Bill Richardson 

Governor 

State of New Mexico 

Office ofthe Governor 

December 1,2003 

Mayor Richard Greene 

Regional Administrator 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6 

1445 Ross Avenue 

Dallas, TX 75202-2733 

Dear Mayor Greene: 

On behalf of the New MexicoEnvironment Department (NMED), I am pleased to submit to the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the enclosed Revision to the New Mexico State 

Implementation Plan for Regional Haze (SIP revision) and related new and revised air quality 

regulations. These documents were compiled in accordance with Title 40 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations, Part 51, Section 309, commonly referred to as Section 309 of the federal Regional 

Haze Rule. The New Mexico Environmental ~m~rovement Board adopted ihe SIP revision and 

the associated new and revised regulations at hearings on November 18 and 19,2003. 

The enclosed SIP revision is New Mexico's first step toward remedying regional haze, created 

by visibility-impairing air pollution originating at a variety of sources over a broad geographic 

area. The visibility protection recommendations of the Grand Canyon Visibility Transport 

Commission (GCVTC) will be implemented by New Mexico through the SIP revision, which 

addresses visibility impairment at mandatory federal Class I areas on the Colorado Plateau, 

including San Pedro Parks Wilderness Area in New Mexico. Additionally, the SIP revision 

makes it possible for New Mexico to continue its regional approach to a regional air quality issue 

through collaboration with other western states and tribes in the GCVTC's successor 

organization, the Western Regional Air Partnership. 

Accompanying the SIP revision are two new regulations and two revised regulations that are 

being added to the New Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC). The two new regulations are 

Smoke Management (20.2.65 NMAC) and the Western Backstop Sulfur Dioxide Trading 

Program (20.2.81 NMAC). Section 309 of the federal Regional Haze Rule requires both new 

regulations and the revisions that were made to Notice of Intent and Emissions Inventory 

Requirements (20.2.73 NMAC). 

State Capitol Room 400 Santa Fe, NewMexico 87501 505-827-3000 mgovernor.state.nm.us 
Mayor &chard Greene 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

December 1,2003 

Page 2 

Revisions were also made to New Mexico's Open Burning regulation (20.2.60 NMAC) because 

that regulation's requirements dovetail with the requirements of the new Smoke Management 

regulation. Although not a part of the Regional Haze SIP requirements under 40 CFR 51.309, the 

Open Burning regulation is a part of New Mexico's SIP and has been since it was initially 

adopted in 1969. 

In addition to the SIP revision and new and revised regulations, complete records of the SIP 

revision hearing and regulatory hearings are enclosed for your review. 

The State of New Mexico looks forward to EPA's approval of the State Implementation Plan 

revisions and your continued support for our efforts to protect visibility in New Mexico's 

National Parks and Wilderness Areas. If you have any questions regarding the SIP revision or 

the new or revised regulations, please contact Sandra Ely, Chief of NMED's Air Quality Bureau, 

at (505) 955-8091. 

S7B2 4- 

Bill Richardson 

Governor of New Mexico 

Enclosures: 

A. Revision to the New Mexico State Implementation Plan for ~e~iond Haze 

B. Regulatory text and NMAC Transmittal Forms for 

20.2.60 NMAC, Open Burning 

20.2.65 NMAC, Smoke Management -. 

20.2.73 NMAC, Notice of Intent and Emissions Inventory Requirements 

20.2.81 NMAC, Western Backstop Sulfur Dioxide Trading Program :, ~3 ;.< #,< C. Copies of Public Notices of the Hearings and Affidavits of Publication . ..r3 4 

D. Copies of Notices of Intent to Testify at the Hearings '.?.., ~2 .Ti . 

.,,-. E. Transcripts and Exhibits for the Hearings . C? 

' c.;> .~. , 

, ~3 -v., 

cc: Carl Edlund, EPA Region 6 

Tom Diggs, EPA Region 6 

David Neleigh, EPA Region 6 

Joe Kordzi, EPA Region 6 

Ron Curry, NMED, Cabinet Secretary 

Sandra Ely, NMED, Air Quality Bureau 

~., , *.-. --r -.2 

I.;. ::,~: c-r'; ,. 

0 C? 9x2 T'> ' , . -,. 

#L 

1 

' c, VJ 0% 

n 

.,.. 
20.2.81 NMAC

Western Backstop Sulfur Dioxide Trading Program
NMAC TRANSMITAL FORM 2~v-j ~3y 2 5 r i4 ! F. .. .IT j3 1.24.10 NMAC [Sequence # 

I- - - -- I Environmental Improvement Board 1 667 

P.O. Box 26110 

1190 St. Francis Drive. Santa Fe. New Mexico 87502 

Name Tracy Hughes ( Phone # 1 (505) 827-2750 1 FAX 1 (505) 827-1628 

E-mail tram huahes@nmenv.state.nm.us 

New Amendment n Renumber n Repeal n Emergency 

I Reference / Internet site 

No x Yes Please list attachmenk 

- and Internet si&(s) if 

applicable 2 

3. 

Title 

20 

Public domain 0 

1 74-1-8 NMSA 1978; Chapter 74, Article 2 NMSA 1978 1 

Chapter 

2 

Name: Gay Dillingham Check if delegated 

authon'ty 

Title: Chair, 

0 

R 

\ 

Y 

Part 

81 
- TITLE 20 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

CHAPTER 2 AIR QUALITY (STATEWIDE) 

PART 81 WESTERN BACKSTOP SULFUR DIOXIDE TRADING PROGRAM 

20.2.81.1 ISSUING AGENCY: Environmental Improvement Board. 

[20.2.81.1 NMAC - N, 1213 1/03] 

20.2.81.2 SCOPE: All geographic areas within the jurisdiction of the environmental improvement board. 

[20.2.81.2 NMAC - N, 12/31/03] 

20.2.81.3 STATUTORY AUTHORITY: Environmental Improvement Act, NMSA 1978, Section 74-1- 

8(A)(4) and (7), and Air Quality Control Act, NMSA 1978, Sections 74-2-1 et seq., including specifically, Section 

74-2-5 (A), (B) and (C). 

[20.2.81.3 NMAC - N, 1213 1/03] 

20.2.81.4 DURATION: Permanent. 

[20.2.81.4 NMAC - N, 1213 1/03] 

20.2.81.5 EFFECTIVE DATE: December 3 1,2003, except where a later date is cited at the end of a 

section. 

[20.2.81.5 NMAC - N, 1213 1/03] 

[The latest effective date of any section in this part is December 3 1, 2003.1 

20.2.81.6 OBJECTIVE: 

A. 20.2.81 NMAC implements the western backstop sulfur dioxide trading program ("WEB trading 

program") provisions required under the federal regional haze rule, 40 CFR 5 1.309, and New Mexico's regional haze .,sx. implementation plan. 

B. Nothing in 20.2.81 NMAC waives any requirement otherwise in effect or subsequently required 

under another program, including rules governing new sources. 

[20.2.81.6 NMAC - N, 12/31/03] 

20.2.81.7 DEFINITIONS: In addition to the terms defined in 20.2.2 NMAC (Definitions), as used in this 

part: 

A. "account certificate of representation" means the completed and signed submission required to 

designate an account representative for a web source or an account representative for a general account; 

B. "account representative" means the individual who is authorized through an account certificate 

of representation to represent owners and operators of the WEB source with regard to matters under the web trading 

program or, for a general account, who is authorized through an account certificate of representation to represent the 

persons having an ownership interest in allowances in the general account with regard to matters concerning the 

general account; 

C. "act" means the federal Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.; 

D. "actual emissions" means total annual sulfur dioxide emissions determined in accordance with 

20.2.81.106 NMAC, or determined in accordance with 20.2.73 NMAC for sources that are not subject to 

20.2.81.106 NMAC; 

E. "allocate" means to assign allowances to a WEB source through Section C1 of the 

implementation plan; 

F. "allowance" means the limited authorization under the WEB trading program to emit one ton of 

sulfur dioxide during a specified control period or any control period thereafter subject to the terms and conditions 

for use of unused allowances as established by 20.2.81 NMAC; 

G. "allowance limitation" means the tonnage of sulfur dioxide emissions authorized by the 

allowances available for compliance deduction for a WEB source for a control period under 20.2.81.109 NMAC on 

the allowance transfer deadline for that control period; 

- H. "allowance tracking system" means the system developed by the department where allowances 

under the WEB trading program are recorded, held, transferred and deducted; 

I. "allowance tracking system account" means an account in the allowance tracking system 

20.2.81 NMAC 
established for purposes of recording, holding, transferring, and deducting allowances; 

J. "allowance transfer deadline" means the deadline established in Subsection B of 20.2.8 1.107 

NMAC when allowances must be submitted for recording in a WEB source's compliance account in order to 

demonstrate compliance for that control period; 

K. "compliance account" means an account established in the allowance tracking system under 

Subsection A of 20.2.81 .I05 NMAC for the purpose of recording allowances that a WEB source might hold to 

demonstrate compliance with its allowance limitation; 

L. "compliance certification" means a submission to the department by the account representative 

as required under Subsection B of 20.2.81.109 NMAC to report a WEB source's compliance or noncompliance with 

20.2.81 NMAC; 

M. "control period" means the period beginning January 1 of each year and ending on December 3 1 

of the same year, inclusive; 

N. "emissions tracking database" means the central database where sulfur dioxide emissions for 

WEB sources as recorded and reported in accordance with 20.2.81 NMAC are tracked to determine compliance with 

allowance limitations; 

0. "emission unit" means any part of a stationary source that emits or would have the potential to 

emit any pollutant submitted to regulations under the Clean Air Act; . . 

P. "existing source" means, a stationary source that commenced operation before the program 

trigger date; 

Q. "fugitive emissions" are those emissions that could not reasonably pass through a stack, chimney, 

vent, or other functionally equivalent opening; 

R. "general account" means an account established in the allowance tracking system under 

20.2.8 1.105 NMAC for the purpose of recording allowances held by a person that are not to be~used to show 

compliance with an allowance limitation; 

S. "milestone" means the maximum level of stationary source regional sulfur dioxide emissions for 

each year from 2003 to 2018, established according to the procedures in section A of the sulfur dioxide milestones 

and backstop trading program implementation plan; 

T. "new web source" means a WEB source that commenced operation on or after the program 

trigger date; 

U. "new source set-aside" means a pool of allowances that are available for allocation to new 

sources in accordance with the provisions of section C (a)1.3 of the sulfur dioxide milestones and backstop trading 

program implementation plan; 

V. "owner or operator'' means any person who is an owner or who operates, controls or supervises 

a WEB source, and includes but is not be limited to any holding company, utility system or plant manager; 

W. "part" means an air quality control regulation under Title 20, Chapter 2 of the New Mexico 

administrative code, unless otherwise noted, as adopted or amended by the board; 

X. "potential to emit" means the maximum capacity of a stationary source to emit any air pollutant 

under its physical and operational design; any physical or operational limitation on the capacity of a source to emit 

an air pollutant, including air pollution control equipment and restrictions on hours of operation or on the type or 

amount of material combusted, stored or processed, shall be treated as part of its design if the limitation is 

enforceable by the EPA administrator; 

Y. "program trigger date" means the date that the department determines that the WEB trading 

program has been triggered in accordance with the provisions of section A2 of the sulfur dioxide milestones and 

backstop trading program implementation plan; 

Z. "program trigger years" means the years shown in table 1, column 3, of the sulfur dioxide 

milestones and backstop trading program implementation plan for the applicable milestone if the WEB trading 

program is triggered as described in section A of the sulfur dioxide milestones and backstop trading program 

implementation plan; 

AA. "renewable energy resource" means a resource that generates electricity by non-nuclear and 

non-fossil technologies that results in low or no air emissions; the term includes electricity generated by wind energy 

technologies; solar photovoltaic and solar thermal technologies; geothermal technologies; technologies based on 

landfill gas and biomass sources, and new low-impact hydropower that meets the low-impact hydropower institute 

criteria; biomass includes agricultural, food and wood wastes; the term does not include pumped storage or biomass 

from municipal solid waste, black liquor, or treated wood; 

AB. "retired source" means a WEB source that has received a retired source exemption as provided 

in Subsection D of 20.2.8 1.101 NMAC; any retired source resuming operations under Subsection D of 20.2.81.101 

20.2.81 NMAC 
.a- NMAC, must submit its exemption as part of its registration materials; 

AC. "serial number" means, when referring to allowances, the unique identification number assigned 

to each allowance by the tracking systems administrator, in accordance with Subsection B of 20.2.81.104 NMAC; 

AD. "sulfur dioxide emitting unit" means any equipment that is located at a WEB source and that 

emits sulfur dioxide; 

AE "sulfur dioxide milestones and backstop trading program implementation plan" or 

"implementation plan" means section C of the New Mexico regional haze state implementation plan revision 

adopted by the environmental improvement board on November 18,2003; 

AF. "stationary source" means any building, structure, facility or installation that emits or may emit 

any air pollutant subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act; 

AG. "submit" means sent to the appropriate authority under the signature of the account 

representative; for purposes of determining when something is submitted, an official U.S. postal service postmark, 

or equivalent electronic time stamp, shall establish the date of submittal; 

AH. "ton" means 2000 pounds and, for any control period, any fraction of a ton equaling 1000 pounds 

or more shall be treated as one ton and any fraction of a ton equaling less than 1000 pounds shall be treated as zero 

tons; 

A1 . "tracking system administrator" means the person designated by the department as the 

administrator of the allowance tracking system and the emission tracking database; 

AJ. "web source" means a stationary source that meets the applicability requirements of 20.2.8 1.10 1 

NMAC; 

AK. "western backstop sulfur dioxide trading program ("WEB trading program")" means 

20.2.81 NMAC, triggered as a backstop in accordance with the provisions in the sulfiu dioxide milestones and 

backstop trading program implementation plan, if necessary, to ensure that regional sulfur dioxide emissions are 

reduced. 

[20.2.81.7 NMAC - N, 12/31/03] 

20.2.81.8 - 20.2.81.99 [RESERVED] 

20.2.81.100 WEB TRADING PROGRAM TRIGGER: 

A. Except as provided in Subsection B of this section, 20.2.81 NMAC shall become effective on the 

program trigger date that is established in accordance with the procedures outlined in the sulfur dioxide milestones 

and backstop trading program implementation plan. 

B. 20.2.8 1.1 10 NMAC, special penalty provisions for year 2018, shall become effective on January 

1, 201 8 and shall remain effective until the provisions of 20.2.8 1.110 NMAC have been fully implemented. 

C. The department shall report to the environmental improvement board every two years following 

the trigger of this program on the distributions of emissions allowances under the program. 

[20.2.81.100 NMAC - N, 12/31/03] 

20.2.81.101 WEB TRADING PROGRAM APPLICABILITY: 

A. General applicability. 20.2.81 NMAC applies to any stationary source or group of stationary 

sources that are located on one or more contiguous or adjacent properties and which are under the control of the 

same person or persons under common control, belonging to the same industrial grouping, and that are described in 

Paragraphs 1 through 4 of Subsection B. A stationary source or group of stationary sources shall be considered part 

of a single industrial grouping if all of the pollutant emitting activities at such source or group of sources on 

contiguous or adjacent properties belong to the same major group (i.e., all have the same two-digit code) as 

described in the standard industrial classification manual, 1987. 

B. The following are WEB sources. 

(1) All BART-eligible sources as defined in 40 CFR 51.301 that are BART-eligible due to sulfur 

dioxide emissions. 

(2) All stationary sources not meeting the criteria of Paragraph 1 of Subsection B of 20.2.8 1.101 

NMAC, that have actual sulhr dioxide emissions of 100 tons or more per year in the program trigger years or any 

subsequent year. The hgitive emissions of a stationary source shall not be considered in determining whether it is a 

WEB source unless the source belongs to one of the following categories of stationary source: 

(a) coal cleaning plants (with thermal dryers); 

(b) Kraft pulp mills; 

(c) Portland cement plants; 

20.2.81 NMAC 
(d) primary zinc smelters; 

(e) iron and steel mills; 

(9 primary aluminum ore reduction plants; 

(g) primary copper smelters; 

(h) municipal incinerators capable of charging more than 250 tons of refuse per day; 

(i) hydrofluoric, sulfuric, or nitric acid plants; 

(j) petroleum refineries; 

(k) lime plants; 

(I) phosphate rock processing plants; 

(m) coke oven batteries; 

(n) sulfur recovery plants; 

(0) carbon black plants (furnace process); 

(p) primary lead smelters; 

(q) fuel conversion plants; 

(r) sintering plants; 

(s) secondary metal production plants; 

(t) chemical process plants; 

(u) fossil-fuel boilers (or combination thereof) totaling more than 250 million British thermal 

units per hour heat input; 

(v) petroleum storage and transfer units with a total storage capacity exceeding 300,000 

barrels; 

(w) taconite ore processing plants; 

(x) glass fiber processing plants; 

(y) charcoal production plants; 

(2) fossil-fuel-fired steam electric plants of more than 250 million British thermal units per 

hour heat input; or 

(aa) any other stationary source category, which as of August 7, 1980 is being regulated under 

Section 11 1 or 1 12 of the Clean Air Act. 

(3) A new source that begins operation after the program trigger date and has the potential to emit 

100 tons or more of sulfur dioxide per year. 

(4) The department may determine on a case-by-case basis, with concurrence from the EPA 

administrator, that a source defined in Paragraph 2 of Subsection B of 20.2.81.101 NMAC is not a WEB source if 

the source: 

(a) in each of the previous five years had actual sulfur dioxide emissions of less than 100 tons 

per year; and 

(b) had actual sulfur dioxide emissions of 100 tons or more in a single year due to a temporary 

emission increase that was caused by a sudden, infrequent, and not reasonably preventable failure of air pollution 

control equipment, failure of process equipment, or a failure to operate in a normal or usual manner; and 

(c) took timely and reasonable action to minimize the temporary emission increase; and 

(d) has corrected the failure of air pollution control equipment, process equipment, or process 

by the time of the department's determination under this section; or 

(e) had to switch fuels or feedstocks on a temporary basis and as a result of an emergency 

situation or unique and unusual circumstances besides cost of such fuels or feedstocks; and 

(9 a temporary emission increase due to poor maintenance or careless operation does not meet 

the criteria of this section. 

C. Duration of program participation. Except as provided for in Subsection D of 20.2.81.101 

NMAC, once a source is subject to the WEB trading program, it will remain in the program every year thereafter. 

D. Retired source exemption: application. 

(1) Any WEB that is retired shall apply for a retired source exemption. The WEB source may only be 

considered retired if all sulfur dioxide emitting units at the source are retired. The application shall contain all of the 

following information: 

(a) identification of the WEB source, including plant name and an appropriate identification 

code in a format specified by the department; 

(b) name of account representative; 

(c) description of the status of the WEB source, including the date that the WEB source was 

retired; 

20.2.81 NMAC 
.y (d) signed certification that the WEB source is retired and will comply with the requirements of 

Subsection D of 20.2.8 1.101 NMAC; and 

(e) verification that the WEB source has a general account where any unused allowances or 

future allocations will be recorded. 

(2) Responsibilities of retired sources. The retired source exemption becomes effective when the 

department notifies the source that the retired source exemption has been granted. 

(3) A retired source shall be exempt from 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC and 20.2.8 1.109 NMAC, except as 

provided below. 

(a) A retired source shall not emit any sulfur dioxide after the date the retired source exemption 

is effective. 

(b) A WEB source shall submit sulfur dioxide emissions reports, as required by Subsection 0 

of 20.2.81.106 NMAC for any time period the source was operating prior to the effective date of the retired source 

exemption. The retired source shall be subject to the compliance provisions of 20.2.8 1.109 NMAC, including the 

requirement to hold allowances in the source's compliance account to cover all sulfur dioxide emissions prior to the 

date the source was permanently retired. 

(c) A retired source that is still in existence but no longer emitting sulfur dioxide shall, for a 

period of five years from the date the records are created, retain records demonstrating the effective date of the 

retired source exemption for purposes of this part. 

(4) Resumption of operations. 

(a) Should a retired source desire to resume operation, the retired source shall submit 

registration materials as follows: 

(i) if the source is required to obtain a new source review permit or operating permit 

under 20.2.70 NMAC, 20.2.72 NMAC, 20.2.74 NMAC or 20.2.79 NMAC prior to resuming operation, then the 

source shall submit registration information as described in 20.2.81.103 NMAC and a copy of the retired source 

exemption with the application required under 20.2.70 NMAC, 20.2.72 NMAC, 20.2.74 NMAC or 20.2.79 NMAC; 

or 

(ii) if the source is not required to obtain a new source review permit or operating permit 

.---. under 20.2.70 NMAC, 20.2.72 NMAC, 20.2.74 NMAC or 20.2.79 NMAC prior to resuming operation, then the 

source shall submit registration information as described in Subsection A of 20.2.81.103 NMAC and a copy of the 

retired source exemption to the department at least ninety days prior to resumption of operation. 

(b) The retired source exemption shall automatically expire on the day the source resumes 

operation. 

