabl e mad e applicatio no f SC Rarrangement s clearl y outsid e th e bound s o f goo dengineerin g practice . I nfact , th e ris k o f a fir e i nth e SC Rreacto r woul db e significantl y greate r tha ni nai r heate r o r ESP . Unlik e th e ai r heate r o r ESP , whic har e allowe d t o coo l dow ndurin g off-lin e periods , th e SC Rreacto r mus t b e maintaine da t th e elevate dtemperature s t o preserv e catalys t life . Therefore , th e time perio d tha t th e SC Rreacto r i s expose dt o hea t fo r combustio ni s significantl y greate r tha ntha t o f th e ai r heate r an dESP . I naddition , SC Rreactor s ar e mor e pron e t o as han dcarbo naccumulatio ntha n tha t o f ai r heater s o r ESP's . Ai r heater s an dESP' s ar e constructe dwit h simple r vertica l surface s tha ntha t o f th e SCR' s honeycom bdesign . Also , mean s ar e typicall y

provide don

ai r heater s an

dESP' s t o maintai nadequat e ga s velocitie s t o preven t materia l fallou t an dt o remov e as han

dcarbo nfro

m th e ES P plate s an

dhopper s prio r t o removin g th e generatin g uni t fro m service . T o ou r knowledge , no t on e SC Rmanufacture r provide s a nSC Rwit hplat e rappers , hopper s an

da nevacuatio nsyste

m t o remov e material s tha t ma y accumulat e i n th e SCR . Slow oxidation , o r mor e commonl y "spontaneou s combustion" , i s th e likel y outcome , wit hresult s simila r t o th e Japanes e experienc e wit hfires . Thi s clea r an dpresen t hazar dt o personnel , equipmen t an dreliabl e operatio nmake s SC Rapplicatio na t Por t Washingto nPowe r Plan t unacceptable . Page s 8 , 9 - Technica l Feasibilit y o f Contro l Alternative s fo r Por t Washington' s Boiler s - Selectiv e Non-Catalyti c Reductio n(SNCR ) Inhi s determination , Mr . Hubbar dindicate d"a s o f Ma y 2 , 1990 , tha t SNC Ri s technicall y

infeasibl e fo r controllin g NO xemission s a t Por t Washington. " Mr . Hubbard , however , suggest s tha t on e o f th e firm s tha t provide s a licens e fo r SNC Rtechnolog y

(Exxon ) believe s tha t thei r proces s ma y b e applicabl e t o Por t Washington . Wisconsi nElectri c ha s reviewe dExxon' s May , 199 0 submitta l t o th e Departmen t regardin g applyin g th e DeNOxSelectiv e Non-Catalyti c deductio nproces s a t Por t Washingto nPowe r Plan t (ref. 1) . Wisconsi nElectri c remain s convince dtha t Selectiv e Non-Catalyti c Reductio n(SNCR ) i s not , no r wil l b e a viabl e NO x contro l technolog y

fo r th e Por t Washingto nPowe r Plan t boiler s an dtha t suc h a napplicatio ncanno t b e effectivel y installed , operate do r commerciall y guaranteed . Thi s positio ni s maintaine dbase do nuncertaintie s i ndevelop ment , desig nandperformanc e o f SNC Rsystem s whic hremai nunresolved , eve ni nP.1 4

AUG-16-9 0 TH

U8:4 9 FA XNO . OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO *P : 13" .

