UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

REGION 1 

1 CONGRESS STREET, SUITE 1100 

BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02114-2023 

June 30, 2004 

Robert Donaldson 

Department of Environmental Protection 

Bureau of Waste Prevention 

One Winter Street 8th Floor 

Boston, MA 02108 

Dear Mr. Donaldson: 

We have reviewed the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection's (DEP) proposed 

amendments 310 Code of Massachusetts Regulations (CMR) part 7.00, which will add sections 

7.26(40) through (44) to the Air Pollution Control Regulations. 

We have included our comments on the proposed rule for smaller-scale electric generating 

resources in the enclosure to this letter. We have concerns about the enforceability of the 

proposed rule, but have suggested changes that would address our concerns. 

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Christine Sansevero of my staff at (617) 

918-1699. 

Sincerely, 

Anne Arnold 

Acting Manager 

Air Quality Planning Unit 

Enclosure 

Toll Free •1-888-372-7341 

Internet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov/region1 

Recvcled/Recvclable .Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 30% Postconsumer) 
Enclosure 

EPA Region 1 Comments - 310 CMR 7.26 - Engines and Combustion Turbines 

June 2004 Proposal 

Major Comments 

Subsections 7.26(42)(e)(3)(a) and 7.26(43)(e)(3)(a) authorize the Department to 

unilaterally approve alternative test methods to certify compliance with emission limits. 

If Massachusetts intends to adopt this rule into the SIP for enforceable emission 

reductions, these "director discretion" provisions must be qualified to ensure that any 

such alternatives must be submitted for EPA approval. 

To address these concerns, we recommend the following language change 

(changes in caps): "Tests to certify compliance with emission limitations must be 

performed in accordance with EPA reference Methods, California Air Resources 

Board Methods APPROVED BY EPA, or equivalent methods as approved by the 

Department AND EPA." 

• In subsection 7.26(42)(b), we recommend that DEP reference EPA's new standards for 

nonroad engines published in the Federal Register on June 29, 2004 (see 40 CFR Part 

89). Engines built in model year 2008 and beyond will have to begin meeting these new, 

more stringent standards. 

• In 7.26(43)(b), which addresses the issue of a technology review, we recommend adding 

a new section (5) to read as follows: "ANY REVISIONS TO THE EMISSIONS LIMITS 

IN TABLES 2 AND 3 SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO EPA FOR APPROVAL." We also 

recommend changing "will" to "shall" in the first sentence of 7.26(43)(b)(2) and (3). 

Other Comments 

In 7.26(40)(b), for clarification, we suggest the following language change (in caps): 

"Engines REGULATED UNDER 40 CFR 89, 90, 91, and 92 are exempt from the 

requirements of 310 CMR 7.26(40) through (44) in its entirety." 

• To clarify the effective dates of the sulfur limits, EPA recommends the following 

language change (in caps) to 7.02(8)(i)(5), 7.05(l)(a)(3), 7.03(10)(b): "On or after [six 

months after the effective date], no person shall accept for delivery for burning in any 

engines subject to 310 CMR 7.02(8)(i), diesel fuel that does not meet the applicable U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency sulfur limits for fuel pursuant to 40 CFR 80.29 as 

PROMULGATED January 18, 2001. ON OR AFTER JUNE 2006, NO PERSON 

SHALL ACCEPT FOR DELIVERY FOR BURNING IN ANY ENGINES SUBJECT TO 

310 CMR 7.02(8)(i), DIESEL FUEL THAT DOES NOT MEET THE APPLICABLE 

U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY SULFUR LIMITS FOR FUEL 

PURSUANT TO 40 CFR 80.500(a), AND 80.520(a) AND (b) AS PROMULGATED 

JANUARY 18, 2001." 
Alternatively, it may be less confusing to simply state that the sulfur limit of 500 ppm 

must be met six months after the effective date of the rule and 15 ppm limit must be met 

beginning in June 2006. 

In 7.26(42)(e)(3)(b) and 7.26(43)(e)(3)(b), EPA recommends that the test method 

reference ISO Method 8178 D2. The D2 test is the best test for an emergency generator 

because it is a constant speed test (it omits idle and intermediate speed modes). 

In the pre-amble to the rule, DEP is seeking comment on allowing credit for Combined 

Heat and Power (CHP) systems. If DEP does decide to give credit to CHP systems, we 

recommend that you adopt the language in the Regulatory Assistance Project (RAP) 

model rule. In order gain credit, the RAP rule requires facilities to demonstrate that at 

least 20 percent of the fuel's total recovered energy is thermal and at least 13 percent is 

electric. It also requires a design system efficiency of at least 55 percent. In addition, the 

RAP model mle contains a formula for calculating credit. 

2 

i