(5) Loss of future allowances. A WEB source that is retired and that does not apply to the 

department for a retired source exemption within ninety days of the date that the source is retired shall forfeit any 

unused and future allowances. The abandoned allowances shall be retired by the tracking system administrator. 

[20.2.81.101 NMAC - N, 1213 1/03] 

20.2.81.102 ACCOUNT REPRESENTATIVE FOR WEB SOURCES: Each WEB source must identify 

one account representative and may also identify an alternate account representative who may act on behalf of the 

account representative. Any representation, action, inaction or submission by the alternate account representative 

will be deemed to be a representation, action, inaction or submission by the account representative. 

A. Identification and certification of an account representative. 

(1) The account representative and any alternate account representative shall be appointed by an 

agreement that makes the representations, actions, inactions or submissions of the account representative and any 

alternate binding on the owners and operators of the WEB source. 

(2) The account representative shall submit to the department and the tracking system administrator a 

signed and dated account certificate of representation (certificate) that contains the following elements: 

(a) identification of the WEB source by plant name, state and an appropriate identification code 

in a format specified by the department; 

(b) the name, address, e-mail (if available), telephone and facsimile number of the account 

representative and any alternate; 

(c) a list of owners and operators of the WEB source; and 

(d) information to be part of the emission tracking system database in accordance with the 

lsr 

implementation plan. the specific data elements shall be as specified by the department to be consistent with the data 

system structure, and may include basic facility information that may appear in other reports and notices submitted 

by the WEB source, such as county location, industrial classification codes, and similar general facility information. 

20.2.81 NMAC 
(e) the following certification statement: "I certify that I was selected as the account 

representative or alternate account representative, as applicable, by an agreement binding on the owners and 

operators of the WEB source. I certify that I have all the necessary authority to carry out my duties and 

responsibilities under the WEB trading program on behalf of the owners and operators of the WEB source and that 

each such owner and operator shall be fully bound by my representations, actions, inactions, or submissions and by 

any decision or order issued to me by the department regarding the WEB trading program." 

(3) Upon receipt by the department of the complete certificate, the account representative and any 

alternate account representative represents and, by his or her representations, actions, inactions, or submissions, 

legally binds each owner and operator of the WEB source in all matters pertaining to the WEB trading program. The 

owners and operators shall be bound by any decision or order issued by the department regarding the WEB trading 

program. 

(4) No WEB allowance tracking system account shall be established for the WEB source until the 

tracking system administrator has received a complete certificate. Once the account is established, the account 

representative shall make all submissions concerning the account, including the deduction or transfer of allowances. 

B. Requirements and responsibilities. 

(1) The responsibilities of the account representative include, but are not limited to, the transferring 

of allowances, and the submission of monitoring plans, registrations, certification applications, sulfur dioxide 

emissions data and compliance reports as required by 20.2.8 1 NMAC, and representing the source in all matters 

pertaining to the WEB trading program. 

(2) Each submission under this program shall be signed and certified by the account representative 

for the WEB source. Each submission shall include the following truth and accuracy certification statement by the 

account representative: "I am authorized to make this submission on behalf of the owners and operators of the WEB 

source for which the submission is made. I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined, and am 

familiar with, the statements and information submitted in this document and all its attachments. Based on my 

inquiry of those individuals with primary responsibility for obtaining the information, I certify that the statements 

and information are to the best of my knowledge and belief true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are 

significant penalties for submitting false statements and information or omitting required statements and 

information, including the possibility of fine or imprisonment." 

C. Changing the account representative or owners and operators. 

(1) Changes to the account representative or the alternate account representative. The account 

representative or alternate account representative may be changed at any time by sending a complete superseding 

certificate to the department and the tracking system administrator under Paragraph 3 of Subsection A of 

20.2.8 1.102 NMAC, with the change taking effect upon receipt of such certificate by the department. 

Notwithstanding any such change, all representations, actions, inactions, and submissions by the previous account 

representative or alternate prior to the time and date when the tracking system administrator receives the superseding 

certificate shall be binding on the new account representative and the owners and operators of the WEB source. 

(2) Changes in owners and operators. 

(a) Within thirty days of any change in the owners and operators of the WEB source, including 

the addition of a new owner or operator, the account representative shall submit a revised certificate amending the 

list of owners and operators to include such change. 

(b) In the event a new owner or operator of a WEB source is not included in the list of owners 

and operators submitted in the certificate, such new owner or operator shall be deemed to be subject to and bound by 

the certificate, the representations, actions, inactions, and submissions of the account representative of the WEB 

source, and the decisions, orders, actions, and inactions of the department as if the new owner or operator were 

included in such list. 

[20.2.81.102 NMAC - N, 1213 1/03] 

20.2.81 .lo3 REGISTRATION: 

A. Deadlines. 

(1) Each source that is a WEB source on or before the program trigger date shall register by 

submitting the initial certificate required in Subsection A of 20.2.8 1.102 NMAC to the department no later than 180 

days after the program trigger date. 

(2) Any existing source that becomes a WEB source after the program trigger date shall register by 

submitting the initial certificate required in Subsection A of 20.2.81.102 NMAC to the department no later than 

September 30 of the year following the inventory year in which the source exceeded the emission threshold. 

(3) Any new WEB source shall register by submitting the initial certificate required in Subsection A 

20.2.81 NMAC 
of 20.2.8 1.102 NMAC to the department prior to the commencement of operation. 

B. Integration into permits. 

(1) Any allocation, transfer or deduction of allowance to or fiom the compliance account of a WEB 

source shall not require revision of the WEB source's operating permit under 20.2.70 NMAC. 

(2) Any WEB source is not required to have a permit under 20.2.72 NMAC, 20.2.74 NMAC or 

20.2.79 NMAC at any time after this rule becomes effective, must at all times possess a permit that includes the 

requirements of 20.2.8 1 MAC. If it does not possess a title V permit under 20.2.70 MAC , it may satisfy this 

paragraph's requirements by obtaining or modifying a permit under 20.2.72, MAC, 20.2.74 NMAC or 20.2.79 

NMAC to incorporate the requirements of 20.2.81 NMAC. The source must at all times possess a permit that 

includes these requirements. 

[20.2.81.103 NMAC - N, 1213 1/03] 

20.2.81.104 ALLOWANCE ALLOCATIONS: 

A. The tracking system administrator shall record the allowances for each WEB source in the 

compliance account for a WEB source once the allowances are allocated by the department under section C1 of the 

sulfur dioxide milestones and backstop trading program implementation plan. If applicable, the tracking system 

administrator shall record a portion of the sulfur dioxide allowances for a WEB source in a special reserve account 

assigned to the department to account for any allowances to be held by the Department in accordance with 

Subsection B of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC. 

B. The tracking system administrator shall assign a serial number to each allowance in accordance 

with section C2 of the sulfur dioxide milestones and backstop trading program implementation plan. 

C. All allowances shall be allocated, recorded, transferred, or used as whole allowances. To 

determine the number of whole allowances, the number of allowances shall be rounded down for decimals less than 

0.50 and rounded up for decimals of 0.50 or greater. 

D. An allowance is not a property right, and is a limited authorization to emit one ton of sulfur 

dioxide valid only for the purpose of meeting the requirements of 20.2.8 1 NMAC. No provision of this WEB trading 

program or other law should be construed to limit the authority of the United States or the department to terminate *.+..- or limit such authorization. 

E. Early reduction bonus allocation. Any WEB source that reduces permitted annual sulfur 

dioxide emissions to a level that is below the floor level allocation established for that source in section C 1 of the 

sulfur dioxide milestones and backstop trading program implementation plan between 2003 and the program trigger 

year may apply to the department for an early reduction bonus allocation. The application shall be submitted no later 

than ninety days after the program trigger date. Any WEB source that applies and receives early reduction bonus 

allocations shall retain the records referenced below for a minimum of five years after the early reduction bonus 

allowance is certified in accordance with section Cl. l(a) (3) of the implementation plan. The application for an early 

reduction bonus allocation shall contain the following information. 

(1) Copies of all permits or other enforceable documents that include annual sulfur dioxide emissions 

limits for the WEB source during the period the WEB source was generating the early reductions. Such permits or 

enforceable documents shall require monitoring for sulfur dioxide emissions that meets the requirements in 

Subsection A and Subsection C of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC and that the monitoring provisions were in effect one year 

prior to the beginning of the credit generating period. 

(2) Copies of emissions monitoring reports, for one year prior to the beginning of the credit 

generating period and for the period the WEB source was generating the early reductions, that documents the actual 

annual sulfur dioxide emissions. The emissions monitoring reports during the credit generating period must 

demonstrate that the actual annual sulfur dioxide emissions were below the floor level allocation established for that 

source in section C1 of the sulfur dioxide milestones and backstop trading program implementation plan. 

(3) Demonstration that the floor level established for the source in accordance with section C 1 of the 

sulfur dioxide milestones and backstop trading program implementation plan was calculated using data that are 

consistent with the new monitoring methodology under Subsection A of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC. If new monitoring 

techniques change the floor level for the source, then a demonstration of the new floor level based on new 

monitoring techniques shall be included in the application. 

F. Request for allowances for new WEB sources or modified WEB sources. 

(1) A new WEB source or an existing WEB source that has increased production capacity through a 

,A 

permitted change in operations under 20.2.72 NMAC, 20.2.74 NMAC or 20.2.79 NMAC may apply to the 

department for an allocation from the new source set-aside, as outlined in section C1.3 of the implementation plan. 

(a) A new WEB source is eligible to apply for an annual allocation equal to the permitted 

20.2.81 NMAC 
annual sulfur dioxide emission limit for that source after the source has commenced operation. 

(b) An existing WEB source is eligible to apply for an annual allocation equal to the permitted 

annual sulfur dioxide emission limit for that source that is attributable to any amount of production capacity that is 

greater than the permitted production capacity for that source as of January 1, 2003. 

(c) A source that has received a retired source exemption under Subsection D of 20.2.81.101 

NMAC is not eligible to apply for an allocation fiom the new source set-aside. 

(2) The application for an allocation from the new source set-aside shall contain the following 

information: 

(a) for existing WEB sources, documentation that shows the permitted production capacity of 

the source before and after the new permit; or 

(b) for new WEB sources, documentation of the actual date of the commencement of operation 

and a copy of the permit. 

[20.2.81.104 NMAC -N, 12/31/03] 

20.2.81.105 ESTABLISHMENT OF ACCOUNTS: 

A. Allowance tracking system accounts. All WEB sources shall open a compliance account. Any 

person may open a general account for holding and transferring allowances. In addition, if a Web source conducts 

monitoring under Subsection B of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC, the WEB source shall open a special reserve compliance 

account for allowances associated with units monitored under those provisions. The WEB source and account 

representative shall have no rights to transfer allowances in or out of such special reserve compliance account. The 

department shall allocate allowances to the account in accordance with Paragraph 5 of Subsection B of 20.2.81.106 

NMAC and all such allowances for each control period shall be retired each year for compliance in accordance with 

20.2.8 1.109 NMAC. To open either type of account; an application that contains the following information shall be 

submitted: 

(1) the name, mailing address, e-mail address, telephone number, and facsimile number of the 

account representative; for a compliance account, include a copy of the account certificate of representation of the 

account representative and any alternate as required in Paragraph 2 of Subsection A of 20.2.8 1.102 NMAC; for a 

general account, include the account certificate of representation of the account representative and any alternate as 

required in Paragraph 2 of Subsection C or 20.2.8 1.105 NMAC; 

(2) the WEB source or organization name; 

(3) the type of account to be opened; and 

(4) a signed certification of truth and accuracy by the account representative according to Paragraph 2 

of Subsection A of 20.2.81 .I02 for compliance accounts and for general accounts, certification of truth and accuracy 

by the account representative according to Subsection D of 20.2.81.105 NMAC. 

B. Account representative for general accounts. For a general account, one account representative 

shall be identified and an alternate account representative may be identified and may act on behalf of the account 

representative. Any representation, action, inaction or submission by the alternate account representative shall be 

deemed to be a representation, action, inaction or submission by the account representative. 

C. Identification and certification of an account representative for general accounts. 

(1) The account representative shall be appointed by an agreement that makes the representations, 

actions, inactions or submissions of the account representative binding on all persons who have an ownership 

interest with respect to allowances held in the general account. 

(2) The account representative shall submit to the department and the tracking system administrator a 

signed and dated account certificate of representation (certificate) that contains the following elements: 

(a) the name, address, e-mail (if available), telephone and facsimile number of the account 

representative and any alternate; 

(b) the organization name; and 

(c) the following certification statement: "I certify that I was selected as the account 

representative or alternate account representative, as applicable, by an agreement binding on all persons who have 

an ownership interest in allowances in the general account with regard to matters concerning the general account. I 

certify that I have all the necessary authority to cany out my duties and responsibilities under the WEB trading 

program on behalf of said persons and that each such person shall be fully bound by my representations, actions, 

inactions, or submissions and by any decision or order issued to me by the department regarding the general 

account." 

(3) Upon receipt by the department of the complete certificate, the account representative represents 

and, by his or her representations, actions, inactions, or submissions, legally binds each person who has an 

20.2.81 NMAC 
# ownership interest in allowances held in the general account with regard to all matters concerning the general 

account. Such persons shall be bound by any decision or order issued by the department. 

(4) No WEB allowance tracking system general account shall be established until the tracking system 

administrator has received a complete certificate. Once the account is established, the account representative shall 

make all submissions concerning the account, including the deduction or transfer of allowances. 

D. Requirements and responsibilities. Each submission for the general account shall be signed and 

certified by the account representative for the general account. Each submission shall include the following truth and 

accuracy certification statement by the account representative: "I am authorized to make this submission on behalf 

of all person who have an ownership interest in allowances held in the general account. I certify under penalty of 

law that I have personally examined, and am familiar with, the statements and information submitted in this 

document and all its attachments. Based on my inquiry of those individuals with primary responsibility for obtaining 

the information, I certify that the statements and information are to the best of my knowledge and belief true, 

accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false statements and 

information or omitting required statements and information, including the possibility of fine or imprisonment." 

E. Changing the account representative. The account representative or alternate account 

representative may be changed at any time by sending a complete superseding certificate to the department and the 

tracking system administrator under Paragraph 2 of Subsection C of 20.2.8 1.105 NMAC, with the change taking 

effect upon receipt of such certificate by the department. Notwithstanding any such change, all representations, 

actions, inactions, and submissions by the previous account representative or alternate prior to the time and date 

when the department receives the superseding certificate shall be binding on the new account representative and all 

persons having ownership interest with respect to allowances held in the general account. 

F. Changes to the account. Any change to the information required in the application for an existing 

account under Subsection A of 20.2.81 .lo5 NMAC shall require a revision of the application. 

[20.2.8 1.105 NMAC - N, 1213 1/03] 

20.2.81.106 MONITORING, RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 

ON MONITORING METHODS: ", .&. A. For each sulfur dioxide emitting unit at a WEB source shall comply with the following, as 

applicable, to monitor and record sulfur dioxide mass emissions. 

(1) If a unit is subject to 40 CFR Part 75 under a requirement separate from the WEB trading 

program, the unit shall meet the requirements contained in Part 75 with respect to monitoring, recording and 

reporting sulfur dioxide mass emissions. 

(2) If a unit is not subject to 40 CFR Part 75 under a requirement separate from the WEB trading 

program, a unit shall use one of the following monitoring methods, as applicable: 

(a) a continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS) for sulfur dioxide and flow that 

complies with all applicable monitoring provisions in 40 CFR Part 75; 

(b) if the unit is a gas- or oil-fired combustion device, the accepted monitoring methodology in 

Appendix D to 40 CFR Part 75, or, if applicable, the low mass emissions (LME) provisions (with respect to sulfur 

dioxide mass emissions only) of Section 75.19 of 40 CFR Part 75; 

(c) one of the optional WEB protocols, if applicable, in 20.2.8 1.1 1 1 NMAC or 20.2.8 1.1 12 

NMAC; or 

(d) a petition for site-specific monitoring that the source submits for approval by the 

department, and approval by the U.S. environmental protection agency in accordance with Paragraph 5 of 

Subsection 0 of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC. 

(3) A permanently retired unit shall not be required to monitor under thls section if such unit was 

permanently retired and had no emissions for the entire period for which the WEB source implements this Paragraph 

3 and the account representative certifies in accordance with Subsection B of 20.2.8 1.109 NMAC that these 

conditions were met. In the event that a permanently retired unit recommences operation, the WEB source shall 

meet the requirements of this Section 20.2.81.106 NMAC in the same manner as if the unit was a new unit. 

B. Notwithstanding Subsection A of this section, the WEB source with a unit that meets one of the 

conditions of Paragraph 1 of Subsection B of 20.2.81.106 NMAC may elect to have the provisions of this Paragraph 

1 apply to that unit. 

(1) Any of the following units may implement Subsection B of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC: 

,:- (a) any smelting operation where all of the emissions from the operation are not ducted to a 

stack; 

(b) any flare, except to the extent such flares are used as a fuel gas combustion device at a 

20.2.81 NMAC 
petroleum refinery; or 

(c) any other type of unit without add-on sulfur dioxide control equipment, if no control level 

was assumed for the WEB source in establishing the floor level (and reducible allocation) provided in section C1 of 

the implementation plan. 

(2) For each unit covered by Subsection B of 20.2.8 1 .I06 NMAC , the account representative shall 

submit a notice to request that Subsection B of 20.2.81.106 NMAC apply to one or more sulfur dioxide emitting 

units at a WEB source. The notice shall be submitted in accordance with the compliance dates specified in 

Paragraph 1 of Subsection M of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC, and shall include the following information (in a format 

specified by the department with such additional, related information as may be requested): 

(a) a notice of all units at the applicable source, specifying which of the units are to be covered 

by Subsection B of 20.2.81.106 NMAC; 

(b) consistent with the emission estimation methodology used to determine the floor level (and 

reducible allocation) for the source in accordance with section C1 of the implementation plan, the portion of the 

WEB source's overall allowance allocation that is attributable to any unit(s) covered by ths paragraph; and 

(c) an identification of any such units that are permanently retired. 

(3) For each new unit at an existing WEB source for which the WEB source seeks to comply with 

this Subsection B of 20.2.81.106 NMAC; and for which the account representative applies for an allocation under 

the new source set-aside provisions of Subsection F of 20.2.8 1.104 NMAC, the account representative shall submit a 

modified notice under Paragraph 2 of Subsection B of 20.2.81.106 NMAC, that includes such new sulh dioxide 

emitting unit(s). The modified notice shall be submitted in accordance with the compliance dates in Paragraph 1 of 

Subsection M of 20.2.81 .I06 NMAC, but no later than the date on which a request is submitted under Paragraph 1 

of Subsection F of 20.2.81 .I04 NMAC for allocations from the set-aside. 

(4) The department shall evaluate the information submitted by the WEB source in Paragraphs 2 and 

3 of Subsection B of 20.2.81.106 NMAC, and may issue a notice to the source to exclude any units that do not 

qualify under this Subsection B of 20.2.81.106 NMAC or to adjust the portion of allowances attributable to units 

that do qualify to be consistent with the emission estimation methodology used to establish the floor level (and 

reducible allocation) for the source. 

(5) The department shall allocate allowances equal to the adjusted portion of the WEB source's 

allowances under Paragraphs 2,3, and 4 of Subsection B of 20.2.81.106 NMAC in a special reserve compliance 

account provided that no such treatment of the WEB source's allocation will be required for any unit that is 

permanently retired and had no emissions for the entire period for which the WEB source implements this 

Subsection B and the account representative certifies in accordance with 20.2.81.109 NMAC that these conditions 

are met. In the event that a permanently retired unit recommences operation, the WEB source shall meet the 

requirements of this Section 20.2.81.106 NMAC in the same manner as if the unit was a new unit. 

(6) The account representative for a WEB source shall submit an annual emissions statement for each 

unit under this Subsection B of 20.2.81.106 NMAC in accordance with Subsection 0 of 20.2.81.106 NMAC. The 

WEB source shall maintain operating records sufficient to estimate annual emissions in a manner consistent with the 

emission estimation methodology used to establish the floor level (and reducible allocation) for the source. In 

addition, if the estimated emissions from all such units at the WEB source are greater than the allowances for the 

current control year held in the special reserve compliance account under Paragraph 5 of Subsection B of 

20.2.8 1.106 NMAC for the WEB source, the account representative shall report the excess amount as part of the 

annual report for the WEB source under 20.2.8 1.109 NMAC and be required to use other allowances in the standard 

compliance account for the WEB source to account for such emissions, in accordance with 20.2.81.109 NMAC. 

(7) The remaining provisions of this section shall not apply to units covered by Subsection B of 

20.2.8 1.106 NMAC except where otherwise noted. 

(8) A WEB source may opt to modify the monitoring for an sulfur dioxide emitting unit to use 

monitoring under Subsection A of 20.2.81.106 NMAC, but any such monitoring change shall take effect on January 

1 of the next compliance year. In addition, the account representative shall submit an initial monitoring plan at least 

180 days prior to the date on which the new monitoring will take effect and a detailed monitoring plan in accordance 

with Subsection D of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC. The account representative shall also submit a revised notice under 

Subsection B of 20.2.81.106 NMAC at the same time that the initial monitoring plan is submitted. 

