P. 1


# OAR Box 1796 Prepped byKeeiaRichards



### Document

Number: 

# 44 ) IV-H-7 0 Docket Number: 

# A-90-3 7

Printed 10/31/20084:20:37

PM Sheet 44of 107P. 2 

### |V - 

### H 7 0

O 

### e

x 

# M A U
f\-tr<^ 

# L t*y 

# H 

# c c < ^ PjrsOsuJv^
- T T )



# .O 

# v

# iH ? •
rr 

# 3 - ._*' > _* * iP< 0 r-< ? t A^C6V^ ) 

# Ue ----- - ^ p©« >

I "c l 9IE8-91B-E0Z , sn o * S a^ l *-E\r'-L0 2 0 2 8 ^°WP. 3

Interna l an d Deliberativ e Draft
- D o no t quote , cite , copy , o r distribute . Novembe r 19 , 200 2 existin g procedur e unde r th e pre-existin g definitio no f "actua l emissions " a t §52.21(b)(21(ii) , whic hgenerall y require s th e us e o f a naverag e annua l emission s rat e base d o nth e 2-yea r perio d immediatel yprecedin g a particula r •date . Th e latte r procedur e i s designe dt o estimat e a source' s actua l emission s a t a particula r tim e an dcontinue s t o b e appropriat e fo r suc hthing s a s estimatin g a source' s impac t o nai r qualit yfo r PS D incremen t consumption . O nth e othe r hand , th e ne wbaselin e procedur e i s specificall ydesigne d t o allo wa sourc e t o conside r a ful l busines s cycl e i ndeterminin g whethe r ther e wil l b e a n emission s increas e fro ma physica l o r operationa l change . Generally , a source' s operation s ove r a busines s cycl e cover s a rang e o f operatin g (an d emissions ) levels—-no t simpl ya singl e leve l o f utilization . Th e ne wprocedur e recognize s tha t marke t fluctuation s ar e a norma l occurrenc e i nmos t industries , and tha t a source' s operatin g leve l (an d emissions ) dee ^ no t remai nconstan t throughou t a source' s busines s cycle . Th e us e o f a 24-mont hperio dwithi nth e pas t 1 0 year s t o establis ha naverag e annua l rat e i s intende d t o adjus t fo r unusuall yhig hshort-ter mpeak s i n utilization . Consequently , th e ne wprocedur e ensure s tha t a sourc e 8 3

2- d 9tE8-9t6-E0_
- si^ D " S 33 1 *3f-LQ 30 33 *°. JP. 4

Interna l an d Deliberativ e Draft
- D o no t quote , cite , copy , o r distribute . Novembe r 19 , 200 2 seekin g t o mak e change s a t it s facilit ya t a tim e whe n• utilizatio nma yno t b e a t it s highes t ca nus e a norma l busines s cycl e baselin e byallowin g th e sourc e t o identif y capacit yactuall yuse d (-an d t-ha-t—reTtra"__TT

s usable- ) i norde r t o determin e a naverag e annua l emission s rat e fro mwhic ht o calculat e anyprojecte dactua l emission s resultin g fro mth e change . Wit hrespec t t o th e commenters ' genera l concern s tha t a 10-yea r loo k bac k perio di s to o long , w e sough t t o bette r understan d wha t tim e perio dbest
- represent s a nindustry' s norma l busines s cycle . Therefore , w e contracte dfo r a study o f severa l industrie s i n1997. 2 4 Thi s stud yfoun dthat , fo r th e industrie s analyzed , busines s cycle s diffe r markedl yby industry , an d ma yvar ygreatl ybot hi nduratio nan d intensit yeve nwithi na particula r industry . Nevertheless , w e conclude d fro m th e studytha t 1 0 year s o f dat a i s reasonabl e t o captur e a nentir e industr ycycle . Comment s