Jul y 13 , 199 0 Pag e 1 2

ligh t o f Exxon' s unfounde d assertions . Th e followin g discussio ni s offere d t o S.T? * P r e y 1ou s ^formatio nsupplie d by Wisconsi nElectri c onthi s NO x remova l technology . DEVELOPMEN T Applicatio no f SNC Ra t Por t Washingto nPowe r Plan t woul d b e th e firs t us e o f SNC Rona U.S . coal-fire d boiler . A s show ni nthei r May , 199 0 submittal , Exxo ns SNC Rexperience , worldwide , include s onl y fou r coal-fire d utilit y boile r configurations . Thes e installation s wer e oncyclon e furnace , fluidize d bed , towe r an

d Europea ndesign s eac hdistinctl y differen t fro

m th e Por t Washingto nboilers . Th e remainin g 7 1 installation s o f Exxo nSNC Rtechnolog y ar e onoi l an

d ga s fire d equipment . Althoug happlication s hav e grown , parametri c dat a fo r SNC Rinvolvin g coa l firin g i ncomplicate d hea t transfe r equipmen t ha s onl y

a limite d an

d exclusiv e base . DESIG N N o desig nfo r DeNO xapplicatio na t Por t Washingto nha s bee nproduced . A s Exxonindicate d i nthei r submittal , eac happlicatio nrequire s thei r specific , detaile d engineerin g revie w t o determin e 1 ) Applicatio no f DeNO xt o th e furnac e configuration , 2 ) Proces s parameter s suc ha s injecto r design , proces s control , reagen t us e an d expecte d performance . I nPor t Washingto nPowe r Plant' s case , al l thi s woul d b e base d onth e performanc e o f th e existin g fou r dissimila r boile r design s an d th e us e o f mathematica l model s predictin g th e mixin g an d reactio no f flu e ga s an d ammonia . Accordin g t o thei r submittal , Exxo nwoul d provid e (an d license ) onl y

th e basi s fo r th e NO xcontro l process . Actua l detaile d mechanical , electrica l an d contro l engineering , a s wel l a s installation , woul d b e lef t t o others . Withou t a comparabl e experienc e bas e fo r th e designer s and Installers , optimis m an d confidenc e i nth e succes s o f th e fina l syste m i s no t apparent , an

d certainl y i s no t guaranteed . PERFORMANC E Ultimately , th e amoun t o f NO xremova l an d ammoni a (NH 3 ) sli p ar e linke d t o th e furnac e configuratio nan d operation . Exxonreport s performanc e 1 s Influence d durin g injectio nan

d reactio nb

y temperature , mixing , flu e ga s constituents , an d th e natur e o f th e loca l an d downstream

surface s (ref.1,2) . Thes e condition s var y

widel y fro m applicatio nt o applicatio nand durin g operatio non an y specifi c application . Reportedly , onl y i nth e mos t optima l proces s configurations , wher e maximu m NO xremova l occur s wil l minimu m NH . pass-throug h b e obtaine d (ref . 2) . — Th e Por t Washingto nfurnace s operat e a t o r abov e th e uppe r temperatur e limi t o f th e SNC Rproces s durin g ful l load operatio nand hav e closel y space d tubin g immediatel y

downstream . A t low

load , th e desire d injectio ntemperatur e ma y occu r i nth e uppe r furnace . Withou t significan t and costl y boile rP.1 5

AUG-16r9 0 TH

U8:5 2 FA XNO . OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO P.1 4

Jul y 13 , 199 0 Pag e 1 3

modifications , n o existin g injectio nare a i s availabl e fo r th e proces s t o operat e reliabl y

ove r th e rang e o f load s experience db y th e generatin g unit . Temperatur e ha s th e greates t influenc e onth e DeNO xprocess . I nthei r submittal , Exxo nsuggest s ammoni a injectio nint o th e uppe r portio no f th e furnace s woul db e require da t two differen t elevations . Th e Por t Washingto n boilers , however , wil l routinel y cycl e throug ha 4: 1 loa drang e an dwil l no t operat e steadil y

a t onl y two loa dpoints . Performanc e concern s stil l exis t fo r operatio nove r th e entir e loadrange . I nth e uppe r loa drange , wher e temperature s throughou t th e furnac e ar e high , exceedin g th e SNC Racceptabl e rang e woul dresul t i noxidatio no f th e NH 3 an d productio no f additiona l NOx . Althoug hExxo nassert s th e tub e surface s immediatel y