C. For any monitoring that the WEB source uses under this section (including Paragraph I), the WEB 

source (and, as applicable, the account representative) shall implement, certify, and use such monitoring in 

accordance with this section, and shall record and report the data from such monitoring as required in this section. In 

addition, the WEB source (and, as applicable, the account representative) shall not: -, 

(1) except for an alternative approved by the U.S. EPA administrator for a WEB source that 

20.2.8 1 NMAC 
-,-"-. implements monitoring under Paragraph 1 of Subsection A of 20.2.8 1.106 MAC, use an alternative monitoring 

system, alternative reference method or another alternative for the required monitoring method without having 

obtained prior written approval in accordance with Paragraph 5 of Subsection 0 of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC; 

(2) operate an sulfur dioxide emitting unit so as to discharge, or allow to be discharged, sulfur dioxide 

emissions to the atmosphere without accounting for these emissions in accordance with the applicable provisions of 

this section; 

(3) disrupt the approved monitoring method or any portion thereof, and thereby avoid monitoring and 

recording sulfur dioxide mass emissions discharged into the atmosphere, except for periods of recertification or 

periods when calibration, quality assurance testing or maintenance is performed in accordance with the applicable 

provisions of this section; or 

(4) retire or permanently discontinue use of an approved monitoring method, except under one of the 

following circumstances: 

(a) during a period when the unit is exempt fiom the requirements of this section, including 

retirement of a unit as addressed in Paragraph 3 of Subsection A of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC; 

(b) the WEB source is monitoring emissions from the unit with another certified monitoring 

method approved under this section for use at the unit that provides data for the same parameter as the retired or 

discontinued monitoring method; or 

(c) the account representative submits notification of the date of certification testing of a 

replacement monitoring system in accordance with this section, and the WEB source recertifies thereafter a 

replacement monitoring system in accordance with the applicable provisions of this section. 

D. Monitoring plan general provisions. The WEB source of a sulfur dioxide emitting unit that uses 

a monitoring method under Paragraph 2 of Subsection A of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC shall meet the following 

requirements : 

(1) prepare and submit to the department an initial monitoring plan for each monitoring method that 

the WEB source uses to comply with this section. In accordance with Subsection F of 20.2.81 .I06 NMAC, the plan 

shall contain sufficient information on the units involved, the applicable method, and the use of data derived from 

that method to demonstrate that all unit sulk dioxide emissions are monitored and reported; the plan shall be 

&. submitted in accordance with the compliance deadlines specified in Subsection M of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC; 

(2) prepare, maintain and submit to the department a detailed monitoring plan prior to the first day of 

certification testing in accordance with the compliance deadline specified in Subsection M of 20.2.81 .I06 NMAC; 

the plan shall contain the applicable information required by Subsection D of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC. The department 

may require that the monitoring plan (or portions thereof) be submitted electronically; the department also may 

require that the plan be submitted on an ongoing basis in electronic format as part of the quarterly report submitted 

under Paragraph 1 of Subsection 0 of 20.2.8 1 .I06 NMAC or resubmitted separately within after any change is made 

to the plan in accordance with the following Paragraph 3 of Subsection D of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC; and 

(3) whenever the WEB source makes a replacement, modification, or change in one of the systems or 

methodologies provided for in Paragraph 2 of Subsection A of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC, including a change in the 

automated data acquisition and handling system or in the flue gas handling system, that affects information reported 

in the monitoring plan (e.g., a change to serial number for a component of a monitoring system), then the WEB 

source shall update the monitoring plan in accordance with the compliance deadline specified in Subsection M of 

20.208 1.106 NMAC. 

E. A WEB source with a sulfur dioxide emitting unit that uses a method under Paragraph 1 of 

Subsection A of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC (a unit subject to 40 CFR Part 75 under a program other than this WEB trading 

program) shall meet the requirements of Subsections D-I of 20.2.81.106 NMAC by preparing, maintaining and 

submitting a monitoring plan in accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR Part 75, provided that the WEB source 

also shall submit the entire monitoring plan to the department upon request. 

F. Initial monitoring plan. The account representative shall submit an initial monitoring plan for 

each sulfur dioxide emitting unit (or group of units sharing a common methodology) that, except as otherwise 

specified in an applicable provision in 20.2.8 1.1 1 1 NMAC, contains the following information. 

(1) For all sulfur dioxide emitting units involved in the monitoring plan: 

(a) plant name and location; 

(b) plant and unit identification numbers assigned by the department; 

(c) type of unit (or units for a group of units using a common monitoring methodology); 

- (d) identification of all stacks or pipes associated with the monitoring plan; 

(e) types of fuel(s) fired (or sulfur containing process materials used in the sulfur dioxide 

emitting unit), and the fuel classification of the unit if combusting more than one type of fuel and using a 40 CFR 

20.2.81 NMAC 
Part 75 methodology; 

(f) type(s) of emissions controls for sulfur dioxide installed or to be installed, including 

specifications of whether such controls are pre-combustion, post-combustion, or integral to the combustion process; 

(g) maximum hourly heat input capacity, or process throughput capacity, if applicable; 

(h) identification of all units using a common stack; and 

(i) indicator of whether any stack identified in the plan is a bypass stack. 

(2) For each unit and parameter required to be monitored, identification of monitoring methodology 

information, consisting of monitoring methodology, monitor locations, substitute data approach for the 

methodology, and general identification of quality assurance procedures. If the proposed methodology is a sitespecific methodology submitted pursuant to Subparagraph d of Paragraph 2 of Subsection A of 20.2.81 .I06 NMAC, 

the description under this paragraph shall describe fully all aspects of the monitoring equipment, installation 

locations, operating characteristics, certification testing, ongoing quality assurance and maintenance procedures, and 

substitute data procedures. 

(3) If the WEB source intends to petition for a change to any specific monitoring requirement 

otherwise required under this section, such petition may be submitted as part of the initial monitoring plan. 

(4) The department may issue a notice of approval or disapproval of the initial monitoring plan based 

on the compliance of the proposed methodology with the requirements for monitoring in this section. 

G. Detailed monitoring plan. The account representative shall submit a detailed monitoring plan 

that, except as otherwise specified in an applicable provisions in 20.2.81.1 11 NMAC or 20.2.81.1 12 NMAC, shall 

contain the following information. 

(1) Identification and description of each monitoring component (including each monitor and its 

identifiable components, such as analyzer or probe) in a CEMS (e.g., sulfiu dioxide pollutant concentration monitor, 

flow monitor, moisture monitor), a 40 CFR Part 75, Appendix D monitoring system (e.g., fuel flowmeter, data 

acquisition and handling system), or a protocol in 20.2.8 1.1 1 1 NMAC or 20.2.8 1.1 12 NMAC , including: 

(a) manufacturer, model number and serial number; 

(b) component or system identification code assigned by the facility to each identifiable 

monitoring component, such as the analyzer or probe; 

(c) designation of the component type and method of sample acquisition or operation (e.g., in 

situ pollutant concentration monitor or thermal flow monitor); 

(d) designation of the system as a primary or backup system; 

(e) first and last dates the system reported data; 

(f) status of the monitoring component; and 

(g) parameter monitored. 

(2) Identification and description of all major hardware and software components of the automated 

data acquisition and handling system, including: 

(a) hardware components that perform emission calculations or store data for quarterly 

reporting purposes (provide the manufacturer and model number); and 

(b) software components (provide the identification of the provider and model or version 

number). 

(3) Explicit formulas for each measured emissions parameter, using component or system 

identification codes for the monitoring system used to measure the parameter that links the system observations with 

the reported concentrations and mass emissions. The formulas shall contain all constants and factors required to 

derive mass emissions from component or system code observations and an indication of whether the formula is 

being added, corrected, deleted, or is unchanged. The WEB source with a low mass emissions unit for which the 

WEB source is using the optional low mass emissions accepted methodology in Section 75.19(c) of 40 CFR Part 75 

is not required to report such formulas. 

(4) Inside cross-sectional area (square feet) at flow monitoring location (for units with flow monitors, 

only). 

(5) If using CEMS for sulfur dioxide and flow, for each parameter monitored: scale, maximum 

potential concentration (and method of calculation), maximum expected concentration (if applicable) (and method 

of calculation), maximum potential flow rate (and method of calculations), span value, full-scale range, daily 

calibration units of measure, span effective date and hour, span inactivation date and hour, indication of whether 

dual spans are required, default high range value, flow rate span, and flow rate span value and full scale value in 

standard cubic feet per hour (scfh) for each unit or stack using sulfur dioxide or flow component monitors. 

(6) If the monitoring system or accepted methodology provides for use of a constant, assumed, or 

default value for a parameter under specific circumstances, then the following information for each value of such 

20.2.8 1 NMAC 
- parameter shall be included: 

(a) identification of the parameter; 

(b) default, maximum, minimum, or constant value, and units of measure for the value; 

(c) purpose of the value; 

(d) indicator of use during controlled and uncontrolled hours; 

(e) types of fuel; 

(f) source of the value; 

(g) value effective date and hour; 

(h) date and hour value is no longer effective (if applicable); and 

(i) for units using the accepted methodology under Section 75.19 of 40 CFR Part 75, the 

applicable sulfur dioxide emission factor. 

(7) Unless otherwise specified in Section 6.5.2.1 of Appendix A to 40 CFR Part 75, for each unit or 

common stack on which hardware CEMS are installed: 

(a) the upper and lower boundaries of the range of operation (as defined in Section 6.5.2.1 of 

Appendix A to 40 CFR Part 75), or thousand of lbh of steam, or ft/sec (as applicable); 

(b) the load or operating level(s) designated as normal in Section 6.5.2.1 of Appendix A to 40 

CFR Part 75, or thousands of pounds per hour lbh of steam, or feet per second ft/sec (as applicable); 

(c) the two load or operating levels (i.e., low, mid, or high) identified in Section 6.5.2.1 of 

Appendix A to 40 CFR Part 75 as the most frequently used; 

(d) the date of the data analysis used to determine the normal load (or operating) level(s) and 

the two most frequently-used load (or operating) levels; and 

(e) activation and deactivation dates when the normal load or operating level(s) change and are 

updated. 

(8) For each unit that is complying with 40 CFR Part 75 for which the optional fuel flow-to-load test 

in Section 2.1.7 of Appendix D to 40 CFR Part 75 is used: 

(a) the upper and lower boundaries of the range of operation (as defined in Section 6.5.2.1 of 

Appendix A to 40 CFR Part 75), expressed in thousand of lblhr of steam; ,- (b) the load level designated as normal, pursuant to Section 6.5.2.1 of Appendix A to 40 CFR 

Part 75, expressed in thousands of lblhr of steam; and 

(c) the date of the load analysis used to determine the normal load level. 

(9) Information related to quality assurance testing, including (as applicable): identification of the 

test strategy; protocol for the relative accuracy test audit; other relevant test information; calibration gas levels 

(percent of span) for the calibration error test and linearity check; calculations for determining maximum potential 

concentration, maximum expected concentration (if applicable), maximum potential flow rate, and span; 

(10) If applicable, apportionment strategies under Sections 75.10 through 75.18 of 40 CFR Part 75. 

(11) Description of site locations for each monitoring component in a monitoring system, including 

schematic diagrams and engineering drawings and any other documentation that demonstrates each monitor location 

meets the appropriate siting criteria. For units monitored by a continuous emission monitoring system, diagrams 

shall include: 

(a) a schematic diagram identifying entire gas handling system from unit to stack for all units, 

using identification numbers for units, monitor components, and stacks corresponding to the identification numbers 

provided in the initial monitoring plan and Paragraphs 1 and 3 of Subsection G of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC; the 

schematic diagram must depict the height of any monitor locations; comprehensive or separate schematic diagrams 

shall be used to describe groups of units using a common stack; and 

(b) stack and duct engineering diagrams showing the dimensions and locations of fans, turning 

vanes, air preheaters, monitor components, probes, reference method sampling ports, and other equipment that 

affects the monitoring system location, performance, or quality control checks. 

(12) A data flow diagram denoting the complete information handling path from output signals of 

CEMS components to final reports. 

H. In addition to supplying the information in Subsections F and G above, the WEB source with an 

sulfur dioxide emitting unit using either of the methodologies in Subparagraph b of Paragraph 2 of Subsection A of 

20.2.8 1.106 NMAC shall include the following information in its monitoring plan for the specific situations 

described. 

(1) For each gas-fired or oil-fired sulfur dioxide emitting unit for which the WEB source uses the 

optional protocol in Appendix D to 40 CFR Part 75 for sulfur dioxide mass emissions, the WEB source shall include 

the following information in the monitoring plan: 

20.2.81 NMAC 
(a) parameter monitored; 

(b) type of fuel measured, maximum fuel flow rate, units of measure, and basis of maximum 

fuel flow rate (i.e., upper range value or unit maximum) for each fuel flowmeter; 

(c) test method used to check the accuracy of each fuel flowmeter; 

(d) submission status of the data; 

(e) monitoring system identification code; 

(f) the method used to demonstrate that the unit qualifies for monthly gross calorific value 

(GCV) sampling or for daily or annual fuel sampling for sulfur content, as applicable; 

(g) a schematic diagram identifying the relationship between the unit, all fuel supply lines, the 

fuel flowrneter(s), and the stack(s); the schematic diagram must depict the installation location of each fuel 

flowmeter and the fuel sampling location(s); comprehensive and separate schematic diagrams shall be used to 

describe groups of units using a common pipe; 

(h) for units using the optional default sulfur dioxide emission rate for "pipeline natural gas" or 

"natural gas" in Appendix D to 40 CFR Part 75, the information on the sulfur content of the gaseous fuel used to 

demonstrate compliance with either Section 2.3.1.4 or 2.3.2.4 of Appendix D to 40 CFR Part 75; 

(i) for units using the 720 hour test under Section 2.3.6 of Appendix D to 40 CFR Part 75 to 

determine the required sulfur sampling requirements, report the procedures and results of the test; and 

(j) for units using the 720 hour test under Section 2.3.5 of Appendix D to 40 CFR Part 75 to 

determine the appropriate fuel GCV sampling frequency, report the procedures used and the results of the test. 

(2) For each sulfur dioxide emitting unit for which the WEB source uses the low mass emission 

accepted methodology of Section 75.19 to 40 CFR Part 75, the WEB source shall include the following information 

in the monitoring plan that accompanies the initial certification application: 

(a) the results of the analysis performed to qualify as a low mass emissions unit under Section 

75.19(c) to 40 CFR Part 75; this report shall include either the previous three years actual or projected emissions; the 

following items shall be included: a) current calendar year of application; b) type of qualification; c) years one, two, 

and three; d) annual measured, estimated or projected sulfur dioxide mass emissions for years one, two, and three; 

and e). annual operating hours for years one, two, and three; 

(b) a schematic diagram identifying the relationship between the unit, all fuel supply lines and 

tanks, any fuel flowmeter(s), and the stack(s); comprehensive or separate schematic diagrams shall be used to 

describe groups of units using a common pipe; 

(c) for units which use the long term fuel flow methodology under Section 75.19(~)(3) to 40 

CFR Part 75, a diagram of the fuel flow to each unit or group of units and a detailed description of the procedures 

used to determine the long term fuel flow for a unit or group of units for each fuel combusted by the unit or group of 

units; 

(d) a statement that the unit bums only gaseous fuel(s) and/or fuel oil and a list of the fuels that 

are burned or a statement that the unit is projected to bum only gaseous fuel(s) and/or fuel oil and a list of the fuels 

that are projected to be burned; 

(e) a statement that the unit meets the applicability requirements in Sections 75.19(a) and (b) to 

40 CFR Part 75 with respect to sulfur dioxide emissions; and 

(f) any unit historical actual, estimated and projected sulfur dioxide emissions data and 

calculated sulfur dioxide emissions data demonstrating that the unit qualifies as a low mass emissions unit under 

Sections 75.19(a) and (b) to 40 CFR Part 75. 

(3) For each gas-fired unit the WEB source shall include the following in the monitoring plan: 

current calendar year, fuel usage data as specified in the definition of gas-fired in Section 72.2 of 40 CFR Part 72, 

and an indication of whether the data are actual or projected data. 

I. The specific elements of a monitoring plan under Subsection D of 20.2.81.106 NMAC shall not be 

part of an operating permit for a WEB source issued in accordance with the title V of the Clean Air Act, and 

modifications to the elements of the plan shall not require a permit modification. 

J. Certification and recertification. 

(1) All monitoring systems are subject to initial certification and recertification testing as specified in 

40 CFR Part 75, 20.2.8 1.1 1 1 NMAC or ; 20.2.8 1.11 2 NMAC. Certification or recertification of a monitoring 

system by the U.S. environmental protection agency for a WEB source that is subject to 40 CFR Part 75 under a 

requirement separate from 20.2.8 1 NMAC shall constitute certification under the WEB trading program. 

(2) The WEB source with a sulfur dioxide emitting unit not otherwise subject to 40 CFR Part 75 that 

monitors sulfur dioxide mass emissions in accordance with 40 CFR Part 75 to satisfy the requirements of this 

section shall perform all of the tests required by that regulation and shall submit the following: 

20.2.81 NMAC 
.-. (a) a test notice, not later than 21 days before the certification testing of the monitoring system, 

provided that the department may establish additional requirements for adjusting test dates after this notice as part of 

the approval of the initial monitoring plan under Subsection F of 20.2.81 .I06 NMAC; 

(b) an initial certification application within 45 days after testing is complete; 

(c) a monitoring system shall be considered provisionally certified while the application is 

pending, and the system shall be deemed certified if the department does not approve or disapprove the system 

within six months after the date on which the application is submitted; and 

(d) whenever an audit of any monitoring certified under 20.2.81 NMAC, and a review of the 

initial certification or recertification application, reveal that any system or component should not have been certified 

or recertified because it did not meet a particular performance specification or other requirement of 20.2.8 1 NMAC, 

both at the time of the initial certification or recertification application submission and at the time of the audit, the 

department will issue a notice of disapproval of the certification status of such system or component; for the 

purposes of this paragraph, an audit shall be either a field audit of the facility or an audit of any information 

submitted to the department regarding the facility; by issuing the notice of disapproval, the certification status is 

revoked prospectively, and the data measured and recorded shall not be considered valid quality-assured data from 

the date of issuance of the notification of the revoked certification status until the date and time that the WEB source 

completes subsequently approved initial certification or recertification tests in accordance with the procedures in 

Subsection J of 20.2.81.106 NMAC; the WEB source shall apply the substitute data procedures in Paragraph 2 of 

Subsection L of 20.2.81 .I06 NMAC to replace, prospectively, all of the invalid, non-quality-assured data for each 

disapproved system or component. 

K. Ongoing quality assurance and quality control. The WEB source shall satisfy the applicable 

quality assurance and quality control requirements of Part 75 or, if the WEB source is subject to a WEB protocol in 

20.2.81.1 11 NMAC , the applicable quality assurance and quality control requirements in 20.2.81.1 11 NMAC on 

and after the date that certification testing commences. 

L. Substitute data procedures. 

(1) For any period after certification testing is complete in which quality assured, valid data are not 

being recorded by a monitoring system certified and operating in accordance with 20.2.81 NMAC, missing or -- invalid data shall be replaced with substitute data in accordance with 40 CFR Part 75 or, if the WEB source is 

subject to a WEB protocol in 20.2.8 1.1 1 1 NMAC or 20.2.8 1.1 12 NMAC , with substitute data in accordance with 

20.2.81.1 11 NMAC. 

(2) For a sulfur dioxide emitting unit that does not have a certified or provisionally certified 

monitoring system in place as of the beginning of the first control period for which the unit is subject to the WEB 

trading program, the WEB source shall: 

(a) if the WEB Source will use a CEMS to comply with this section, substitute the maximum 

potential concent~ation of sulfur dioxide for the unit and the maximum potential flow rate, as determined in 

accordance with 40 CFR Part 75; the procedures for conditional data validation under Section 75.20(b)(3) may be 

used for any monitoring system under 20.2.81 NMAC that uses these 40 CFR Part 75 procedures, as applicable; 

(b) if the WEB source will use the 40 CFR Part 75 Appendix D methodology, substitute the 

maximum potential sulfur content, density or gross calorific value for the fuel and the maximum potential fuel flow 

rate, in accordance with Section 2.4 of Appendix D to 40 CFR Part 75; 

(c) if the WEB source will use the 40 CFR Part 75 methodology for low mass emissions units, 

substitute the sulfur dioxide emission factor required for the unit as specified in 40 CFR 75.19 and the maximum 

rated hourly heat input, as defined in 40 CFR 72.2; or 

(d) if using a protocol in 20.2.81.11 1 NMAC or 20.2.81.1 12 NMAC , follow the procedures in 

the applicable protocol. 

M. Compliance Deadline. 

(1) The initial monitoring plan shall be submitted by the following dates. 

(a) For each source that is a WEB source on or before the program trigger date, the monitoring 

plan shall be submitted 180 days after such program trigger date. 