2 4 "Busines s Cycle s i nMajo r Emittin g Sourc e Industries. " Easter nResearc hGroup ; Septembe r 25 , 1997 . Thi s study examine d th e busines s fluctuation s fo r nin e sourc e categorie s describe d a s Clea nAi r Ac t majo r emittin g sources . Industr ybusines s cycle s wer e examine dusin g industr youtpu t dat a fo r th e year s 198 2 t o 199 4 inclusive ^ base d o nth e Offic e o f Managemen t an dBudget' s Standar d Industria l Classificatio n(SIC ) code i fo r individua l industries-(OMB , 1987) . 8 4

£•<= ! 9tE8-9t6-E0_

_si^ D ' S aa i BEt-:_, 0 2 0 2 2 ^° WP. 5

Interna lan dDeliberativ eDraft
- D o no t quote , cite , copy , o r distribute . Novembe r

19 , 200 2 f o r EUSGUs . However , fo r consistenc y wit hth ebaselin e perio dfo r

othe r

existin g emission s units , w ehav especifie d tha t th e2-yea r

perio di s the aconsecutiv e24-mont hperiod . En dO f Move dTex t 2 . Wh

y d o th ene w requirement s no t provid ediscretio nfo r t h ereviewin g authorit y t o conside r anothe r

tim eperio dmor e 

# f f.. - rxcr- £<-<-

-<W. r 0 Severa l commenter s oppos e ou r propose d eliminatio no f th e reviewin g authority' s discretio nt o allo wa differen t representativ e perio d (outsid e o f th e 10-yea r period) , becaus e the yargu e certai nsource s (fo r example , emission s unit s place d i n col d reserv e du e t o reduce d demand ) requir e thi s flexibility . Som e commenter s sa yth e discretio nshoul d b e give nt o th e reviewin g authority , whil e othe r commenter s wante d th e discretio ngive ndirectl yt o sourc e owner s an d operators . Instea d o f th e discretio nt o us e a n alternat e period , on e commente r prefer s tha t al l source s shoul d b e require d t o sho wtha t the yhav e selecte d a•representativ e perio d tha t precede s th e mos t recen t 2-yea r period .

W e believ e tha t us e o f a fixe d 10-yea r loo k bac k perio d provide s th e desire d clarit yan d certaint yt o th e proces s o f selectin g a n appropriat e utilization/emission s level ^ tr_*a^r-"±" S representativ e o f a source ' _ » uomid-r-Ofierat-io R. • 8 7

t,-c l 9TE8-9IB-E0-
- S ^ D " S a* l <-E+-L0 2 0 2 2 *°K

JP. 6

Interna l an d Deliberativ e Draft
- D o no t quote , cite , copy , o r distribute . Novembe r 19 , 200 2 emissions . Som e commenter s saythes e provision s woul d penaliz e source s tha t complie d wit hothe r regulator y requirement s o r chos e t o implemen t pollutio npreventio n programs . Commenter s ar e particularl yconcerne dtha t source s b e give ncredi t fo r voluntar yreductions . However , othe r commenter s suppor t includin g al l o f thes e factors'i n th e baselin e t o bette r represen t actua l emission s an davoi d inconsistencie s betwee nemission s unit s tha t hav e permit s and thos e tha t d o not . Commenter s als o rais e specifi c question s abou t ho wth e calculatio nwoul dinclud e th e effec t o f othe r emissio nlimitations . A s describe d earlier , w e hav e decide dt o requir e th e us e o f a consecutiv e 24-mont hperio dwithi nth e 10-yea r loo k bac k instea d o f th e propose d12-mont hperio dt o calculat e th e baselin e actua l emission s fo r anyemission s uni t tha t undergoe s a physica l o r operationa l change , o r i s affecte d bysuc hchange . Th e longe r 24-mont hperio dallow s yo u t o referenc e level s o f utilizatio nachieve di n th e past , bu t v^^,f-^txuAJuxr als o eliminate s th e potentia l proble massociate dwith]short
ter m peak s Lha L do~not~1-~ri-fl yrepresen t th e unit' s normal " op-er_atjL_on . I n thi s respect , th e us e o f a 24-mont hperio di s consisten t wit hth e pre-existin g approac hfo r calculatin g actua l emissions . 9 2

