Tlle Business Coulncil for

FE7 Sr¡stainal¡le

I FIU Enerslz

May 20,2011

Lisa Jackson, Administrator

US EPA Headquarters

Ariel Rios Building (110114)

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Washington, DC 20460

Docket Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0058

Petition for Reconsideration of the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants

for Major Sources: lndustrial, Commercial, and lnstitutional Boilers and Process Heaterc, 76

Fed. Reg. 15608 (Mar. 21,20111

Dear Administrator Jackson,

The Business Council for Sustainable Energy (BCSE, the Council) petitions EPA to reconsider two

components of the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) for New

and Existing Sources for Major Source lndustr¡al, Commercial, and lnstitution Boilers and Process

Heaters (hereafter referred to as Boiler MACT).

The Council applauds EPA's effort throughout the rule to emphasize the role energy efficiency can

play in reducing hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) emissions cost-effectively. As EPA noted in its

Response to Comments, improved combustion efficiency reduces fuel usage, which, in turn, reduces

emissions.' Driving energy efficiency in a consistent manner across regulations and rules has the

potential to reduce emissions of multiple pollutants in a cost-effective manner. The Council offers

these recommendations as ways to strengthen the rule's effectiveness and contribute to EPA's

energy efficiency objectives:

1. Clarify that facilities may simultaneously adopt the alternative output-based compliance

standard and average emissions; 2. Clarify that coal-fired facilities seeking to incorporate combined heat and power (CHP) or

waste heat recovery (VVHR) are eligible for a one-year compliance extension.

Though not singled out for reconsideration in EPA's March 21, 201 1 Reconsideration Notice, the

Council feels these issues are appropriate for Reconsideration under the Clean Air Act, Section

307(dX7Xb). The output-based standard compliance option was not included in the proposed rule and

was thus unable to be commented on during the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. The Council also

seeks clarification to allow for increased new development of CHp and WHR.

Allowing Output-Based Sfandards and Emissions Averaging

The BCSE supports the use of output-based standards wherever possible to encourage system-wide

efficiency. As EPA has noted, "output-based emission standards provide a regulatory incentive to

enhance unit operating efficiency and reduce emissions." " The BCSE and others observe, however,

that there does not seem to be an option for a regulated entity to simultaneously opt for output-based

limitations and emissions averaging. Section 63.7522 of the rule instructs regulated entities that opt

for emissions averaging to use formulae for establishing initial compliance (in 63.7522(eX1) and (2))

and for demonstrating monthly compliance (in 63.7522(f)('l) and (2)) that provide onty heat inputbased emissions rates. The Council notes that there are no instructions or alternative formulae in

63.7522 for showing initial and monthly compliance using an output basis. Nor are there any

directions in the energy efficiency/conservation crediting section (63.7533) on how to simultaneously

opt for output-based emissions limitations and emissions averaging. The BCSE encourages EPA to

162O Eye Street NW . Suite 5O1 . Washington, DC 20006 . p:202,785.0607 . f:2c.2.286.,c,614 . http://wwwbcse.org
alter Sect¡on 63.7522 to allow and give clear direction for those regulated under the rule seeking to

opt simultaneously for output-based emissions limitations and emissions averaging.

Considering Fuel-Switching + ç¡1p¡11y¡1p as "Controls',

Under the rule as written, an owner operating a coal-fired boiler who wishes to use add-on controls to

comply with the Boiler MACT can request a one-year extension.from the permitting State should

additíonal time be necessary for the inqtallation of the controls."' The BCSE encourages EpA to clarify

that the same one-year compliance extension can be offered to operators of coal-firéd boilers who

choose to switch to natural gas-fired systems that include CHP or WHR. CHP and WHR developers

and environmental engineeríng firms have expressed concerns that the three year compliance

window allowed for switching fuel from coal to natural gas may not provide sufficient time for boiler

owners to decide on efficient CHP or WHR as their compliance approach and to have the equipment

designed, permitted, and installed. lncluding CHP and WHR in the definitíon of "controls" unðei tne

Act will allow those choosing fuel-switching as a compliance option to install the most efficient

systems possible.

Sincerely,

)..^ 1^***

Lisa Jacobson

President

Gina McCarthy, Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and Radiation, US EpA

Office of General Counsel, US EPA

Brian Shrager, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, US EpA

i 76 Fed. Reg. 15608, 15630, Mar. 21, 201 1, "Final Rule: National Emission Standards for Hazardous

Air Pollutants for Major Sources: lndustrial, Commercial, and lnstitutional Boilers and process

Heaters."

" 76 Fed. Reg. at 1s630-31.

"'See 40 CFR 63.6 (Authorizing the Administrator or delegated state authority to "grant an extension

allowing the source up to 1 additional year to comply with the standard, if such additional period is

necessary for the installation of controls").