(b) For any existing source that becomes a WEB source after the program trigger date, the 

monitoring plan shall be submitted by September 30 of the year following the inventory year in which the source 

exceeded the emissions threshold. 

(c) For any new WEB source, the monitoring plan shall be included with the permit application 

under 20.2.70 NMAC, 20.2.72 NMAC, 20.2.74 NMAC or 20.2.79 NMAC. 

(2) A detailed monitoring plan under Subsection E of 20.2.81 .I06 NMAC shall be submitted no later 

than 45 days prior to commencing certification with the following Paragraph 3. 

20.2.81 NMAC 
(3) Emission monitoring systems shall be installed, operational and shall have met all of the 

certification testing requirements of this 20.2.81.106 NMAC (including any referenced in 20.2.81.11 1 NMAC or 

20.2.81.1 12 NMAC ) by the following dates. 

(a) For each source that is a WEB source on or before the program trigger date, two years prior 

to the start of the first control period as described in 20.2.8 1.109 NMAC. 

(b) For any existing source that becomes a WEB source after the program trigger date, one year 

after the due date for the monitoring plan under Subparagraph b of Paragraph 2 of Subsection M of 20.2.8 1.106 

NMAC. 

(c) For any new WEB source, (or any new unit at a WEB source under Paragraph 3 

Subparagraph a or b, the earlier of 90 unit operating days or 180 calendar days after the date the new source 

commences operation. 

(4) The WEB source shall submit test notices and certification applications in accordance with the 

deadlines set forth in Paragraph 2 of Subsection J of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC. 

(5) For each applicable control period, the WEB source shall submit each quarterly report under 

Subsection 0 of 20.2.81.106 NMAC by no later than 30 days after the end of each calendar quarter and shall submit 

the annual report under Subsection 0 of 20.2.81 .lo6 NMAC no later than 60 days after the end of each calendar 

year. 

N. Recordkeeping. 

(1) Except as provided in Paragraph 2 of Subsection N of 20.2.81.106 NMAC, the WEB source shall 

keep copies of all reports, registration materials, compliance certifications, sulfur dioxide emissions data, quality 

assurance data, and other submissions under 20.2.81 NMAC for a period of five years. In addition, the WEB source 

shall keep a copy of all account certificates of representation. Unless otherwise requested by the WEB source and 

approved by the department, the copies shall be kept on site at the source. 

(2) The WEB source shall keep records of all operating hours, quality assurance activities, fuel 

sampling measurements, hourly averages for sulfur dioxide, stack flow, fuel flow, or other continuous 

measurements, as applicable, and any other applicable data elements specified in this section, 20.2.8 1.11 1 NMAC 

or in 20.2.81.1 12 NMAC. The WEB source shall maintain the applicable records specified in 40 CFR Part 75 for 

any sulfur dioxide emitting unit that uses a Part 75 monitoring method to meet the requirements of this section. 

0. Reporting. 

(1) Quarterly reports. For each sulfur dioxide emitting unit, the account representative shall submit a 

quarterly report within thirty days after the end of each calendar quarter. The report shall be in a format specified by 

the department to include hourly and quality assurance activity information and shall be submitted in a manner 

compatible with the emissions tracking database designed for the WEB trading program. If the WEB source 

submits a quarterly report under 40 CFR Part 75 to the U.S. EPA administrator, no additional report under this 

paragraph shall be required, provided, however, that the department may require that a copy of that report (or a 

separate statement of quarterly and cumulative annual sulfur dioxide mass emissions) be submitted separately to the 

department. 

(2) Annual report. Based on the quarterly reports, each WEB source shall submit an annual statement 

of total annual sulfur dioxide emissions for all sulfur dioxide emitting units at the source. The annual report shall 

identify the total emissions for all units monitored in accordance with Subsection A of 20.2.81.106 NMAC and the 

total emissions for all units with emissions estimated in accordance with Subsection B of 20.2.81.106 NMAC. The 

annual report shall be submitted within 60 days after the end of a control period. 

(3) If the department so directs that any monitoring plan, report, certification, recertification, or 

emissions data required to be submitted under this section be submitted to the tracking system administrator. 

(4) The department may review and reject any report submitted under this Subsection 0 of 

20.2.81.106 NMAC that contains errors or fails to satisfy the requirements of this section, and the account 

representative shall resubmit the report to correct any deficiencies. 

(5) A WEB source may petition for an alternative to any requirement specified in Paragraph 2 of 

Subsection A of 20.2.81.106 NMAC. The petition shall require approval of the department and the U.S. EPA 

administrator. Any petition submitted under this paragraph shall include sufficient information for the evaluation of 

the petition, including, at a minimum, the following information: 

(a) identification of the WEB source and applicable sulfur dioxide emitting unit(s); 

(b) a detailed explanation of why the proposed alternative is being suggested in lieu of the 

requirement; 

(c) a description and diagram of any equipment and procedures used in the proposed 

alternative, if applicable; 

20.2.81 NMAC 
.- (d) a demonstration that the proposed alternative is consistent with the purposes of the 

requirement for which the alternative is proposed and is consistent with the purposes of 20.2.81 NMAC and that any 

adverse effect of approving such alternative will be de minimis; and 

(e) any other relevant information that the department may require. 

(6) For any monitoring plans, reports, or other information submitted under 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC, the 

WEB source shall ensure that, where applicable, identifying information is consistent with the identifying 

information provided in the most recent certificate of representation for the WEB source submitted under 

20.2.81.102 NMAC. 

[20.2.81.106 NMAC - N, 12/31/03] 

20.2.81.107 ALLOWANCE TRANSFERS: 

A. Procedure. To transfer allowances, the account representative shall submit the following 

information to the tracking system administrator: 

(1) the transfer account number(s) identifying the transferor account; 

(2) the transfer account number(s) identifying the transferee account; 

(3) the serial number of each allowance to be transferred; and 

(4) the transferor's account representative's name and signature and date of submission. 

B. Deadline. The allowance transfer deadline is midnight Pacific standard time March 1 of each year 

(or if this date is not a business day, midnight of the first business day thereafter) following the end of the control 

period. By this time, the transfer of the allowances into the WEB source's compliance account must be correctly 

submitted to the tracking system administrator in order to demonstrate compliance under Subsection A of 

20.2.81 .I09 NMAC for that control period. 

C. Retirement of Allowances. To transfer allowances for the purpose of retirement, the account 

representative shall submit the following information to the tracking system administrator: 

(1) the transfer account number(s) identifying the transferor account; 

(2) the serial number of each allowance to be retired; and 

(3) the transferor's account representative's name and signature and date of submission accompanied ,- by a signed statement acknowledging that each retired allowance as no longer available for future transfers from or 

to any account. 

[20.2.81.107 NMAC - N, 12/31/03] 

20.2.81.108 USE OF ALLOWANCES FROM A PREVIOUS YEAR: 

A. Any allowance that is held in a compliance account or general account shall remain in such an 

account unless and until the allowance is deducted in conjunction with the compliance process, or transferred to 

another account. 

B. In order to demonstrate compliance under Subsection A of 20.2.81.109 NMAC for a control 

period, WEB sources shall only use allowances allocated for that current control period or any previous year. 

Because all allowances held in a special reserve compliance account for a WEB source that monitors certain units in 

accordance with Subsection B of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC will be deducted for compliance for each control period, no 

banking of such allowances for use in a subsequent year is permitted by 20.2.8 1 NMAC. 

C. If flow control procedures for the current control period have been triggered as outlined in section 

C4.2 of the sulfur dioxide milestones and backstop trading program implementation plan, then the use of allowances 

that were allocated for any previous year shall be limited as follows. 

(1) The number of allowances that are held in each compliance account and general account as of the 

allowance transfer deadline for the immediately previous year and that were allocated for any previous year shall be 

determined. 

(2) The number determined in Paragraph 1 shall be multiplied by the flow control ratio established in 

accordance with section C4.2 of the sulfur dioxide milestones and backstop trading program implementation plan to 

determine the number of allowances that were allocated for a previous year that can be used without restriction for 

the current control period. 

(3) Allowances that were allocated for a previous year in excess of the number determined in (2) may 

also be used for the current control period. If such allowances are used to make a deduction, two allowances shall be 

deducted for each deduction of one allowance required under 20.2.8 1.109 NMAC. 

D. Special provisions for the year 2018. After compliance with the 2017 allowance limitation has 

been determined in accordance with Subsection A of 20.2.8 1.109 NMAC, allowances allocated for any year prior to 

2018 shall not be used for determining compliance with the 201 8 allowance limitation or any future allowance 

20.2.81 NMAC 
limitation. 

[20.2.81.108 NMAC - N, 12/31/03] 

20.2.81.109 COMPLIANCE: 

A. Compliance with Allowance Limitations. 

(1) The WEB source shall hold allowances, in accordance with Paragraph 2 of Subsection A of 

20.2.81.109 NMAC and 20.2.81 .I08 NMAC, as of the allowance transfer deadline in the WEB source's compliance 

account (together with any current control year allowances held for the WEB source by the department under 

Subsection B of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC in an amount not less than the total sulfur dioxide emissions for the control 

period from the WEB source, as determined under the monitoring and reporting requirements of 20.2.81.106 

NMAC. 

(a) For each source that is a WEB source on or before the program trigger date, the first control 

period is the calendar year that is six years following the calendar year for which sulfur dioxide emissions exceeded 

the milestone in accordance with procedures in section A of the sulfur dioxide milestones and backstop trading 

program implementation plan. 

(b) For any existing source that becomes a WEB source after the program trigger date, the first 

control period is the calendar year that is four years following the inventory year in which the source exceeded the 

sulfur dioxide emissions threshold. 

(c) For any new WEB source after the program trigger date the first control period is the first 

full calendar year that the source is in operation. 

(d) If the WEB trading program is triggered in accordance with the 201 3 review procedures in 

section A4 of the sulfur dioxide milestones and backstop trading program implementation plan, the first control 

period for each source that is a WEB source on or before the program trigger date is the year 201 8. 

(2) Allowance transfer deadline. An allowance may only be deducted from the WEB source's 

compliance account if: 

(a) the allowance was allocated for the current control period or meets the requirements in 

20.2.8 1.108 NMAC for use of allowances from a previous control period; and 

(b) the allowance was held in the WEB source's compliance account as of the allowance 

transfer deadline for the current control period, or was transferred into the compliance account by an allowance 

transfer correctly submitted for recording by the allowance transfer deadline for the current control period. 

(3) Compliance with allowance limitations shall be determined as follows. 

(a) The total annual sulfur dioxide emissions for all sulfur dioxide emitting units at the source 

that are monitored under Subsection B of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC, as reported by the source in Paragraph 2 or 4 of 

Subsection 0 of 20.2.81.106 NMAC, and recorded in the emissions tracking database shall be compared to the 

allowances held in the source's special reserve compliance account as of the allowance transfer deadline for the 

current control period, adjusted in accordance with 20.2.81.108 NMAC. If the emissions are equal to or less than 

the allowances in such account, all such allowances shall be retired to satisfy the obligation to hold allowances for 

such emissions. If the total emissions from such units exceeds the allowances in such special reserve account, the 

WEB source shall account for such excess emissions in the following Subparagraph b. 

(b) The total annual sulfur dioxide emissions for all sulfur dioxide emitting units at the source 

that are monitored under Subsection A of 20.2.8 1.1 06 NMAC, as reported by the source in Paragraph 2 or 4 of 

Subsection 0 of 20.2.81.106 NMAC, and recorded in the emissions tracking database, together with any excess 

emissions as calculated in the preceding Subparagraph a, shall be compared to the allowances held in the source's 

compliance account as of the allowance transfer deadline for the current control period, adjusted in accordance with 

20.2.81 .lo8 NMAC. 

(4) Other than allowances in a special reserve compliance account for units monitored under 

Subsection B of 20.2.81 .I06 NMAC, to the extent consistent with 20.2.81.108 NMAC, allowances shall be deducted 

for a WEB source for compliance with the allowance limitation as directed by the WEB source's account 

representative. Deduction of any other allowances as necessary for compliance with the allowance limitation shall 

be on a first-in, first-out accounting basis in the order of the date and time of their recording in the WEB source's 

compliance account, beginning with the allowances allocated to the WEB source and continuing with the allowances 

transferred to the WEB source's compliance account fiom another compliance account or general account. The 

allowances held in a special reserve compliance account pursuant to Subsection B of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC shall be 

deducted as specified in Subparagraph a of Paragraph 3 of Subsection A of 20.2.8 1.109 NMAC. .4 

B. Certification of compliance. 

(1) For each control period in which a WEB source is subject to the allowance limitation, the account 

20.2.81 NMAC 18 
/-- representative of the source shall submit to the department a compliance certification report for the source. 

(2) The compliance certification report shall be submitted no later than the allowance transfer 

deadline of each control period, and shall contain the following: 

(a) identification of each WEB source; 

(b) at the account representative's option, the serial numbers of the allowances that are to be 

deducted from a source's compliance account for compliance with the allowance limitation; and 

(c) the compliance certification report according to Paragraph 3 of this section. 

(3) In the compliance certification report, the account representative shall certify, based on reasonable 

inquiry of those persons with primary responsibility for operating the WEB source in compliance with the WEB 

trading program, whether the WEB source for which the compliance certification is submitted was operated during 

the control period covered by the report in compliance with the requirements of the WEB trading program 

applicable to the source including: 

(a) whether the WEB source operated in compliance with the sulfur dioxide allowance 

limitation; 

(b) whether sulfur dioxide emissions data has been submitted to the department in accordance 

with Subsection A of 20.2.81.106 NMAC and other applicable guidance, for review, revision as necessary, and 

finalization for forwarding to the sulfur dioxide allowance tracking system for recording; 

(c) whether the monitoring plan that governs the WEB source has been maintained to reflect 

the actual operation and monitoring of the source, and contains all information necessary to attribute sulfur dioxide 

emissions to the source, in accordance with Subsection a of 20.2.81.106 NMAC; 

(d) whether all the sulfur dioxide emissions from the WEB source if applicable, were 

monitored or accounted for either through the applicable monitoring or through application of the appropriate 

missing data procedures; 

(e) if applicable, whether any sulfur dioxide emitting unit for which the WEB source is not 

required to monitor in accordance with Paragraph 3 of Subsection A of 20.2.81.106 NMAC remained permanently 

retired and had no emissions for the entire applicable period; and 

(f) whether there were any changes in the method of operating or monitoring the WEB source 

.A. that required monitor recertification; if there were any such changes, the report shall specify the nature, reason, and 

date of the change, the method to determine compliance status subsequent to the change, and specifically, the 

method to determine sulfur dioxide emissions. 

C. Penalties for any WEB source exceeding its allowance limitations. 

(1) Allowance deduction penalties. 

(a) If emissions from a WEB source exceed the allowance limitation for a control period, as 

determined in accordance with Subsection A of 20.2.8 1.109 NMAC , the source's allowance held in its compliance 

account will be reduced by an amount equal to two times the source's tons of excess emissions. If the compliance 

account does not have sufficient allowances allocated for that control period, the required number of allowances 

shall be deducted from the WEB source's compliance account regardless of the control period for which they were 

allocated, once allowances are recorded in the account. 

(b) Any allowance deduction required under this section shall not affect the liability of the 

owners and operators of the WEB source for any fine, penalty or assessment or their obligation to comply with any 

other remedy, for the same violation, as ordered under the Clean Air Act, implementing regulations or applicable 

state or tribal law. Accordingly, a violation can be assessed each day of the control period for each ton of sulfur 

dioxide emissions in excess of its allowance limitation if the department so chooses. 

(2) Financial penalties. A financial penalty of $5,000 per ton of sulfur dioxide emissions in excess of 

the WEB source's allowance limitation shall be levied. Each ton represents a separate violation. 

D. Liability. 

(1) WEB source liability for non-compliance. Separate and regardless of any automatic penalties 

assessed for allowance deduction penalty and financial penalty, a WEB source that violates any requirement of 

20.2.81 NMAC is subject to civil and criminal penalties under the Air Quality Control Act and the Clean Air Act. 

Each day of the control period is a separate violation, and each ton of sulfur dioxide emissions in excess of a source's 

allowance limitation is a separate violation. 

(2) General liability. 

(a) Any provision of the WEB trading program that applies to a source or an account 

.A representative shall apply also to the owners and operators of such source. 

(b) Any person who violates any requirement or prohibition of the WEB trading program shall 

be subject to enforcement pursuant to applicable state, tribal or federal law. 

20.2.81 NMAC 
(c) Any person who knowingly makes a false material statement in any record, submission, or 

report under this WEB trading program shall be subject to criminal enforcement pursuant to the applicable state, 

tribal or federal law. 

[20.2.81.109 NMAC - N, 12/31/03] 

20.2.81.1 10 SPECIAL PENALTY PROVISIONS FOR YEAR 2018: 

A. If the WEB trading program is triggered as outlined in section A of the sulfur dioxide milestones 

and backstop trading program implementation plan, and the first control period will not occur until after the year 

20 18, the following provisions shall apply for the 201 8 emissions year. 

(1) All WEB sources shall register, and open a compliance account within 180 days after the program 

trigger date, in accordance with Subsection A of 20.2.81 .I03 NMAC and 20.2.81.105 NMAC. 

(2) The tracking system administrator shall record the allowances for the 201 8 control period for each 

WEB source in the source's compliance account once the department allocates the 201 8 allowances under section C1 

and Dl of the sulfur dioxide milestones and backstop trading program implementation plan. 

(3) The allowance transfer deadline is midnight Pacific standard time on May 30,202 1. WEB sources 

may transfer allowances as provided in Subsection A of 20.2.81.107 NMAC until the allowance transfer deadline. 

(4) A WEB source shall hold allowances allocated for 2018 including those transferred into the 

compliance account by an allowance transfer correctly submitted by the allowance transfer deadline, in an amount 

not less than the WEB source's total su1fi.u dioxide emissions for 2018. Emissions shall be determined using the pretrigger monitoring provisions in section B of the sulfur dioxide milestones and backstop trading program 

implementation plan, and 20.2.73 NMAC. 

(5) An allowance deduction penalty and financial penalty shall be assessed and levied in accordance 

with Subsection D of 20.2.8.108 NMAC, Paragraph 4 of Subsection A of 20.2.81.109 NMAC and Subsection C of 

20.2.81.109 NMAC except that sulfur dioxide emissions shall be determined under Paragraph 4 of Subsection A of 

20.2.81.1 10 NMAC. 

B. The provisions in 20.2.81.1 10 NMAC shall continue to apply for each year after the 2018 

emission year until: 

(1) the first control period under the WEB trading program; or 

(2) the department determined, in accordance with section A3.10 of the implementation plan, that the 

201 8 sulfur dioxide milestone has been met. 

C. If 20.2.81.1 10 NMAC was implemented, the following shall apply to each emissions year after the 

201 8 emissions year. 

(1) The tracking system administrator will record the allowances for the control period for the 

specific year for each WEB source in the source's compliance account once the department allocates the allowances 

under section C1 of the sulfur dioxide milestones and backstop trading program implementation plan. 

(2) The allowance transfer deadline is midnight Pacific standard time on March 1 of each year (or if 

this date is not a business day, midnight of the first business day thereafter) following the end of the specific 

emissions year. WEB sources may transfer allowances as provided in Subsection A of 20.2.81 .I07 NMAC until the 

allowance transfer deadline. 

(3) A WEB source must hold allowances allocated for that specific emissions year, or any year after 

201 8, including those transferred into the compliance account by an allowance transfer correctly submitted by the 

allowance transfer deadline, in an amount not less than the WEB source's total sulfur dioxide emissions for the 

specific emissions year. Emissions are detennined using the pre-trigger monitoring provisions in section B of the 

sulfur dioxide milestones and backstop trading program implementation plan, and 20.2.73 NMAC. 

(4) An allowance deduction penalty and financial penalty shall be assessed and levied in accordance 

with Subsection D of 20.2.81.108 NMAC, Paragraph 4 of Subsection A of 20.2.8 1.109 NMAC, and Subsection C 

of 20.2.81.109 NMAC, except that sulfur dioxide emissions shall be determined under Paragraph 3 of Subsection C 

of 20.2.81.1 10 NMAC. 

[20.2.81.110 NMAC - N, 1213 1/03] 

20.2.81.111 NMAC SULFUR DIOXIDE MONITORING OF FUEL GAS COMBUSTION DEVICES: 

A. Applicability. 

(1) The provisions of this protocol are applicable to fuel gas combustion devices at petroleum 

refineries. 

(2) Fuel gas combustion devices include boilers, process heaters, and flares used to bum fuel gas 

generated at a petroleum refinery. 

20.2.81 NMAC 
-CLc (3) Fuel gas means any gas which is generated and combusted at a petroleum refinery. Fuel gas does 

not include: 

(a) natural gas, unless combined with other gases generated at a petroleum refinery; 

(b) gases generated by a catalytic cracking unit catalyst regenerator; 

(c) gases generated by fluid colung burners; 

(d) gases combusted to produce sulfur or sulfuric acid; or 

(e) process upset gases generated due to startup, shutdown, or malfunctions. 