downstream

o f th e furnac e migh t no t foul , th e relativel y coo l surface s woul dhav e a

nimpac t o neffectivenes s an dar e Identifie d b

y Exxo na s Increasin g NH 3 sli p(ref . 2) . Durin g loadchanges , an deve na t steady

load , temperatur e variation s wil l occu r acros s th e plan e o f injection . Stron g variatio ni nperformanc e tendin g towar dlowe r NO xremova l andincreasin g NH 3 emission s ha s bee nreporte dfo r DeNO xSNC R(ref . 3) . I ntha t reference , lo w loadNO xremoval s o f les s tha n 20 % occurred , accompanie dby NH- , emission s o f 20-5 0 ppm . Fo r Por t Washington , tha t leve l o f performanc e woul dresul t i nn o ne t reductio ni nth e emissio no f tota l nitroge ncompounds . T o addres s performanc e a t lowe r loads , Exxo nma y intendt o injec t additiona l "enhancer " agents . Methanol , hydroge nan dproprietar y

hydrocarbon s hav e bee n investigate dt o expan dth e lowe r temperatur e limi t fo r th e reductio nproces s fo r NH 3 an d Ure a injectio nscheme s (ref. 4,5) . Exxon' s May , 199 0 submitta l include s hydroge ni nth e lis t o f proces s desig ncriteria . Hydroge ni s highl y explosive , an

di s difficul t t o handl e an dstor e i nlarg e quantities . Maintainin g leaktlgh t systems , wher e temperatur e change s an drelativ e growt h o f component s occur , i s especiall y difficult ; witnes s th e recen t concern s wit h spac e shuttl e deliver y

hydroge nsystems . Ideally , significan t NO xremova l shoul db e accomplishe dwithou t producin g othe r detrimenta l impacts . A s note dinou r previou s report s an dabove , th e SNC Rinherentl y

produce s a sli pstrea

m o f ammoni a (NH 3 ) , whic hpasse s throug h th e reductio nreaction . Th e NH 3 subsequentl y interact s wit hothe r flu e ga s product s o r i s emitte dt o th e environment . Nationally , ammoni a i s liste da s "Extremel y

Hazardous " b

y th e U.S . EPA . I nWisconsin , ammoni a I s identifie da s a nai r toxi c b

y th e Department . Exxo nacknowledge s th e likelihoo d o f unreacte dNH 3 pass4n g ou t o f th e proces s (ref.l) . The y

sugges t tha t proces s performanc e ma y b e tailore dt o pas s NH , in concentration s eithe r les s tha n5 pp m o r i nfairl y

larg e concentration s o f 2 0 t o 5 0 pp m (ref . 1,2) . Thes e range s ar e selecte dt o inhibi t formatio no f ammoni a salt s i nandondownstream equipment .P.1 6

AUG-16-9 0 TH

U8:5 4 FA XNO . OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 'P.T 5

Jul y 13 , 199 0 Pag e 1 4

Althoug hth e high/low

NH 3 sli p techniqu e ma y

hav e bee npractica l insome in stances , an

d a s Exxo nasserts , n o detrimenta l equipmen t impact s hav e bee n incurre d s o fa r wit hsoli d fue l firin g (Includin g shor t term result s fo r a 1.5 % sulfu r coa l installatio ni nGermany) , :i e wid e variatio ninfue l characteristics , especiall y sulfur/as halkalinit y

concentration s wil l effec t ammoni a sal t production . Th e coal s currentl y use d an d planne d fo r Por t Washingto nconsumptio nar e relativel y lo w inHcalinlt y

relativ e t o municipa l waste , woo d an

d Europea ncoal s an

d thu s th e pocsntia l fo r sal t formatio nwoul d b e significantl y

greater . A s mentione d above , contro l t o 5 pp m NH 3 sli p i s ver y

unlikel y excep t i nth e bes t o f circumstances , nd , a s state d i nou r earlie r reports , i s difficul t t o measur e an