S * d 9IE8-9tG-E0_ - s n D - s 33 1 e E *:__ 0 2 0 2 2 AOK JP. 7

Interna l an d Deliberativ e Draft
- D o no t quote , cite , copy , o r distribute . Novembe r 19 , 200 2 _5&gri 1 1 y—enforceabl e limitation s currentl yexis t tha t woul d preven t th e affecte d uni t fro memittin g a pollutan t a t the y^ >c ~' ~ level s calculate d fro mth e 24-mont hbaselin e period / Th e MAOAapproac htha t w e hav e adopte dallow s yo u t o referenc e plan t capacit ytha t ha s actuall ybee nused , bu t no t pollutio n level s tha t ar e no t legall yallowe da t th e tim e th e modificatio ni s t o occur . Yo u wil l b e require dt o mak e adjustment s fo r voluntar yreduction s tha t yo u ma yhav e take n onl yt o th e exten t tha t th e reduction s resulte d-rrrfro m condition s tha t ar e - J ^g^'l-jr

yenforceabl e limitations . 5 . Ho wdoe s th e chang e i nth e baselin e perio daffec t relate d requirement s regardin g protectio no f ai r quality ? a . Ho wdoe s th e extende d baselin e perio dconfor mwit hth e specia l modificatio nprovision s unde r section s 18 2 (c ) an d (e ) o f th e Act ? Mos t commenter s fee l th e propose d extensio no f th e loo k bac k perio d fit s withi nth e desig nandinten t o f th e specia l modificatio nprocedure s se t fort hi nsection s 182(c ) .an d (e ) o f th e Act , applicabl e i nserious , severe ^ an dextrem e ozon e nonattainmen t areas . However , on e commente r representin g Stat e an d loca l ai r pollutio ncontro l agencie s consider s th e ne wrequirement s t o b e i nsignifican t conflic t wit hth e specia l modificatio nprocedure s containe di nthos e section s 9 4

9- d 9 t E 8 - 9 t B - E 0 L si^ O " S 33 1 BE*=-_ 0 2 0 2 2 A ° WP. 8

Interna l an d Deliberativ e Draft
- D o no t .quote , cite , copy , o r distribute . Novembe r 19 , 200 2 propose d deman d growt hexclusio nsimpl ymake s tha t principl e explici t an d eliminate s confusio na s t o ho wemission s shoul d b e calculated . Th e sam e commenter s wh o suppor t retainin g deman d growt hprovision s fo r utilitie s als o believe d thes e provision s shoul d b e extende d t o non-utilities . Unde r today' s ne wrequirements , you_wil l b e allowe dt o appl yth e causatio nprovisio na s originall ycontaine di nth e WEPC O amendments . Bot hth e statut e an dimplementin g regulation s indicat e tha t ther e shoul db e a causa l lin k betwee nth e propose d chang e and anypost-chang e increas e i n emissions , tha t is , "...an yphysica l chang e o r chang e i nth e metho d o f operatio ntha t would result Ina significan t ne t emission s increase... " [emphasi s added] . -f-See , fo r example , existin g §52.2 1 (b ) (2 ) (i ) .-]
—Consequently , unde r today' s ne w rules , whe na projecte d increas e i nequipmen t utilizatio ni s i nrespons e t o a facto r suc ha s growt hi nmarke t demand , yo u ma ysubtrac t th e emission s increase s fro mth e unit' s projecte d actua l emission s i f yo nr-a n ^ho wth-aH

- • —(1 ) th e uni t coul d hav e achieve d th e necessar yleve l o f utilizatio n durin g th e consecutiv e 24-mont hperio dyo u selecte dt o establis hth e baseline^actua l emissions ; and(2 ) th e , ___ . increas e i s no t -Tfcjlal-^ 1 t o th e physica l o r operationa l ^kACytfltt^f y chang e (s ) mad e t o th e unit . -f-Se e fo r example , ne w^.iAi-^S) 10 2