B. Monitoring Requirements. 

(1) Except as provided in Paragraphs 2 and 3 of 20.2.8 1.1 1 1 NMAC, fuel gas combustion devices 

shall use a continuous fuel gas monitoring system (CFGMS) to determine the total sulfur content (reported as H2S) 

of the fuel gas mixture prior to combustion, and continuous fuel flow meters to determine the amount of fuel gas 

burned. 

(a) Fuel gas combustion devices having a common source of fuel gas may be monitored for 

sulfur content at one location, if monitoring at that location is representative of the sulfur content of the fuel gas 

being burned in any fuel gas combustion device. 

(b) The CFGMS shall meet the performance requirements in Performance Specification 2 in 

Appendix B to 40 CFR Part 60, and the following. 

(i) Continuously monitor and record the concentration by volume of total sulfur 

compounds in the gaseous fuel reported as ppmv H2S. 

(ii) Have the span value set so that the majority of readings fall between 10 and 95 

percent of the range. 

(iii) Record negative values of zero drift, for initial certification and daily calibration 

error tests. 

(iv) Calibration drift shall be 5.0 percent of the span. 

(v) Methods 15A, 16, or approved alternatives for total sulfur, are the reference methods 

for the relative accuracy test. The relative accuracy test shall include a bias test in accordance with Paragraph 3 of 

Subsection D of 20.2.81.1 1 1 NMAC. C (c) All continuous fuel flow meters shall comply with the provisions of Section 2.1.5 of 

Appendix D to 40 CFR Part 75. 

(d) The hourly mass sulfur dioxide emissions rate for all the fuel combustion devices 

monitored by this approach shall be calculated using the following equation: 

Et = (Cs)(Qf)(K) 

where: E, = Total sulfur dioxide emissions in lblhr from applicable fuel gas combustion devices 

Cs = Sulfur content of the fuel gas as H2S(ppmv) 

Qf = Fuel gas flow rate to the applicable fuel gas combustion devices (scflhr) 

K = 1.660 x lo-' (1blscf)ippmv 

(2) In place of a CFGMS in Paragraph 1 of Subsection B of 20.2.81.1 1 1 NMAC, fuel gas combustion 

devices having a common source of fuel gas may be monitored with an sulfur dioxide CEMS flow CEMS and (if 

necessary) a moisture monitoring system at only one location, if the CEMS monitoring at that location is 

representative of the sulfur dioxide emission rate (lb sulfur dioxidelscf fuel gas burned) of all applicable fuel gas 

combustion devices. Continuous fuel flow meters shall be used in accordance with Paragraph 2 of Subsection B of 

20.2.8 1.1 1 1 NMAC, and the fuel gas combustion device monitored by a CEMS shall have separate fuel metering. 

(a) Each CEMS for sulfur dioxide and flow, and (if applicable) moisture, shall comply with the 

operating requirements, performance specifications, and quality assurance requirements of 40 CFR Part 75. 

(b) All continuous fuel flow meters shall comply with the provisions of Section 2.1.5 of 

Appendix D to 40 CFR Part 75. 

(c) The sulfur dioxide hourly mass emissions rate for all the fuel gas combustion devices 

monitored by this approach shall be determined by the ratio of the amount of fuel gas burned by the CEMSmonitored fuel gas combustion device to the total fuel gas burned by all applicable fuel gas combustion devices 

using the following equation: 

Et = (Eni)(Qt)/(Qni) 

where: E, = Total sulfur dioxide emissions in lbh from applicable fuel gas combustion devices. 

En, = sulfur dioxide emissions in lblhr from the CEMS-monitored fuel gas combustion device, calculated using 

Equation F-1 or (if applicable) F-2 in Appendix F to 40 CFR Part 75 

Q, = Fuel gas flow rate (scflhr) from applicable fuel gas combustion devices. 

Qn, = Fuel gas flow rate (scflhr) to the CEMS-monitored fuel gas combustion device. 

20.2.81 NMAC 
(3) In place of a CFGMS in Paragraph 1 of Subsection B of 20.2.81.1 1 1 NMAC, fuel gas combustion 

devices having a common source of fuel gas may be monitored with an sulfur dioxide - diluent CEMS at only one ,-+. 

location, if the CEMS monitoring at that location is representative of the sulfur dioxide emission rate (lb sulfur 

dioxide1mmBtu) of all applicable fuel gas combustion devices. If this option is selected, the owner or operator shall 

conduct fuel gas sampling and analysis for gross calorific value (GCV), and shall use continuous fuel flow metering 

in accordance with Paragraph 1 of Subsection B of 20.2.81.11 1 NMAC, with separate fuel metering for the CEMSmonitored fuel gas combustion device. 

(a) Each sulfur dioxide. diluent CEMS shall comply with the applicable provisions for sulfur 

dioxide monitors and diluent monitors in 40 CFR Part 75, and shall use the procedures in Section 3 of Appendix F to 

Part 75 for determining sulfur dioxide emission rate (IbImmBtu) by substituting the term sulfur dioxide for no, in 

that section, and using a K factor of 1.660 x 10 '' (lblscf) ppmv instead of the NO, K factor. 

(b) All continuous fuel flow meters and fuel gas sampling and analysis for GCV to determine 

the heat input ratio shall comply with the applicable provisions of Section 2.1.5 and 2.3.4 of Appendix D to 40 

CFR Part 75. 

(c) The sulfur dioxide hourly mass emissions rate for all the fuel gas combustion devices 

monitored by this approach shall be determined by the ratio of the fuel gas heat input to the CEMS-monitored fuel 

gas combustion device to the total fuel gas heat input to all applicable fuel gas combustion devices using the 

following equation: 

El= (EnJ(Qt)IiGCV) I lo6 

where: El = Total sulfur dioxide emissions in lbslhr from applicable fuel gas combustion devices. 

En, = sulfur dioxide emissions in IblmmBtu from the CEMS - monitored fuel gas combustion device. 

Q, = Fuel gas flow rate (scfh) to the applicable fuel gas combustion devices. 

GCV = Fuel Gross Calorific Value (Btuiscf) 

lo6 = Conversion from Btu to million Btu 

(d) The owner or operator shall calculate total sulfur dioxide mass emissions for each calendar 

quarter and each calendar year based on the emissions in Ibh and equations F-3 and F-4 in Appendix F to 40 CFR 

Part 75, Appendix F. 

C. Certification and recertification requirements. All monitoring systems are subject to initial 

certification and recertification testing as follows. 

(1) The owner or operator shall comply with the initial testing and calibration requirements in 

performance specification 2 in Appendix B of 40 CFR Part 60 and Subparagraph b of Paragraph 1 of Subsection B 

of 20.2.8 1.1 1 1 NMAC for each CFGMS. 

(2) Each CEMS for sulfur dioxide and flow or each sulfur dioxide-diluent CEMS shall comply with 

the testing and calibration requirements specified in 40 CFR Part 75, Section 75.20 and appendices A and B, except 

that each sulfur dioxide-diluent CEMS shall meet the relative accuracy requirements for a NOx-diluent CEMS 

(IbImmBtu). 

(3) A continuous fuel flow meter shall comply with certification requirements in Section 2.1.5 of 

Appendix D of 40 CFR Part 75. 

D. Quality assurance/quality control requirements. 

(1) A quality assurance and quality control (QAIQC) plan shall be developed and implemented for 

each CEMS for sulfur dioxide and flow or the sulfur dioxide-diluent CEMS in compliance with Sections 1, 1.1, and 

1.2 of Appendix B of 40 CFR Part 75. 

(2) A quality assurance and quality control plan shall be developed and implemented for each 

continuous fuel flow meter and fuel sampling and analysis in compliance with Sections 1, 1.1, and 1.3 Appendix B 

of 40 CFR Part 75. The owner or operator shall meet the requirements in Section 2.1.6 of Appendix D to 40 CFR 

Part 75, and may use the procedures set forth in Section 2.1.7 of that appendix. 

(3) A quality assurance and quality control plan shall be developed and implemented for each 

CFGMS in compliance with Sections 1 and 1.1 of Appendix B to 40 CFR Part 75, and the following. 

(a) Perform a daily calibration error test of each CFGMS at two gas concentrations, one low 

level and one high level. Calculate the calibration error as described in Appendix A to 40 CFR Part 75. An out of 

control period occurs whenever the error is greater than 5.0 percent of the span value. 

(b) In addition to the daily calibration error test, an additional calibration error test shall be 

performed whenever a daily calibration error test is failed, whenever a monitoring system is returned to service 

following repairs or corrective actions that may affect the monitor measurements, or after making manual calibration 

adjustments. .a 

(c) Perform a linearity test once every operating quarter. Calculate the linearity as described in 

20.2.8 1 NMAC 
-- Appendix A to 40 CFR Part 75. An out of control period occurs whenever the linearity error is greater than 5.0 

percent of a reference value, and the absolute value of the difference between average monitor response values and a 

reference value is greater than 5.0 ppm. 

(d) Perform a relative accuracy test audit once every four operating quarters. Calculate the 

relative accuracy as described in Appendix A to 40 CFR Part 75. An out of control period occurs whenever the 

relative accuracy is greater than 20.0 percent of the mean value of the reference method measurements. 

(e) Using the results of the relative accuracy test audit, conduct a bias test in accordance with 

Appendix A to 40 CFR Part 75, and calculate and apply a bias adjustment factor if required. 

E. Missing data procedures. 

(1) For any period in which valid data are not being recorded by an sulfur dioxide CEMS or flow 

CEMS specified in this section, missing or invalid data shall be replaced with substitute data in accordance with the 

requirements in subpart D of 40 CFR Part 75. 

(2) For any period in which valid data are not being recorded by an sulfur dioxide-diluent CEMS 

specified in this section, missing or invalid data shall be replaced with substitute data on a rate basis (IbIrnrnBtu) in 

accordance with the requirements for sulfur dioxide monitors in subpart D of 40 CFR Part 75. 

(3) For any period in which valid data are not being recorded by a continuous fuel flow meter or for 

fuel gas GCV sampling and analysis specified in this section, missing or invalid data shall be replaced with 

substitute data in accordance with missing data requirements in Section 2.4 of Appendix D to 40 CFR Part 75. 

(4) For any period in which valid data are not being recorded by the CFGMS specified in this section, 

hourly missing or invalid data shall be replaced with substitute data in accordance with the missing data 

requirements for units performing hourly gaseous fuel sulfur sampling in Section 2.4 of Appendix D to 40 CFR Part 

75. 

F. Monitoring plan and reporting requirements. In addition to the general monitoring plan and 

reporting requirements of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC, the owner or operator shall meet the following additional 

requirements. 

(1) The monitoring plan shall identify each group of units that are monitored by a single monitoring 

system under this 20.2.8 1.1 1 1 NMAC, and the plan shall designate an identifier for the group of units for emissions u.12 reporting purposes. For purpose of submitting emissions reports, no apportionment of emissions to the individual 

units within the group is required. 

(2) If the provisions of Paragraph 2 or 3 of Subsection B of 20.2.8 1.1 1 1 NMAC are used, provide 

documentation and an explanation to demonstrate that the sulfur dioxide emission rate from the monitored unit is 

representative of the rate from non-monitored units. 

[20.2.8 1.1 1 1 NMAC - N, 1213 1/03]] 

20.2.81.1 12 NMAC PREDICTIVE FLOW MONITORING SYSTEMS FOR KILNS WITH POSITIVE 

PRESSURE FABRIC FILTER: 

A. Applicability. The provisions of this protocol are applicable to cement kilns or lime kilns that: 

(1) are controlled by a positive pressure fabric filter; 

(2) combust only a single fuel, no fuel blends; and 

(3) have operating conditions upstream of the fabric filter that the WEB source documents would 

reasonably prevent reliable flow monitor measurements; this protocol does not modify the sulfur dioxide monitoring 

requirements in 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC. 

B. Monitoring requirements. 

(1) A cement or lime kiln with a positive pressure fabric filter shall use a predictive flow monitoring 

system (PFMS) to determine the hourly kiln exhaust gas flow. 

(2) A PFMS is the total equipment necessary for the determination of exhaust gas flow using process 

or control device operating parameter measurements and a conversion equation, a graph, or computer program to 

produce results in cubic feet per hour. 

(3) The PFMS shall meet the following performance specifications. 

(a) Sensors readings and conversion of sensor data to flow in cubic feet per hour must be 

automated. 

(b) The PFMS must allow for the automatic or manual determination of failed monitors. At a 

minimum a daily determination must be performed. 

A (c) The PFMS shall have provisions to check the calibration error of each parameter that is 

individually measured. The owner or operator shall propose appropriate performance specifications in the initial 

monitoring plan for all parameters used in the PFMS comparable to the degree of accuracy required for other 

20.2.8 1 NMAC 
monitoring systems used to comply with 20.2.81 NMAC. The parameters shall be tested at two levels, low: 0 to 20 

percent of fill scale, and high: 50 to 100 percent of fill scale. The reference value need not be certified. 

(d) The relative accuracy of the PFMS must be 5 10.0 percent of the reference method average 

value, and include a bias test in accordance with Paragraph 3 of Subsection D of 20.2.81.112 NMAC. 

C. Certification Requirements. The PFMS is subject to initial certification testing. The source 

owner or operator shall: 

(1) demonstrate the ability of the PFMS to identify automatically or manually a failed monitor; 

(2) provide evidence of calibration testing of all monitoring equipment. Any tests conducted within 

the previous 12 months of operation that are consistent with the QAIQC plan for the PFMS are acceptable for initial 

certification purposes; and 

(3) perform an relative accuracy test audit and accompanying bias test once every four operating 

quarters. Calculate the relative accuracy (and bias adjustment factor) as described in Appendix A to 40 CFR Part 75. 

An out of control period occurs whenever the flow relative accuracy is greater than 10.0 percent of the mean value 

of the reference method. 

D. Quality assurance and quality control requirements. A quality assurance and quality control 

plan shall be developed and implemented for each PFMS in compliance with Sections 1 and 1.1 of Appendix B of 

40 CFR Part 75, and the following: 

(1) perform a daily monitor failure check; 

(2) perform calibration tests of all monitors for each parameter included in the PFMS. At a minimum, 

calibrations shall be conducted prior to each relative accuracy test audit; and 

(3) perform a relative accuracy test audit and accompanying bias test once every four operating 

quarters. Calculate the relative accuracy (and bias adjustment factor) as described in Appendix A to 40 CFR Part 

75. An out of control period occurs whenever the flow relative accuracy is greater than 10.0 percent of the mean 

value of the reference method. 

E. Missing data. For any period in which valid data are not being recorded by the PFMS specified 

in this section, hourly missing or invalid data shall be replaced with substitute data in accordance with the flow 

monitor missing data requirements for non-load based units in subpart D of 40 CFR Part 75. 

F. Monitoring plan requirements. In addition to the general monitoring plan requirements of 

20.2.81.106 NMAC, the owner or operator shall meet the following additional requirements. 

(1) The monitoring plan shall document the reasons why stack flow measurements upstream of the 

fabric filter are unlikely to provide reliable flow measurements over time. 

(2) The initial monitoring plan shall explain the relationship of the proposed parameters and stack 

flow, and discuss other parameters considered and the reasons for not using those parameters in the PFMS. The 

department may require that the subsequent monitoring plan include additional explanation and documentation for 

the reasonableness of the proposed PFMS. 

[20.2.81.112 NMAC - N, 1213 1/03] 

HISTORY OF 20.2.81 NMAC: 

Pre-NMAC History: None. 

History of Repealed Material: [RESERVED] 

Other History: [RESERVED] 

20.2.81 NMAC 
STATE OF NEW MEXICO 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENT , , 

r-c 

re 1 

/ r r, 

PETITION FOR HEARING ON a t.. \\ .- . > -+ 

PROPOSED 20.2.81 WESTERN BACKSTOP 4.. 4. 

<" uSULFUR DIOXIDE TRADING PROGRAM EIB 03-08~ ' d' " 

;- , 

C ' b 

. , , . . .,* , i \I/ 

2 6 -,, ". INEW MEXICO ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT'S 

NOTJCE OF INTENT TO PRESENT TECHNICAL TESTIMONY 

The Environmental Protection Division of the New Mexico Environment Department I1 

\ 

(~ivi' sion) submits this Notice of Intent to Present Technical Testimony in support of the abovereferenced petition at the public hearing beginning on November 17 or 18,2003. 

1. The person for whom the witnesses will testifv. 

The Division. 

2. The name and qualifications of each technical witness. 

Mary Hilbert. Ms. Hilbert is an Environmental Analyst for the Control Strategies Section of 

the Air Quality Bureau. She has worked in the Control Strategies Section since July 2001. Ms. 

Hilbert holds a B.S. degree in Environmental Science and Management fiom New Mexico Highlands 

university. 

Maw Uhl. Mary is the Manager, Planning and Policy Section and has been with the Air 

Quality Bureau since 1992 doing computer-based air dispersion modeling in support of permit 

issuance, regulation development and enforcement actions. Ms. Uhl has completed over 500 

dispersion modeling analyses for air pollution facilities in the state and developed a 

comprehensive New Mexico Air Dispersion Modeling Guideline. Ms. Uhl has BS in Math and 

Chemistry and an MS in Atmospheric Sciences all from Purdue University. 

tPL 

NOTICE OF IlVTENT - PAGE 1 
\ 

Rita Trujillo. Rita Trujillo is Program Manager in the Control Strategy Section of the Air --h 

Quality Bureau. She has 13 years experience in the environmental field, including 5 years with 

the Air Quality Bureau. Ms. Trujillo holds a BS in Biology fiom Humboldt State University. 

Patrick Cummins. Mr. Cummins is the Air Quality Program Manager for the Western 

Governors' Association, where he also serves as Co-Director for the Western Regional Air 

Partnership. He has been in this position since January 2000 and prior to that time, Mr. 

Cummins served as Deputy Director of Denver's Regional Air Quality Council. He holds a BS in 

~h&dstry fiom Fort Lewis College in Durango, CO and an MPA dn Environmental Policy from 

the School of Public and Environmental Affairs at Indiana University, Bloomington, IN. I' 

I 

3. Whether the Division supports or opposes the proposed revisions. 

The Division supports the proposed revisions. 

4. Summary of testimony. 4 

The direct testimony of Ms. Hilbert is attached. The Division estimates that Ms. Hilbert's 

testimony will take 60 minutes. Ms. Uhl, Ms. Trujillo and Mr. Cummins will not provide direct 

testimony, but will be available to answer questions and for re-direct testimony, if necessary. 

5. A list and description of anticipated exhibits. 

EXHIBIT NUMBER TITLE OF EXHIBIT 

NMED Exhibit 1 Proposed Regulation 20.2.8 1 NMAC 

NMED Exhibit 2 Direct Testimony of Mary Hilbert 

NMED Exhibit 3 Western Emissions Backstop (WEB) Emissions and 

Allowance Tracking System (EATS) Analysis - Appendix 

C1 in the SIP 

NMED Exhibit 4 Summary Fact Sheet for WEB trading Program: Monitoring 

Recordkeeping and Reporting 

NOTICE OF INTENT - PAGE 2 
6. Proposed alternative language. 

NMED proposes no additional changes to the regulation that was submitted to the 

Environmental Improvement Board on August 29,2003. 

7. Reservation of Rights. 

This Notice of Intent to Present Technical Testimony is based on the Division's petition. 

The Division reserves the right to call any person to testify and to present any exhibit in response 

to another notice of intent or public comment filed in this matter or to any testimony or exhibit 

.I(. : \ 

offekd at the public hearing. The Division also reserves the right to call any person as a rebuttal 

witness and to present any exhibit in support thereof, 

I 

Respectfully submitted, 

NEW MEXICO ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT 

OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL 

/ 

f*\ - k\-- 

Tracy @gh& 

Tim Dolan 

New Mexico Environment Department 

1 190 St. Francis Drive 

Santa Fe, New Mexico 87502-61 10 

Telephone (505) 827-2990 

Facsimile (505) 827-2836 

blNOTICE OF LNTENT - PAGE 3 
TITLE 20 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION NMED Exhibit 1 

r. CWTER 2 AIR QUALITY (STATEWIDE) 

PART 81 WESTERN BACKSTOP SULFUR DIOXIDE TRADING PROGRAM 

20.2.81.1 ISSUING AGENCY: Environmental Improvement Board. 

[I213 1/03] 

20.2.81.2 SCOPE: All geographic areas within the jurisdiction of the Environmental Improvement Board. 

[I213 1/03] 

20.2.81.3 STATUTORY AUTHORITY: Environmental Improvement Act, NMSA 1978, section 74-1- 

8(A)(4) and (7), and Air Quality Control Act, NMSA 1978, sections 74-2-1 et seq., including specifically, section 

74-2-5 (A), (B) and (C). 

[I 213 1/03] 

20.2.&1,.4 DURATION: Permanent. 