d contro l au^natically . Generally , th e highsli p configuratio n shoul d b e expected . Indeed , anoperator' s tendenc y woul d b e t o "overblow " NH 3 t o maintai nNO xcomplianc e level s i f downstream equipmen t wer e no t affected . Th e bul k o f highe r NH 3 concentration s woul d b e emitte d t o th e atmosphere . DeNo xapplicatio nt o Por t Washingto nPowe r Plan t woul d b e technicall y unprecedente d and woul d requir e performanc e incomplianc e wit hlegall y enforceabl e limits . Thi s ste p require s a hig hdegre e o f certaint y an d confidenc e inth e syste m technolog y

onth e par t o f th e designer , installer , operato r an

d mandatin g regulator . W e not e tha t althoug hExxo nextende d option s fo r additiona l engineerin g suppor t i ndesign , installatio nand start up , n o performanc e guarante e wa s describe d i nth e bas e o r optiona l offerings . Ultimately , o f course , th e operato r i s responsibl e fo r complianc e and workabilit y

o f th e system . Wisconsi nElectri c believe s th e applicatio no f SNC Ri s no t viabl e a t th e Por t Washingto nPowe r Plant , an d th e nascen t tech nolog y doe s no t remov e ou r concerns . Th e technolog y remain s unprove nfo r thi s applicatio nan

d is , therefore , unacceptable .P.1 7

,AUGrl6-9 0 TH

U8:5 6 FA XNO . OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO P.1 6

Jul y 13 , 199 0 Pag e 1 5

REFERENCE S 1 . THERMAL DeNO xESTIMAT E FO RFIVE 8 0 M W ARC H FIRE D P C BOILERS . May , 1990 . Proposa l an d accompanyin g mem o o f Jan . 4 , 1990 . W . D . Fellows , Exxo nResearc han d Developmen t Co . t o A . Hubbard , Wisconsi nDepartmen t o f Natura l Resources . 2 . THERMAL DeNO xTECHNOLOG YUPDATE . Boyd^E . Hurst , Engineerin g Associate , Exxo nResearc han

d Engineerin g Co. , EPR I 198 5 Symposiu m onStationar y Combustio nNO xControl . 3 . TH E THERMAL DeNO xDEMONSTRATIO N PROJECT . Henr y

T . Dziegiel , Tyron e B . Aure , Davi d W . Anderson , Lo s Angele s Departmen t o f Wate r an d power , Powe r Desig nan d Constructio nDivision , EPR I 198 2 Symposiu m o n Stationar y

Combustio nNOxControl . Th e followin g wer e include d inWEPCO' s May , 198 9 SNC RRevie w a s Bechte l Reference s 6 and 8 : 4 . NO xCONTRO L I

N A BROW N COAL-FIRE D UTILIT YBOILER . J . Hoffman , J . Bergmann , D . Bokenbring , EPA/EPR I Join t Symposiu m onStationar y

NOx Control , Sa nFrancisco , Marc h6-9 , 1989 . 5 . METHANO L INJECTION- A NE W METHO D FO

RNO xAN D S0 3 CONTROL . R . Lyon , EPA/EPR I Join t Symposiu m onStationar y

Combustio nNO xControl , Sa n Francisco , Marc h6-9 , 1989 .P.1 8

AUG-16-9 0 TH

U8:5 7 FA XNO . OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 'P : 17 :

-

Jul y 13 , 199 0 Pag e 1 6

We woul dappreciat e i f yo u woul dconside r thes e comment s an d incorporat e th e change s int o th e fina l permi t conditions . I f yo uhav e an y question s concernin g thes e comment s yo u ca n contac t m e a t (414 ) 221-2174 . Sincerely ,

Roger/D . Dodds Ai rQbilit y Enginee r Environmenta l Departmen t RDD/km o Attachment s

cc : Wol f Klasse n - DNR/SE D