^ ' d9tE8-9tB-E0-

_si^ o ' S ee~ l **r'-LQ 2 0 2 2 ftOWP. 9

Interna l an d Deliberativ e Draft
- D o no t quote , cite , copy , o r distribute . Novembe r 19 , 200 2 §52.21(b)(41)(ii)(c) . ± O nth e othe r hand , deman dgrowt hca nonl yb e exclude d t o th e exten t tha t th e physica l o r operationa l chang e i s no t relate d t o th e emission s increase . Thus , eve ni f th e operatio no f a nemission s uni t t o mee t a particula r leve l o f deman d coul d hav e bee naccomplishe d durin g th e representativ e baselin e .period , bu t d.- L cta nbcr'Hihow

nthef t th e increas e i s relate d t o th e change s mad e t o th e unit , the n th e emission s increase s resultin g fro mth e increase d operatio nmus t b e attribute d t o th e modificatioi- , project , and canno t b e subtracte dfro mth e projectio no f projecte d actual , emissions . 8 . Shoul d increase s i nplan t utilizatio nb e reviewe da s potentia l majo r modifications ? Man ycommenter s argu e tha t emission s increase s resultin g fro mincrease d utilizatio nshoul dno t b e subjecte d t o revie wa s majo r modifications . The yinsis t tha t EPA' s polic yan d rule s hav e alway s allowe dincrease s i ncapacit y utilizatio nwithou t triggerin g a modification ^ an dno t allowin g utilizatio nincrease s wil l limi t ne wcapacit yt o ne wemission s unit s instea do f promotin g increase d efficienc ya t existin g emission s units . On e commente r arguedj i tha t thes e sort s o f change s d o no t requir e an ysor t 10 3

8 - d 9TE8-9tB-E0_

_ST^ Q ' S as i efrt.:<_, 0 2 0 2 2 *°K JP.1 0

Interna l an d Deliberativ e Draft
- D o no t quote , cite , copy , o r distribute . Novembe r 19 , 200 2 informatio nfo r 1 0 year s followin g th e completio no f th e mudi f ii_.c

i Liu. i projec t t o trac k th e actua l annua l emission s fro mth e unit s associate dwit hth e modificatio nproject . Thi s represent s a specia l conditio ntha t supersede s th e norma l 5-yea r perio d fo r th e recordkeepin g requirement s bein g adopte d today . Durin g th e 10-yea r period , yo u mus t repor t t o you r reviewin g authorit ywithi n6 0 day s afte r any calenda r yea r i f th e annua l emissions , i nturn s pei—yeartpy , fro mth e projec t excee dth e baselin e actua l emission s bya significan t amoun t fo r th e regulate dNS Rpollutan t an di f suc hemission s diffe r fro mth e preconstructio nprojection. / ^ <$'-' ' --_-d>
- 10 . Doe s th e actual-to-projected-actua l applicabilit ytes/ t ^f>A~~ appl yt o netting ? / ^^'u ^ U, i A-k ' W e di d no t specificall yreques t commen t o nthi s issu e ^o-JL , 

### I / . <P i nth e 199 6 proposal . Nonetheless , w e receive dsevera l 1 comment s tha t asser t tha t us e o f differen t method s t o \ c^Ptc, comput e a nemission s increas e an ddetermin e a ne t emission s increas e woul d resul t i n"absur dresults " an drequir e tw o separat e accountin g records . Othe r commenter s oppos e usin g th e actual-to-future-actua l tes t fo r netting . On e commente r say s tha t th e sol e purpos e o f th e actual-to-future-actua l tes t wa s t o determin e i f a nemission s increas e wil l occur . On e commente r sairdys w e shoul dg o furthe r an drevis e th e 10 7 P JJA

B - d 9tE8-9t6-E0.