11213 i%b3] 

20.2.81.5 EFFECTIVE DATE: 12/31/03, except where a later date is cited at the end of a section. 

[12/3 1/03] , 

[The latest effective date of any section in this Part is 12/31/03.] i 

20.2.81.6 OBJECTIVE: 

A. 20.2.8 1 NMAC implements the Western Backstop SO2 Trading Program ("WEB Trading 

Program") provisions required under the federal Regional Haze Rule, 40 CFR 51.309, and New Mexico's Regional 

Haze Implementation Plan. 

B. Nothing in 20.2.8 1 NMAC waives any requirement otherwise in effect or subsequently required 

under another program, including rules governing new sources. 

[12/3 1/03] 

20.2.81.7 DEFmlITIONS: In addition to the terms defined in 20.2.2 NMAC (Definitions), as used in this 

part: 

A. "Account Certificate of Representation" means the completed and signed submission required 

to designate an Account Representative for a WEB source or an Account Representative for a general account. 

B. "Account Representative" means the individual who is authorized through an Account 

Certificate of Representation to represent owners and operators of the WEB source with regard to matters under the 

WEB Trading Program or, for a general account, who is authorized through an Account Certificate of 

Representation to represent the persons having an ownership interest in allowances in the general account with 

regard to matters concerning the general account. 

C. "Act" means the federal Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq. 

D. "Actual Emissions" means total annual sulfur dioxide emissions determined in accordance with 

20.2.8 1.106 MAC, or determined in accordance with 20.2.73 NMAC for sources that are not subject to 

20.2.81.106 NMAC. 

E. "Allocate" means to assign allowances to a WEB source through section C1 of the 

Implementation Plan. 

F. "Allowance" means the limited authorization under the WEB Trading Program to emit one ton of 

SO2 during a specified control period or any control period thereafier subject to the terms and conditions for use of 

unused allowances as established by 20.2.8 1 NMAC. 

G. "Allowance limitation" means the tonnage of SO2 emissions authorized by the allowances 

available for compliance deduction for a WEB source for a control period under 20.2.8 1 .lo9 NMAC on the 

allowance transfer deadline for that control period. 

H. "Allowance Tracking System" means the system developed by the Department where 

allowances under the WEB Trading Program are recorded, held, transferred and deducted. 

I. "Allowance Tracking System account" means an account in the Allowance Tracking System 

established for purposes of recording, holding, transfemng, and deducting allowances. 

20.2.81 NMAC 
J. "Allowance transfer deadline" means the deadline established in Subsection B of 20.2.81.107 

NMAC when allowances must be submitted for recording in a WEB source's compliance account in order to 

demonstrate compliance for that control period. 

K. "Compliance account" means an account established in the Allowance Tracking System under 

Subsection A of 20.2.81 .lo5 NMAC for the purpose of recording allowances that a WEB source mi& hold to 

demonstrate compliance with its allowance limitation. 

L. "Compliance certification" means a submission to the Department by the Account 

Representative as required under Subsection B of 20.2.8 1 .lo9 NMAC to report a WEB source's compliance or 

noncompliance with 20.2.8 1 NMAC. 

M. "Control period" means the period beginning January 1 of each year and ending on December 31 

of the same year, inclusive. 

N. "Emissions tracking database" means the central database where SO2 emissions for WEB 

sources as recorded and reported in accordance with 20.2.81 NMAC are tracked to determine compliance with 

allowance limitations. 

0. "Emission unit" means any part of a stationary source that emits or would have the potential to 

emit any pollutant submitted to regulations under the Clean Air Act. 

P. "Existing sourcet1 means, a stationary source that commenced operation before the Program 

Trigger Date. 

I Q. "Fugitive emissions" are those emissions that could not reasdnably pass through a stack, 

chimney, vent, or other functionally equivalent opening. 

R. "General account" means an account established in the Allowance Tracking System under 

20.2.8 1.105 NMAC for the purpose of recording allowances held by a person that are not to be used to show 

compliance with an allowance limitation. 

S. "Milestone" means the maximum level of stationary source regional sulfiu dioxide emissions for 

each year fiom 2003 to 2018, established according to the procedures in Section A of the SO1 Milestones and 

Backstop Trading Program Implementation Plan. 

T. "New WEB Source" means a WEB source that commenced operation on or after the Program 

Trigger Date. 

U. "New Source Set-aside" means a pool of allowances that are available for allocation to new 

sources in accordance with the provisions of Section C (a)1.3 of the SOz Milestones and Backstop Trading Program 

Implementation Plan. 

V. "Owner or operator" means any person who is an owner or who operaies, controls or supervises 

a WEB source, and includes but is not be limited to any holding company, utility system or plant manager. 

W. "Part" means an air quality control regulation under Title 20, Chapter 2 of the New Mexico 

Administrative Code, unless otherwise noted, as adopted or amended by the Board. 

X. "Potential to emit" means the maximum capacity of a stationary source to emit any air pollutant . 

under its physical and operational design. Any physical or operational limitation on the capacity of a source to emit 

an air pollutant, including air pollution control equipment and restrictions on hours of operation or on the type or 

amount of material combusted, stored or processed, shall be treated as part of its design if the limitation is 

enforceable by the EPA Administrator. 

Y. "Program trigger date" means the date that the Department determines that the WEB Trading 

Program has been triggered in accordance with the provisions of Section A2 of the SO2 Milestones and Backstop 

Trading Program Implementation Plan. 

Z. "Program trigger years" means the years shown in Table 1, column 3, of the SO2 Milestones 

and Backstop Trading Program Implementation Plan for the applicable milestone if the WEB Trading Program is 

triggered as described in Section A of the SO2 Milestones and Backstop Trading Program Implementation Plan. 

AA. "Renewable Energy Resource" means a resource that generates electricity by non-nuclear and 

non-fossil technologies that results in low or no air emissions. The term includes electricity generated by wind 

energy technologies; solar photovoltaic and solar thermal technologies; geothermal technologies; technologies based 

on landfill gas and biomass sources, and new low-impact hydropower that meets the Low-Impact Hydropower 

Institute criteria. Biomass includes agricultural, food and wood wastes. The term does not include pumped storage 

or biomass fiom municipal solid waste, black liquor, or treated wood. 

AB. "Retired source" means a WEB source that has received a retired source exemption as provided 

in Subsection D of 20.2.81.101 NMAC. Any retired source resuming operations under Subsection D of 20.2.81 .I01 

NMAC, must submit its exemption as part of its registration materials. 

20.2.81 NMAC 
- AC. "Serial number" means, when referring to allowances, the unique identification number assigned 

to each allowance by the Tracking Systems Administrator, in accordance with Subsection B of 20.2.81.1 04 NMAC. 

AD. "SO2 emitting unit" means any equipment that is located at a WEB source and that emits S02. 

AE "SOzMilestones and Backstop Trading Program Implementation Plan" or "Implementation 

Plan" means Section C of the New Mexico Regional Haze State Implementation Plan Revision adopted by the 

Environmental Improvement Board on XX/XX/03. 

AF. "Stationary source" means any building, structure, facility or installation that emits or may emit 

any air pollutant subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act. 

AG. "Submit" means sent to the appropriate authority under the signature of the Account 

Representative. For purposes of determining when something is submitted, an official U.S. Postal Service postmark, 

or equivalent electronic time stamp, shall establish the date of submittal. 

AH. "Ton" means 2000 pounds and, for any control period, any fiaction of a ton equaling 1000 

pounds or more shall be treated as one ton and any fraction of a ton equaling less than 1000 pounds shall be treated 

as zero tons. 

AI. "Tracking System Administrator" means the person designated by the Department as the 

administrator of the Allowance Tracking System and the emission tracking database. 

I, AJ. "WEB source" means a stationary source that meets the applicability requirements of 

20.2.81.101 NMAC. \ 

AK. "Western Backstop SO2 Trading Program ("WEB Trading Program")" means 20.2.81 

NMAC, triggered as a backstop in accordance with the provisions in the SO2 Milestones and Backstop Trading 

Program Implementation Plan, if necessary, to ensure that regional SO2 emissions are reduced. 

[12/3 1/03] 

20.2.81.8 - 20.2.81.99 [RESERVED] 

20.2.81.100 WEB TRADING PROGRAM TRIGGER: 

A. Except as provided in Subsection B of this section, 20.2.81 NMAC shall become effective on the 

program trigger date that is established in accordance with the procedures outlined in the SO2 Milestones and 

Backstop Trading Program Implementation Plan. 

B. 20.2.81.1 10 NMAC, Special Penalty Provisions for Year 2018, shall become effective on January 

l,20 18 and shall remain effective until the provisions of 20.2.8 1.1 10 NMAC have been hlly implemented. 

[12/3 1/03] 

C, DcF*. :h"" Rcpa, t . ., 

20.2.81.101 WEB TRADING PROGRAM APPLICABILITY 

A. General Applicability: 20.2.81 NMAC applies to any stationary source or group of stationary 

sources that are located on one or more contiguous or adjacent properties and which are under the control of the 

same person or persons under common control, belonging to the same industrial grouping, and that are described in 

paragraI;hs 1 through 4 of Subsection B. A stationary source or group of stationary sources shall be considered part 

of a single industrial grouping if all of the pollutant emitting activities at such source or group of sources on. 

contiguous or adjacent properties belong to the same Major Group (i.e., all have the same two-digit code) as 

described in the Standard Industrial Classification Manual, 1987. 

B. The following are WEB sources: 

(1) All BART-eligible sources as defined in 40 CFR 5 1.301 that are BART-eligible due to SO2 

emissions. 

(2) All stationary sources not meeting the criteria of Paragraph 1 of Subsection B of 20.2.8 1.10 1 

NMAC, that have actual SO2 emissions of 100 tons or more per year in the Program Trigger Years or any 

subsequent year. The fugitive emissions of a stationary source shall not be considered in determining whether it is a 

WEB source unless the source belongs to one of the following categories of stationary source: 

(a) Coal cleaning plants (with thermal dryers); 

@) Kraft pulp mills; 

(c) Portland cement plants; 

(d) Primary zinc smelters; 

(e) Iron and steel mills; 

(0 Primary aluminum ore reduction plants; 

(g) Primary copper smelters; 

(h) Municipal incinerators capable of charging more than 250 tons of refuse per day; 

20.2.81 NMAC 
(i) Hydrofluoric, sulfiuic, or nitric acid plants; 

Q) Petroleum refineries; 

Q Lime plants; 

(l) Phosphate rock processing plants; 

(m) Coke oven batteries; 

(n) Sulfur recovery plants; 

(0) Carbon black plants (furnace process); 

@) Primary lead smelters; 

(q) Fuel conversion plants; 

(r) Sintering plants; 

(s) Secondary metal production plants; 

(t) Chemical process plants; 

(u) Fossil-fuel boilers (or combination thereof) totaling more than 250 million British thermal 

units per hour heat input; 

(v) Petroleum storage and transfer units with a total storage capacity exceeding 300,000 

barrels; 

.II : (w) Taconite ore processing plants; 

11 , (x) Glass fiber processing plants; \ 

(y) Charcoal production plants; 

(z) Fossil-fuel-fired steam electric plants of more than 250 million British thermal units per 

hour heat input; or 

(aa) Any other stationary source category, hhich as of August 7, 1980 is being regulated under 

Section 1 11 or 112 of the Clean Air Act. 

(3) A new source that begins operation after the Program Trigger Date and has the potential to emit 

100 tons or more of SO2 per year. 

(4) The Department may determine on a case-by-case basis, with concurrence fiom the EPA 

Administrator, that a source defined in Paragraph 2 of Subsection B of 20.2.8 1.10 1 is not a WEB source if 

the source: 

(a) In each of the previous five years had actual SO2 emissions of less than 100 tons per year, 

and 

(b) Had actual SO2 emissions of 100 tons or more in a single year due to a temporary emission 

increase that was caused by a sudden, infrequent, and not reasonably preventable failure of air pollution control 

equipment, failure of process equipment, or a failure to operate in a normal or usual manner. 

(c) Took timely and reasonable action to minimize the temporary emission increase; and 

(d) Has corrected the failure of air pollution control equipment, process equipment, or process 

by the time of the Department's determination under this section; or 

(e) Had to switch fuels or feedstocks on a temporary basis and as a result of an emergency 

situation or unique and unusual circumstances besides cost of such fuels or feedstocks. 

(f) A temporary emission increase due to poor maintenance or careless operation does not meet 

the criteria of this section. 

C. Duration of Program Participation: 

(1) Except as provided for in Subsection D of 20.2.81.101 NMAC, once a source is subject to the 

WEB Trading Program, it will remain in the program every year thereafter. 

D. Retired Source Exemption: Application 

(1) Any WEB that is retired shall apply for a retired source exemption. The WEB source may only 

be considered retired if all SO2 emitting units at the source are retired. The application shall contain all of the 

following information: 

(a) Identification of the WEB source, including plant name and an appropriate identification 

code in a format specified by the Department. 

@) Name of Account Representative. 

(c) Description of the status of the WEB source, including the date that the WEB source was 

retired. 

(d) Signed certification that the WEB source is retired and will comply with the requirements 

of Subsection D of 20.2.8 1 .I01 NMAC. 

(e) Verification that the WEB source has a general account where any unused allowances or 

future allocations will be recorded. 

20.2.81 NMAC 
- (2) Responsibilities of Retired Sources: The retired source exemption becomes effective when the 

Department notifies the source that the retired source exemption has been granted. 

(3) A retired source shall be exempt from 20.2.81 .lo6 NMAC and 20.2.81 .I09 NMAC, except as 

provided below. 

(a) A retired source shall not emit any SOz afier the date the retired source exemption is 

effective. 

@) A WEB source shall submit SOz emissions reports, as required by Subsection 0 of 

20.2.8 1.106 NMAC for any time period the source was operating prior to the effective date of the retired source 

exemption. The retired source shall be subject to the compliance provisions of 20.2.81 .lo9 NMAC, including the 

requirement to hold allowances in the source's compliance account to cover all SOz emissions prior to the date the 

source was permanently retired. 

(c) A retired source that is still in existence but no longer emitting SOz shall, for a period of 

five years from the date the records are created, retain records demonstrating the effective date of the retired source 

exemption for purposes of this part. 

(4) Resumption of Operations 

(a) Should a retired source desire to resume operation, the retired source shall submit 

regisnation materials as follows: , (1 , (i) If the source is required to obtain a new source rehew permit or operating permit 

under 20.2.70 NMAC, 20.2.72 NMAC, 20.2.74 NMAC or 20.2.79 NMAC prior to resuming operation, then the 

source shall submit registration information as described in 20.2.81 .lo3 NMAC and a copy of the retired source 

exemption with the application required under 20.2.70 NMAC,, 20.2.72 NMAC, 20.2.74 NMAC or 20.2.79 NMAC; 

(ii) If the source is not required to obtain a new source review permit or operating permit 

under 20.2.70 NMAC, 20.2.72 NMAC, 20.2.74 NMAC or 20.2.79 NMAC prior to resuming operation, then the 

source shall submit registration information as described in Subsection A of 20.2.81 .lo3 NMAC and a copy of the 

retired source exemption to the Department at least ninety days prior to resumption of operation. 

@) The retired source exemption shall automatically expire on the day the source resumes 

operation. 

(5) Loss of Future Allowances: A WEB source that is retired and that does not apply to the 

Department for a retired source exemption within ninety days of the date that the source is retired shall forfeit any 

unused and hture allowances. The abandoned allowances shall be retired by the Tracking System Administrator. 

[12/3 1/03] 

20.2.81.102 ACCOUNT REPRESENTATIVE FOR WEB SOURCES: Each WEB source must identify 

one Account Representative and may also identify an alternate Account Representative who may act on behalf of the 

Account Representative. Any representation, action, inaction or submission by the alternate Account Representative 

will be deemed to be a representation, action, inaction or submission by the Account Representative. 

A. Identification and Certification of an Account Representative: 

(1) The Account Representative and any Alternate Account Representative shall be appointed by an 

agreement that makes the representations, actions, inactions or submissions of the Account Representative and any 

alternate binding on the owners and operators of the WEB source. 

(2) The Account Representative shall submit to the Department and the Tracking System 

Administrator a signed and dated Account Certificate of Representation (Certificate) that contains the following 

elements: 

(a) Identification of the WEB source by plant name, state and an appropriate identification 

code in a format specified by the Department; 

@) The name, address, e-mail (if available), telephone and facsimile number of the Account 

Representative and any alternate; 

(c) A list of owners and operators of the WEB source; 

(d) Information to be part of the emission tracking system database in accordance with the 

Implementation Plan. The specific data elements shall be as specified by the Department to be consistent with the 

data system structure, and may include basic facility information that may appear in other reports and notices 

submitted by the WEB source, such as county location, industrial classification codes, and similar general facility 

information. 

(e) The following certification statement: "I certify that I was selected as the Account I Representative or alternate Account Representative, as applicable, by an agreement binding on the owners and 

operators of the WEB source. I certify that I have all the necessary authority to carry out my duties and 

20.2.81 NMAC 
responsibilities under the WEB Trading Program on behalf of the owners and operators of the WEB source and that 

each such owner and operator shall be fully bound by my representations, actions, inactions, or submissions and by 

any decision or order issued to me by the Department regarding the WEB Trading Program." 

(3) Upon receipt by the Department of the complete Certificate, the Account Representative and any 

alternate Account Representative represents and, by his or her representations, actions, inactions, or submissions, 

legally binds each owner and operator of the WEB source in all matters pertaining to the WEB Trading Program. 

The owners and operators shall be bound by any decision or order issued by the Department regarding the WEB 

Trading Program. 

(4) No WEB Allowance Tracking System account shall be established for the WEB source until the 

Tracking System Administrator has received a complete Certificate. Once the account is established, the Account 

Representative shall make all submissions concerning the account, including the deduction or transfer of allowances. 

B. Requirements and Responsibilities: 

(1) The responsibilities of the Account Representative include, but are not limited to, the transferring 

of allowances, and the submission of monitoring plans, registrations, certification applications, SO2 emissions data 

and compliance reports as required by 20.2.81 NMAC, and representing the source in all matters perthing to the 

WEB Trading Program. 

(2) Each submission under this program shall be signed and certified by the Account Representative 

for the WEB source. Each submission shall include the following truth and accuracy certification statement by the 

Account Representative: "I am authorized to make this submission on behalf of the owners and operators of the 

WEB source for which the submission is made. I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined, and 

am familiar with, the statements and information submitted in this document and all its attachments. Based on my 

inquiry of those individuals with primary responsibility for obtaining the information, 1 certify that the statements 

and information are to the best of my knowledge and belief true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are 

significant penalties for submitting false statements and information or omitting required statements and 

information, including the possibility of fine or imprisonment." 

C. Cbanging the Account Representative or Owners and Operators: 

(1) Changes to the Account Representative or the alternate Account Representative 

(a) The Account Representative or alternate Account Representative may be changed at any 

time by sending a complete superseding Certificate to the Department and the Tracking System Administrator under 

Paragraph 3 of Subsection A of 20.2.81.102 NMAC, with the change taking effect upon receipt of such Certificate 

by the Department. Notwithstanding any such change, all representations, actions, inactions, and submissions by the 

previous Account Representative or alternate prior to the time and date when the Tracking System Administrator 

receives the superseding Certificate shall be binding on the new Account Representative and the owners and 

operators of the WEB source. 

(2) Changes in Owners and Operators 

(a) Within thirty days of any change in the owners and operators of the WEB source, including . 

the addition of a new owner or operator, the Account Representative shall submit a revised Certificate amending the 

list of owners and operators to include such change. 

@) In the event a new owner or operator of a WEB source is not included in the list of owners 

and operators submitted in the Certificate, such new owner or operator shall be deemed to be subject to and bound 

by the Certificate, the representations, actions, inactions, and submissions of the Account Representative of the 

WEB source, and the decisions, orders, actions, and inactions of the Department as if the new owner or operator 

were included in such list. 

E 1213 1/03] 

20.2.81.103 REGISTRATION 

A. Deadlines: 

(1) Each source that is a WEB source on or before the Program Trigger Date shall register by 

submitting the initial Certificate required in Subsection A of 20.2.81.102 NMAC to the Department no later than 

180 days after the Program Trigger Date. 

(2) Any existing source that becomes a WEB source after the Program Trigger Date shall register by 

submitting the initial Certificate required in Subsection A of 20.2.81 .lo2 NMAC to the Department no later than 

September 30 of the year following the inventory year in which the source exceeded the emission threshold. 

(3) Any new WEB source shall register by submitting the initial Certificate required in Subsection A 

of 20.2.81 .I02 NMAC to the Department prior to the commencement of operation. 

B. Integration into Permits: 

20.2.81 NMAC 
(1) Any allocation, transfer or deduction of allowance to or fiom the compliance account of a WEB 

source shall not require revision of the WEB source's operating permit under 20.2.70 NMAC. 

(2) Any WEB source is not required to have a permit under 20.2.72 NMAC, 20.2.74 NMAC or 

20.2.79 NMAC at any time after this Rule becomes effective, 'must at all times possess a permit that includes the 

requirements of 20.2.8 1 NMAC. If it does not possess a Title V permit under 20.2.70 NMAC , it may satisfy this 

paragraph's requirements by obtaining or modifying a permit under 20.2.72, NMAC, 20.2.74 NMAC or 20.2.79 

NMAC to incorporate the requirements of 20.2.8 1 NMAC. The source must at all times possess a pennit that 

includes these requirements. 

[12/3 1/03] 

20.2.81.104 ALLOWANCE ALLOCATIONS: 

A. The Tracking System Administrator shall record the allowances for each WEB source in the 

compliance account for a WEB source once the allowances are allocated by the Department under Section C1 of the 

SO2 Milestones and Backstop Trading Program Implementation Plan. If applicable, the Tracking System 

Administrator shall record a portion of the SO2 allowances for a WEB source in a special reserve account assigned 

to the Department to account for any allowances to be held by the Department in accordance with Subsection B of 

20.2.81:106 NMAC. .I 1 4 B. The Tracking System Administrator shall assign a serial numbkr to each allowance in accordance 

with section C2 of the SO2 Milestones and Backstop Trading Program Implementation Plan. 

C. All allowances shall be allocated, recorded, transferred, or used as whole allowances. To 

determine the number of whole allowances, the number of allowances shall be rounded down for decimals less than 

0.50 and rounded up for decimals of 0.50 or greater. I 

D. An allowance is not a property right, and is a limited authorization to emit one ton of SO2 valid 

only for the purpose of meeting the requirements of 20.2.8 1 NMAC. No provision of this WEB Trading Program or 

other law should be construed to limit the authority of the United States or the Department to terminate or limit such 

authorization. 

E. Early Reduction Bonus Allocation: Any WEB source that reduces permitted annual SO2 

emissions to a level that is below the floor level allocation established for that source in Section C1 of the SO2 

Milestones and Backstop Trading Program Implementation Plan between 2003 and the program trigger year may 

apply to the Department for an early reduction bonus allocation. The application shall be submitted no later than 

ninety days after the Program Trigger Date. Any WEB source that applies and receives early reduction bonus 

allocations shall retain the records referenced below for a minimum of five years after the early reduction bonus 

allowance is certified in accordance with Section Cl .l(a) (3) of the Implementation Plan. The application for an 

early reduction bonus allocation shall contain the following information: 

(1) Copies of all permits or other enforceable documents that include annual SO2 emissions limits for 

the WEB source during the period the WEB source was generating the early reductions. Such permits or 

enforceable documents shall require monitoring for SO2 emissions that meets the requirements in Subsection A and 

Subsection C of 20.2.8 1 .I06 NMAC and that the monitoring provisions were in effect one year prior to the 

beginning of the credit generating period. 

(2) Copies of emissions monitoring reports, for one year prior to the beginning of the credit 

generating period and for the period the WEB source was generating the early reductions, that documents the actual 

annual SO2 emissions. The emissions monitoring reports during the credit generating period must demonstrate that 

the actual annual SO2 emissions were below the floor level allocation established for that source in Section C1 of the 

SO2 Milestones and Backstop Trading Program Implementation Plan. 

(3) Demonstration that the floor level established for the source in accordance with Section C1 of the 

SO2 Milestones and Backstop Trading Program Implementation Plan was calculated using data that are consistent 

with the new monitoring methodology under Subsection A of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC. If new monitoring techniques 

change the floor level for the source, then a demonstration of the new floor level based on new monitoring 

techniques shall be included in the application. 

F. Request for Allowances for New WEB Sources or Modified WEB Sources: 

(1) A new WEB source or an existing WEB source that has increased production capacity through a 

permitted change in operations under 20.2.72 NMAC, 20.2.74 NMAC or 20.2.79 NMAC may apply to the 

Department for an allocation from the new source set-aside, as outlined in Section C1.3 of the Implementation Plan. 

(a) A new WEB source is eligible to apply for an annual allocation equal to the permitted 0- annual SO2 emission limit for that source after the source has commenced operation. 

20.2.81 NMAC 
(b) An existing WEB source is eligible to apply for an annual allbcation equal to the permitted 

annual SO2 emission limit for that source that is attributable to any amount of production capacity that is greater 

than the permitted production capacity for that source as of January 1,2003. 

(c) A source that has received a retired source exemption under Subsection D of 20.2.81 .lo1 

NMAC is not eligible to apply for an allocation from the new source set-aside. 

(2) The application for an allocation from the new source set-aside shall contain the following 

information: 

(a) For existing WEB sources, documentation that shows the permitted production capacity of 

the source before and after the new permit; 

(b) For new WEB sources, documentation of the actual date of the commencement of operation 

and a copy of the permit. 

[I213 1/03] 

20.2.81.105 ESTABLISHMENT OF ACCOUNTS: 

A. Allowance Tracking System Accounts: All WEB sources shall open a compliande account. Any 

person may open a general account for holding and transferring allowances. In addition, if a Web source conducts 

monitoring under Subsection B of 20.2.81 .lo6 NMAC, the WEB source shall open a special reserve compliance 

accoynt for allowances associated with units monitored under those provisions. The WEB source and Account 

Representative shall have no rights to transfer allowances in or out of such special reserve compliance account. The ' Department shall allocate allowances to the account in accordance with Paragraph 5 of Subsection B of 20.2.81 .lo6 

NMAC and all such allowances for each control period shall be retired each year for compliance in accordance with 

20.2.81 .I09 NMAC. To open either type of account; an application that contains the following information shall be 

submitted: 

(1) The name, mailing address, e-mail address, telephone number, and facsimile number of the 

Account Representative. For a compliance account, include a copy of the Account Certificate of Representation of 

the Account Representative and any alternate as required in Paragraph 2 of Subsection A of 20.2.8 1.102 NMAC. For 

a general account, include the Account Certificate of Representation of the Account Representative and any 

alternate as required in Paragraph 2 of Subsection C or 20.2.81.105 NMAC. A 

(2) The WEB source or organization name; 

(3) The type of account to be opened; and 

(4) A signed certification of tmth and accuracy by the Account Representative according to 

Paragraph 2 of Subsection A of 20.2.81.102 for compliance accounts and for general accounts, certification of truth 

and accuracy by the Account Representative according to Subsection D of 20.2.81 .lo5 NMAC. 

B. Account Representative for General Accounts: For a general account, one Account 

Representative shall be identified and an alternate Account Representative may be identified and may act on behalf 

of the Account Representative. Any representation, action, inaction or submission by the altemate Account 

Representative shall be deemed to be a representation, action, inaction or submission by the Account Representative. 

C. Identification and Certification of an Account Representative for General Accounts: 

(1) The Account Representative shall be appointed by an agreement that makes the representations, 

actions, inactions or submissions of the Account Representative binding on all persons who have an ownership 

interest with respect to allowances held in the general account. 

(2) The Account Representative shall submit to the Department and the Tracking System 

Administrator a signed and dated Account Certificate of Representation (Certificate) that contains the following 

elements: 

(a) The name, address, e-mail (if available), telephone and facsimile number of the Account 

Representative and any altemate; 

(b) The organization name; 

(c) The following certification statement: "I certify that I was selected as the Account 

Representative or altemate Account Representative, as applicable, by an agreement binding on all persons who have 

an ownership interest in allowances in the general account with regard to matters concerning the general account. I 

certify that I have all the necessary authority to carry out my duties and responsibilities under the WEB Trading 

Program on behalf of said persons and that each such person shall be fully bound by my representations, actions, 

inactions, or submissions and by any decision or order issued to me by the Department regarding the general 

account." 

(3) Upon receipt by the Department of the complete Certificate, the Account Representative 

represents and, by his or her representations, actions, inactions, or submissions, legally binds each person who has 

20.2.81 NMAC 8 
an ownership interest in allowances held in the general account with regard to all matters concerning the general ,- account. Such persons shall be bound by any decision or order issued by the Department. 

(4) No WEB Allowance Tracking System general account shall be established until the Tracking 

System Administrator has received a complete Certificate. Once the account is established, the Account 

Representative shall make all submissions concerning the account, including the deduction or transfer of allowances. 

D. Requirements and Responsibilities: Each submission for the general account shall be signed 

and certified by the Account Representative for the general account. Each submission shall include the following 

truth and accuracy certification statement by the Account Representative: "I am authorized to make this submission 

on behalf of all person who have an ownership interest in allowances held in the general account. I certify under 

penalty of law that I have personally examined, and am familiar with, the statements and information submitted in 

this document and all its attachments. Based on my inquiry of those individuals with primary responsibility for 

obtaining the information, I certify that the statements and information are to the best of my knowledge and belief 

true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false statements and 

information or omitting required statements and information, including the possibility of fine or imp,nsonment." 

E. Changing the Account Representative: The Account Representative or alternate Account 

Representative may be changed at any time by sending a complete superseding Certificate to the oepartment and the 

Tracking System Administrator under Paragraph 2 of Subsection C of 20.2.8 1 .I05 NMAC, wi+ the change taking 

effect upon receipt of such Certificate by the Department. Notwithstanding any kuch change, all representations, 

actions, inactions, and submissions by the previous Account Representative or alternate prior to the time and date 

when the Department receives the superseding Certificate shall be binding on the new Account Representative and 

all persons having ownership interest with respect to allowances held in the general account. 

F. Changes to the Account: Any change to the information required in the application for an 

existing account under Subsection A of 20.2.8 1 .lo5 NMAC shall require a revision of the application. 

[12/3 1/03] 

20.2.81.106 MONITORING, RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 

ON MONITORING METHODS: 

A. . For each SOz emitting unit at a WEB source shall comply with the following, as applicable, to 

monitor and record SO2 mass emissions: 

(1)' If a unit is subject to 40 CFR Part 75 under a requirement separate fiom the WEB Trading 

Program, the unit shall meet the requirements contained in Part 75 with respect to monitoring, recording and 

reporting SO2 mass emissions. 

(2) If a unit is not subject to 40 CFR Part 75 under a requirement separate fiom the WEB Trading 

Program, a unit shall use one of the following monitoring methods, as applicable: 

(a) A continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS) for SO2 and flow that complies with all 

applicable monitoring provisions in 40 CFR Part 75; 

@) If the unit is a gas- or oil-fired combustion device, the accepted monitoring methodology in 

Appendix D to 40 CFR Part 75, or, if applicable, the low mass emissions (LME) provisions (with respect to SOz 

mass emissions only) of section 75.19 of 40 CFR Part 75; 

(c) One ofthe optional WEB protocols, if applicable, in 20.2.81.1 11 NMAC or 20.2.81.1 12 

NMAC ; or 

(d) A petition for site-specific monitoring that the source submits for approval by the 

Department, and approval by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in accordance with Paragraph 5 of 

Subsection 0 of20.2.81.106 NMAC. 

(3) A permanently retired unit shall not be required to monitor under this Section if such unit was 

permanently retired and had no emissions for the entire period for which the WEB source implements this Paragraph 

3 and the Account Representative certifies in accordance with Subsection B of 20.2.8 1.109 NMAC that these 

conditions were met. In the event that a permanently retired unit recommences operation, the WEB source shall 

meet the requirements of this section 20.2.81.106 NMAC in the same manner as if the unit was a new unit. 

B. Notwithstanding Subsection A of this Section, the WEB source with a unit that meets one of the 

conditions of Paragraph 1 of Subsection B of 20.2.8 1.106 may elect to have the provisions of this Paragraph lapply 

to that unit. 

(1) Any of the following units may implement Subsection B of 20.2.81.106 NMAC: 

(a) Any smelting operation where all of the emissions fiom the operation are not ducted to a -. stack; or 

20.2.8 1 NMAC 
(b) Any flare, except to the extent such flares are used as a fuel gas combustion device at a 

petroleum refinery. 

(c) Any other type of unit without add-on SO2 control equipment, if no control level was 

assumed for the WEB source in establishing the floor level (and reducible allocation) provided in Section C1 of the 

Implementation Plan. 

(2) For each unit covered by Subsection B of 20.2.8 1 .I06 NMAC , the Account Representative shall 

submit a notice to request that Subsection B of 20.2.81.106 NMAC apply to one or more SO2 emitting units at a 

WEB source. The notice shall be submitted in accordance with the compliance dates specified in Paragraph 1 of 

Subsection M of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC, and shall include the following information (in a format specified by the 

Department with such additional, related information as may be requested): 

(a) A notice of all units at the applicable source, specifying which of the units are to be covered 

by Subsection B of 20.2.8 1 .I06 NMAC; 

(b) Consistent with the emission estimation methodology used to determine the floor level (and 

reducible allocation) for the source in accordance with Section C 1 of the Implementation Plan, the portion of the 

WEB source's overall allowance allocation that is athibutable to any unit(s) covered by this paragraph; and 

(c) An identification of any such units that are permanently retired. 

(3) For each new unit at an existing WEB source for which the WEB source seeks to comply with 

this subskction B of 20.2.8 1 .I06 NMAC; and for which the Account Representatipe applies for an allocation under 

the new source set-aside provisions of Subsection F of 20.2.81 .lo4 NMAC, the Account Representative shall submit 

a modified notice under Paragraph 2 of Subsection B of 20.2.8 1 .lo6 NMAC, that includes such new SOz emitting 

unit(s). The modified notice shall be submitted in accordance with the compliance dates in Paragraph 1 of 

Subsection M of 20.2.8 1.1 06 NMAC, but no later than the date'qn which a request is submitted under Paragraph 1 

of Subsection F of 20.2.8 1.104 NMAC for allocations from the set-aside. 

(4) The Department shall evaluate the information submitted by the WEB source in Paragraphs 2 and 

3 of Subsection B of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC, and may issue a notice to the source to exclude any units that do not 

qualify under this Subsection B of 20.2.8 1 .I06 NMAC or to adjust the portion of allowances attributable to units 

that do qualify to be consistent with the emission estimation methodology used to establish the floor level (and 

reducible allocation) for the source. 

(5) The Department shall allocate allowances equal to the adjusted portion of the WEB source's 

allowances under Paragraphs 2, 3, and 4 of Subsection B of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC in a special reserve compliance 

account provided that no such treatment of the WEB source's allocation will be required for any unit that is 

permanently retired and had no emissions for the entire period for which the WEB source implements this 

Subsection B and the account representative certifies in accordance with 20.2.8 1 .lo9 NMAC that these conditions 

are met. In the event that a permanently retired unit recommences operation, the WEB source shall meet the 

requirements of this section 20.2.81.106 NMAC in the same manner as if the unit was a new unit. 

(6) The Account Representative for a WEB source shall submit an annual emissions statement for 

each unit under this Subsection B of 20.2.81 .lo6 NMAC in accordance with Subsection 0 of 20.2.81 .I06 NMAC. 

The WEB source shall maintain operating records sufficient to estimate annual emissions in a manner consistent 

with the emission estimation methodology used to establish the floor level (and reducible allocation) for the source. 

In addition, if the estimated emissions from all such units at the WEB source are greater than the allowances for the 

current control year held in the special reserve compliance account under Paragraph 5 of Subsection B of 

20.2.8 1 .I06 NMAC for the WEB source, the Account Representative shall report the excess amount as part of the 

annual report for the WEB source under 20.2.8 1.109 NMAC and be required to use other allowances in the standard 

compliance account for the WEB source to account for such emissions, in accordance with 20.2.8 1.109NMAC. 

(7) The remaining provisions of this Section shall not apply to units covered by Subsection B of 

20.2.8 1.106 NMAC except where otherwise noted. 

(8) A WEB source may opt to modify the monitoring for an SOz emitting unit to use monitoring 

under Subsection A of 20.2.81.106 NMAC, but any such monitoring change shall take effect on January 1 of the 

next compliance year. In addition, the Account Representative shall submit an initial monitoring plan at least 180 

days prior to the date on which the new monitoring will take effect and a detailed monitoring plan in accordance 

with Subsection D of 20.2.81 .lo6 NMAC. The Account Representative shall also submit a revised notice under 

Subsection B of 20.2.81 .I06 NMAC at the same time that the initial monitoring plan is submitted. 

C. For any monitoring that the WEB source uses under this Section (including Paragraph 1, the WEB 

source (and, as applicable, the Account Representative) shall implement, certify, and use such monitoring in 

accordance with this Section, and shall record and report the data from such monitoring as required in this Section. 

In addition, the WEB source (and, as applicable, the Account Representative) shall not: 

20.2.81 NMAC 
A (1) Except for an alternative approved by the U.S. EPA Administrator for a WEB source that 

implements monitoring under Paragraph 1 of Subsection A of 20.2.8 1 .I06 NMAC, use an alternative monitoring 

system, alternative reference method or another alternative for the required monitoring method without having 

obtained prior written approval in accordance with Paragraph 5 of Subsection 0 of 20.2.81 .lo6 WC; 

(2) Operate an SO2 emitting unit so as to discharge, or allow to be discharged, SO2 emissions to the 

atmosphere without accounting for these emissions in accordance with the applicable provisions of this Section; 

(3) Disrupt the approved monitoring method or any portion thereof, and thereby avoid monitoring 

and recording SOz mass emissions discharged into the atmosphere, except for periods of recertification or periods 

when calibration, quality assurance testing or maintenance is performed in accordance with the applicable provisions 

of this Section; or 

(4) Retire or permanently discontinue use of an approved monitoring method, except under one of the 

following circumstances: 

(a) During a period when the unit is exempt fiom the requirements of this Section, including 

retirement of a unit as addressed in Paragraph 3 of Subsection A of 20.2.8 1 .lo6 WC; 

@) The WEB source is monitoring emissions fiom the unit with another certified monitoring 

method approved under this Section for use at the unit that provides data for the same parameter as the retired or 

discontinued monitoring method; or 

ti, (c) The Account Representative submits notification of the bate of certification testing of a 

replackment monitoring system in accordance with this Section, and the WEB source recertifies thereafter a 

replacement monitoring system in accordance with the applicable provisions of this Section. 

D. Monitoring Plan General Provisions:. The, WEB source of an SO2 emitting unit that uses a 

monitoring method under Paragraph 2 of Subsection A 0f20.2.8 1 .lo6 NMAC shall meet the following 

requirements: 

(1) Prepare and submit to the Department an initial monitoring plan for each monitoring method that 

the WEB source uses to comply with this Section. In accordance with Subsection F of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC, the plan 

shall contain sufficient information on the units involved, the applicable method, and the use of data derived fiom 

that method to demonstrate that all unit SO2 emissions are monitored and reported. The plan shall be submitted in 

accordance with the compliance deadlines specified in Subsection M of 20.2.81 .I06 NMAC. 

(2) Prepare, maintain and submit to the Department a detailed monitoring plan prior to the first day of 

certification testing in accordance with the compliance deadline specified in Subsection M of 20.2.81 .lo6 NMAC 

The plan shall contain the applicable information required by Subsection D of 20.2.81.106 NMAC. The Department 

may require that the monitoring plan (or portions thereof) be submitted electronically. The Department also may 

require that the plan be submitted on an ongoing basis in electronic format as part of the quarterly report submitted 

under Paragraph 1 of Subsection 0 of 20.2.81.1 06 NMAC or resubmitted separately within after any change is made 

to the plan in accordance with the following Paragraph 3 of Subsection D of 20.2.81 .lo6 NMAC. 

(3) Whenever the WEB source makes a replacement, modification, or change in one of the systems or 

methodologies provided for in Paragraph 2 of Subsection A of 20.2.81 .lo6 NMAC, including a change in the 

automated data acquisition and handling system or in the flue gas handling system, that affects information reported 

in the monitoring plan (e.g., a change to serial number for a component of a monitoring system), then the WEB 

source shall update the monitoring plan in accordance with the compliance deadline specified in Subsection M of 

20.208 1.106 NMAC. 

E. A WEB source with an SO2 emitting unit that uses a method under Paragraph 1 of Subsection A of 

20.2.81.106 NMAC (a unit subject to 40 CFR Part 75 under a program other than this WEB Trading Program) shall 

meet the requirements of Subsections D-I of 20.2.8 1.1 06 NMAC by preparing, maintaining and submitting a 

monitoring plan in accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR Part 75, provided that the WEB source also shall 

submit the entire monitoring plan to the Department upon request. 

F. Initial Monitoring Plan: The Account Representative shall submit an initial monitoring plan for 

each SO2 emitting unit (or group of units sharing a common methodology) that, except as otherwise specified in an 

applicable provision in 20.2.8 1.1 1 1 NMAC , contains the following information: 

(1) For all SO2 emitting units involved in the monitoring plan: 

(a) Plant name and location; 

@) Plant and unit identification numbers assigned by the Department; 

(c) Type of unit (or units for a group of units using a common monitoring methodology); 

(d) Identification of all stacks or pipes associated with the monitoring plan; 

20.2.81 NMAC 
(e) Types of fuel(s) fired (or sulfur containing process materials used in the SO2 emitting unit), 

and the he1 classification of the unit if combusting more than one type of fuel and using a 40 CFR Part 75 

methodology; 

(f) Type(s) of emissions controls for SO2 installed or to be installed, including specifications of 

whether such controls are pre-combustion, post-combustion, or integral to the combustion process; 

(g) Maximum hourly heat input capacity, or process throughput capacity, if applicable; 

(h) Identification of all units using a common stack; and 

(i) Indicator of whether any stack identified in the plan is a bypass stack. 