_si^J D ' S a*1 ef*:__ D 2 0 2 2 *o. JP.1 1

Interna lan dDeliberativ eDraft
- D o no t quote , cite , copy , o r distribute . Novembe r

19 , 200 2 definitio no

f "contemporaneous " t o limi t i t t o projec t activitie s (vs . plantwide ) an dreduc e credit s for shutdown s an dcurtailments . J<^J^^« ' ^ ^^4*4 . fod/ / A s state dpreviously , w e di dno t

specificall y reques t I • • ar t v-. . fc-=>>. .

^ mervE " o nthi s issu eand/w ehav en o plans—t o appl y feh-rs- A",



## ^ 

## do ^' VAA V


### JA-A 0 

## I comme

i test—L o netting—a-fc—this—bimrrgrul edoe s no t alte r existin g '**• ^vt> s practices . 11 . Shoul d w e impos e a n enforceabl e projecte dactua l emission s level ? Som e commenter s o n ou r 199 6 proposa l suppor t th e establishmen t o f a n enforceabl e limitatio no n th e modifie d source' s projecte d futur e emission s level . Othe r commenter s suppor t ou r specifi c proposa l i n th e 199 8 NO At o us e th e projecte d actua l emission s a s a temporar yca p fo r th e emission s unit s involve di n th e modificatio nproject , tha t is , a n enforceabl e 10-yea r emission s level . O nth e othe r hand , man yothe r commenter s oppos e th e concept , citin g variou s reason s fo r thei r opposition . Thes e include d concern s tha t i t woul dbecom e a d_ e fact o baselin e fo r anyadditiona l permittin g an d creat e additiona l enforcemen t liability , usur p Stat e prerogatives , b e inconsisten t wit hth e Clea nAi r Act , an d requir e enforceabl e restriction s fo r to o long . Afe wStat e an d loca l ai r 10 8

D T ' d 9TE8-9T6-E0-
- s i . D " S 3a n BSt- : _. Q 2 0 2 2 AO WP.1 2

Interna l an d Deliberativ e Draft
- D o no t quote , cite , copy , o r distribute . Novembe r 19 , 200 2 W e als o considere drequirin g yo u t o submi t a nup^fron t notificatio nt o you r reviewin g authority , bu t conclude dtha t thi s woul d resul t i na nunnecessar ypaperwor k burden , (e-xc-ep t EUSGUa ^ . W e anticipat e tha t a larg e majorit yo f th e ty—- t-*j.^.- project s tha t ar e no t majo r modification s ma ynonetheles s b e o~jfx_.i i require d t o underg o a permi t actio nthroug hStates ' mino r NS Rpermi t programs . I nsuc hcases , th e mino r NS R permittin g procedure s coul d provid e a nopportunit yt o ensur e that-yo u an d you r reviewin g authorit yagree s wit hyou r emissio nprojections . Requirin g a separat e notificatio n woul d no t provid e th e reviewin g authorit ywit hany additiona l informatio ni nsuc hcircumstances . Accordingly , w e believ e today' s requirement s provid e reviewin g agencie s wit hth e abilit yt o obtai nal l th e informatio nnecessar yt o ensur e compliance . 13 . Whyar e w e promulgatin g a—differen t reportin g requirement s fo r existin g emission s unit s tha nfo r EUSGUs ? Toda yw e ar e finalizin g slightl ydifferen t requirement s fo r EUSGU s tha nothe r industries . I n2000 , boiler s and turbine s wit hgreate r tha n2 5 MW e o r 25 0 rnmB-t-TrTU/h r o f generatin g capacit yrepresente d7 6 percen t o f thi s nation' s emission s o f nitroge noxide s (NO x _ ) an d8 5 percen t o f thi s
11 2

I I ' d 9IE8-9IB-E0_
- si^ D - S 33 1 e__W__ 0 2 0 2 2 ^o. J