(2) For each unit and parameter required to be monitored, identification of monitoring methodology 

information, consisting of monitoring methodology, monitor locations, substitute data approach for the 

methodology, and general identification of quality assurance procedures. If the proposed methodology is a sitespecific methodology submitted pursuant to Subparagraph d of Paragraph 2 of Subsection A of 20.2.8 1 .lo6 NMAC, 

the description under this paragraph shall describe fully all aspects of the monitoring equipment, installation 

locations, operating characteristics, certification testing, ongoing quality assurance and maintenance procedures, and 

substitute data procedures. 

(3) If the WEB source intends to petition for a change to any specific monitoring requirement 

otherwise required under this Section, such petition may be submitted as part of the initial monitoring plan. II (4) The Department may issue a notice of approval or disapprovql of the initial monitoring plan based 

on de compliance of the proposed methodology with the requirements for monitoring in this Section. 

G. Detailed Monitoring Plan: The Account Representative shall submit a detailed monitoring plan 

that, except as otherwise specified in an applicable provisions in 20.2.8 1.1 11 NMAC or 20.2.81.1 12 NMAC, shall 

contain the following information: 

(1) Identification and description of each monitoring component (including each monitor and its 

identifiable components, such as analyzer or probe) in a CEMS (e.g., SO2 pollutant concentration monitor, flow 

monitor, moisture monitor), a 40 CFR Part 75, Appendix D monitoring system (e.g., fuel flowmeter, data acquisition 

and handling system), or a protocol in 20.2.81.1 11 NMAC or 20.2.81 .I 12 NMAC , including: 

(a) Manufacturer, model number and serial number; 

(b) Component or system identification code assigned by the facility to each identifiable 

monitoring component, such as the analyzer or probe; 

(c) Designation of the component type and method of sample acquisition or operation (e.g., in 

situ pollutant concentration monitor or thermal flow monitor); 

(d) Designation of the system as a primary or backup system; 

(e) First and last dates the system reported data; 

(f) Status of the monitoring component; and 

(g) Parameter monitored. 

(2) Identification and description of all major hardware and software components of the automated 

data acquisition and handling system, including: 

(a) Hardware components that perfonn emission calculations or store data for quarterly 

reporting purposes (provide the manufacturer and model number); and 

(b) Software components (provide the identification of the provider and model or version 

number). 

(3) Explicit formulas for each measured emissions parameter, using component or system 

identification codes for the monitoring system used to measure the parameter that links the system observations with 

the reported concentrations and mass emissions. The formulas shall contain all constants and factors required to 

derive mass emissions fiom component or system code observations and an indication of whether the formula is 

being added, corrected, deleted, or is unchanged. The WEB source with a low mass emissions unit for which the 

WEB source is using the optional low mass emissions accepted methodology in section 75.1 9(c) of 40 CFR Part 75 

is not required to report such formulas. 

(4) Inside cross-sectional area (square feet) at flow monitoring location (for units with flow monitors, 

only). 

(5) If using CEMS for SO2 and flow, for each parameter monitored: scale, maximum potential 

concentration (and method of calculation), maximum expected concentration (if applicable) (and method of 

calculation), maximum potential flow rate (and method of calculations), span value, full-scale range, daily 

calibration units of measure, span effective date and hour, span inactivation date and hour, indication of whether 

dual spans are required, default high range value, flow rate span, and flow rate span value and full scale value in 

standard cubic feet per hour (scfh) for each unit or stack using SO2 or flow component monitors. 

20.2.81 NMAC 
(6) If the monitoring system or accepted methodology provides for use of a constant, assumed, or 

default value for a parameter under specific circumstances, then the following information for each value of such 

parameter shall be included: 

(a) Identification of the parameter; 

(b) Default, maximum, minimum, or constant value, and units of measure for the value; 

(c) Purpose of the value; 

(d) Indicator of use during controlled and uncontrolled hours; 

(e) Types of fbel; 

(f) Source of the value; 

(g) Value effective date and hour; 

(h) Date and hour value is no longer effective (if applicable); and 

(i) For units using the accepted methodology under section 75.19 of 40 CFR Part 75, the 

applicable SO2 emission factor. 

(7) Unless otherwise specified in section 6.5.2.1 of Appendix A to 40 CFR Part 75, for each unit or 

common stack on which hardware CEMS are installed: 

(a) The upper and lower boundaries of the range of operation (as defined in section 6.5.2.1 of 

Appendix A to 40 CFR Part 75), or thousand of lbh of steam, or Wsec (as applicable); 

(b) The load or operating level(s) designated as normal in section 6.5.2.1 of Appendix A to 40 

CFR Part 75, or thousands of pounds per hour lbh of steam, or feet per second Wsec (as applicable); 

(c) The two load or operating levels (i.e., low, mid, or high) identified in section 6.5.2.1 of 

Appendix A to 40 CFR Part 75 as the most frequently used; 

(d) The date of the data analysis used to determine the normal load (or operating) level(s) and 

the two most frequently-used load (or operating) levels; and 

(e) Activation and deactivation dates when the normal load or operating level(s) change and are 

updated. 

(8) For each unit that is complying with 40 CFR Part 75 for which the optional he1 flow-to-load test 

in section 2.1.7 of appendix D to 40 CFR Part 75 is used: 

(a) The upper and lower boundaries of the range of operation (as defined in section 6.5.2.1 of 

Appendix A to 40 CFR Part 75), expressed in thousand of lbh of steam; 

(b) The load level designated as normal, pursuant to section 6.5.2.1 of Appendix A to 40 CFR 

Part 75, expressed in thousands of lbh of steam; and 

(c) The date of the load analysis used to determine the normal load level. 

(9) Information related to quality assurance testing, including (as applicable): identification of the 

test strategy; protocol for the relative accuracy test audit; other relevant test information; calibration gas levels 

(percent of span) for the calibration error test and linearity check; calculations for determining maximum potential , 

concentration, maximum expected concentration (if applicable), maximum potential flow rate, and span; 

(10) If applicable, apportionment strategies under sections 75.10 through 75.1 8 of 40 CFR Part 75. 

(11) Description of site locations for each monitoring component in a monitoring system, including 

schematic diagrams and engineering drawings and any other documentation that demonstrates each monitor location 

meets the appropriate siting criteria. For units monitored by a continuous emission monitoring system, diagrams 

shall include: 

(a) A schematic diagram identifying entire gas handling system from unit to stack for all units, 

using identification numbers for units, monitor components, and stacks corresponding to the identification numbers 

provided in the initial monitoring plan and Paragraphs 1 and 3 of Subsection G of 20.2.81 .lo6 NMAC. The 

schematic diagram must depict the height of any monitor locations. Comprehensive or separate schematic diagrams 

shall be used to describe groups of units using a common stack. 

(b) Stack and duct engineering diagrams showing the dimensions and locations of fans, turning 

vanes, air preheaters, monitor components, probes, reference method sampling ports, and other equipment that 

affects the monitoring system location, performance, or quality control checks. 

(12) A data flow diagram denoting the complete information handling path from output signals of 

CEMS components to final reports. 

H. In addition to supplying the information in Subsections F and G above, the WEB source with an 

SO2 emitting unit using either of the methodologies in Subparagraph b of Paragraph 2 of Subsection A of 

- 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC shall include the following information in its monitoring plan for the specific situations 

described: 

20.2.81 NMAC 
(l) For each gas-fired or oil-fired SO2 emitting unit for which the WEB source uses the optional 

protocol in appendix D to 40 CFR Part 75 for SOz mass emissions, the WEB source shall include the following 

information in the monitoring plan: 

(a) Parameter monitored; 

(b) Type of fuel measured, maximum fuel flow rate, units of measure, and basis of maximum 

fuel flow rate (i.e., upper range value or unit maximum) for each fuel flowrneter; 

(c) Test method used to check the accuracy of each fuel flowmeter; 

(d) Submission status of the data; 

(e) Monitoring system identification code; 

(f) The method used to demonstrate that the unit qualifies for monthly gross calorific value 

(GCV) sampling or for daily or annual fuel sampling for sulfur content, as applicable; 

(g) A schematic diagram identifying the relationship between the unit, all fuel supply lines, the 

fuel flowmeter(s), and the stack(s). The schematic diagram must depict the installation location of each fuel 

flowmeter and the fuel sampling location(s). Comprehensive and separate schematic diagrams shall be used to 

describe groups of units using a common pipe; 

(h) For units using the optional default SO2 emission rate fq "pipeline natural gas" or "natural 

gas" in1 appendix D to 40 CFR Part 75, the information on the sulfur content of th gaseous fuel used to demonstrate 

comfili6nce with either section 2.3.1.4 or 2.3.2.4 of appendix D to 40 CFR Part ?g; , ' 

(i) For units using the 720 hour test under section 2.3.6 of appendix D to 40 CFR Part 75 to 

determine the required sulfur sampling requirements, report the procedures and results of the test; and 

(j) For units using the 720 hour test under, section 2.3,5 of appendix D to 40 CFR Part 75 to 

determine the appropriate fuel GCV sampling frequency, report the procedures used and the results of the test. 

(2) For each SO2 emitting unit for which the WEB source uses the low mass emission accepted 

methodology of section 75.19 to 40 CFR Part 75, the WEB source shall include the following information in the 

monitoring plan that accompanies the initial certification application: 

(a) The results of the analysis performed to qualify as a low mass emissions unit under section 

75.19(c) to 40 CFR Part 75. This report shall include either the previous three years actual or projected emissions. 

The following items shall be included: a) current calendar year of application; b) type of qualification; c) years one, 

two, and three; d) annual measured, estimated or projected SOz mass emissions for years one, two, and three; and e). 

annual operating hours for years one, two, and three. 

(b) A schematic diagram identifyrng the relationship between the unit, all fuel supply lines and 

tanks, any fuel flowmeter(s), and the stack(s). Comprehensive or separate schematic diagrams shall be used to 

describe groups of units using a common pipe; 

(c) For units which use the long term fuel flow methodology under section 75.19(~)(3) to 40 

CFR Part 75, a diagram of the fuel flow to each unit or group of units and a detailed description of the procedures 

used to determine the long term fuel flow for a unit or group of units for each fuel combusted by the unit or group of 

units; 

(d) A statement that the unit burns only gaseous fuel@) andor fuel oil and a list of the fuels 

that are burned or a statement that the unit is projected to burn only gaseous fuel(s) andor fuel oil and a list of the 

fuels that are projected to be burned; 

(e) A statement that the unit meets the applicability requirements in sections 75.19(a) and (b) to 

40 CFR Part 75 with respect to SO2 emissions; and 

(f) Any unit historical actual, estimated and projected SO2 emissions data and calculated SO2 

emissions data demonstrating that the unit qualifies as a low mass emissions unit under sections 75.19(a) and (b) to 

40 CFR Part 75. 

(3) For each gas-fired unit the WEB source shall include the following in the monitoring plan: 

current calendar year, fuel usage data as specified in the definition of gas-fired in section 72.2 of 40 CFR Part 72, 

and an indication of whether the data are actual or projected data. 

I. The specific elements of a monitoring plan under Subsection D of 20.2.8 1 .I06 NMAC shall not 

be part of an operating permit for a WEB source issued in accordance with the Title V of the Clean Air Act, and 

modifications to the elements of the plan shall not require a permit modification. 

J. Certification and Recertification: 

(1) All monitoring systems are subject to initial certification and recertification testing as specified in 

40 

system 

CFR 

by 

Part 

the 

75,20.2.81.111 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

NMAC or ; 20.2.81.1 12 

for 

NMAC. Certification or recertification of a monitoring 

a WEB source that is subject to 40 CFR Part 75 under a - 

requirement separate from 20.2.81 NMAC shall constitute certification under the WEB Trading Propam. 

20.2.81 NMAC 14 
- (2) The WEB source with an SO2 emitting unit not otherwise subject to 40 CFR Part 75 that monitors 

SO2 mass emissions in accordance with 40 CFR Part 75 to satisfy the requirements of this Section shall perform all 

of the tests required by that regulation and shall submit the following: 

(a) A test notice, not later than 21 days before the certification testing of the monitoring 

system, provided that the Department may establish additional requirements for adjusting test dates after this notice 

as part of the approval of the initial monitoring plan under Subsection F of 20.2.81.106 NMAC; and . 

(b) An initial certification application within 45 days after testing is complete. 

(c) A monitoring system shall be considered provisionally certified while the application is 

pending, and the system shall be deemed certified if the Department does not approve or disapprove the system 

within six months after the date on which the application is submitted. 

(d) Whenever an audit of any monitoring certified under 20.2.81 NMAC, and a review of the , 

initial certification or recertification application, reveal that any system or component should not have been certified 

or recertified because it did not meet a particular performance specification or other requirement of 20.2.81 NMAC, 

both at the time of the initial certification or recertification application submission and at the time of the audit, the 

Department will issue a notice of disapproval of the certification status of such system or component. For the 

purposes of this paragiaph, an audit shall be either a field audit of the facility or an audit of any information 

submjtted to the Department regarding the facility. By issuing the notice of disapproval, the certification status is 

revoked prospectively, and the data measured and recorded shall not be considel\ed valid quality-assured data !?om 

the date of issuance of the notification of the revoked certification status until the date and time that the WEB source 

completes subsequently approved initial certification or recertification tests in accordance with the procedures in 

Subsection J of 20.2.81 .I06 NMAC. The WEB source shall apply the substitute data procedures in Paragraph 2 of 

Subsection L of 20.2.81 .I06 NMAC to replace, prospectively, all of the &valid, non-quality-assured data for each 

disapproved system or component. 

K. Ongoing Quality Assurance and Quality Control: The WEB source shall satisfy the applicable 

quality assurance and quality control requirements of Part 75 or, if the WEB source is subject to a WEB protocol in 

20.2.8 1.1 1 1 NMAC , the applicable quality assurance and quality control requirements in 20.2.8 1.1 1 1 MAC on 

and after the date that certification testing commences. 

L. Substitute Data Procedures: 

(1) For any period after certification testing is complete in which quality assured, valid data are not 

being recorded by a monitoring system certified and operating in accordance with 20.2.81 NMAC, missing or 

invalid data shall be replaced with substitute data in accordance with 40 CFR Part 75 or, if the WEB source is 

subject to a WEB protocol in 20.2.81.1 1 1 NMAC or 20.2.81.1 12 MAC , with substitute data in accordance with 

20.2.81.1 11 MAC. 

(2) For an SO2 emitting unit that does not have a certified or provisionally certified monitoring 

system in place as of the beginning of the first control period for which the unit is subject to the WEB Trading 

Program, the WEB source shall: 

(a) If the WEB Source will use a CEMS to comply with this Section, substitute the maximum 

potential concentration of SO2 for the unit and the maximum potential flow rate, as determined in accordance with 

40 CFR Part 75. The procedures for conditional data validation under section 75.20(b)(3) may be used for any 

monitoring system under 20.2.81 NMAC that uses these 40 CFR Part 75 procedures, as applicable; 

@) If the WEB source will use the 40 CFR Part 75 Appendix D methodology, substitute the 

maximum potential sulfur content, density or gross calorific value for the fuel and the maximum potential fuel flow 

rate, in accordance with section 2.4 of Appendix D to 40 CFR Part 75; 

(c) If the WEB source will use the 40 CFR Part 75 methodology for low mass emissions units, 

substitute the SO2 emission factor required for the unit as specified in 40 CFR 75.1 9 and the maximum rated hourly 

heat input, as defined in 40 CFR 72.2; or 

(d) If using a protocol in 20.2.81.1 11 NMAC or 20.2.81.1 12 NMAC , follow the procedures in 

the applicable protocol. 

M. Compliance Deadline: 

(1) The initial monitoring plan shall be submitted by the following dates: 

(a) For each source that is a WEB source on or before the Program Trigger Date, the 

monitoring plan shall be submitted 180 days after such Program Trigger Date. 

20.2.81 NMAC 
(b) For any existing source that becomes a WEB source after the Program Trigger Date, the 

monitoring plan shall be submitted by September 30 of the year following the inventory year in which the source 

exceeded the emissions threshold. 

(c) For any new WEB source, the monitoring plan shall be included with the permit application 

under 20.2.70 NMAC, 20.2.72 NMAC, 20.2.74 NMAC or 20.2.79 NMAC. 

(2) A detailed monitoring plan under Subsection E of 20.2.81.106 MAC shall be submitted no 

later than 45 days prior to commencing certification with the following Paragraph 3. 

(3) Emission monitoring systems shall be installed, operational and shall have met all of the 

certification testing requirements of this 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC (including any referenced in 20.2.8 1.11 1 NMAC or 

20.2.81.1 12 NMAC) by the following dates: 

(a) For each source that is a WEB source on or before the Program Trigger Date, two years 

prior to the start of the first control period as described in 20.2.81.109 NMAC. 

(b) For any existing source that becomes a WEB source after the Program Trigger Date, one 

year after the due date for the monitoring plan under Subparagraph b of Paragraph 2 of Subsection M of 20.2.81.106 

NMAC. 

(c) For any new WEB source, (or any new unit at a WEB soyce under Paragraph 3 

Subpaqgraph a or b, the earlier of 90 unit operating days or 180 calendar days after the date the new source 

commences operation. \ 

(4) The WEB source shall submit test notices and certification applications in accordance with the 

deadlines set forth in Paragraph 2 of Subsection J of 20.2.81.106 NMAC 

(5) For each applicable control period, the WEB source shall submit each quarterly report under 

Subsection 0 of 20.2.81.106 hWC by no later than 30 days ahtr the end of each calendar quarter and shall submit 

the annual report under Subsection 0 of 20.2.8 1 .I06 NMAC no later than 60 days after the end of each calendar 

year. 

N. Recordkeeping: 

(1) Except as provided in Paragraph 2 of Subsection N of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC, the WEB source shall 

keep copies of all reports, registration materials, compliance certifications, sulfur dioxide emissions data, quality 

assurance data, and other submissions under 20.2.8 1 NMAC for a period of five years. In addition, the WEB source 

shall keep a copy of all Account Certificates of Representation. Unless otherwise requested by the WEB source and 

approved by the Department, the copies shall be kept on site at the source. 

(2) The WEB source shall keep records of all operating hours, quality assurance activities, fuel 

sampling measurements, hourly averages for SOz, stack flow, fuel flow, or other continuous measurements, as 

applicable, and any other applicable data elements specified in this Section, 20.2.81 .I 11 NMAC or in 20.2.81.1 12 

NMAC . The WEB source shall maintain the applicable records specified in 40 CFR Part 75 for any SO2 emitting 

unit that uses a Part 75 monitoring method to meet the requirements of this Section. 

0. Reporting: 

(1) Quarterly Reports. For each SOz emitting unit, the Account Representative shall submit a 

quarterly report within thirty days after the end of each calendar quarter. The report shall be in a fonnat specified by 

the Department to include hourly and quality assurance activity information and shall be submitted in a manner 

compatible with the emissions tracking database designed for the WEB Trading Program. If the WEB source 

submits a quarterly report under 40 CFR Part 75 to the U.S. EPA Administrator, no additional report under this 

paragraph shall be required, provided, however, that the Department may require that a copy of that report (or a 

separate statement of quarterly and cumulative annual SO2 mass emissions) be submitted separately to the 

Department. 

(2) Annual Report: Based on the quarterly reports, each WEB source shall submit an annual 

statement of total annual SOz emissions for all SOz emitting units at the source. The annual report shall identify the 

total emissions for all units monitored in accordance with Subsection A of 20.2.81 .I06 NMAC and the total 

emissions for all units with emissions estimated in accordance with Subsection B of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC. The 

annual report shall be submitted within 60 days after the end of a control period. 

(3) If the Department so directs that any monitoring plan, report, certification, recertification, or 

emissions data required to be submitted under this Section be submitted to the Tracking System Administrator. 

(4) The Department may review and reject any report submitted under this Subsection 0 of 

20.2.8 1.106 NMAC that contains errors or fails to satisfy the requirements of this Section, and the Account 

Representative shall resubmit the report to correct any deficiencies. 

(5) A WEB source may petition for an alternative to any requirement specified in Paragraph 2 of 

Subsection A of 20.2.81 .I06 NMAC. The petition shall require approval of the Department and the U.S. EPA 

20.2.81 NMAC 16 
- Administrator. Any petition submitted under this paragraph shall include sufficient information for the evaluation of 

the petition, including, at a minimum, the following information: 

(a) Identification of the WEB source and applicable SO2 emitting unit(s); 

(b) A detailed explanation of why the proposed alternative is being suggested in lieu of the 

requirement; 

(c) A description and diagram of any equipment and procedures used in the proposed 

alternative, if applicable; 

(d) A demonstration that the proposed alternative is consistent with the purposes of the 

requirement for which the alternative is proposed and is consistent with the purposes of 20.2.8 1 NMAC and that any 

adverse effect of approving such alternative will be de minimis; and 

(e) Any other relevant information that the Department may require. 

(6) For any monitoring plans, reports, or other information submitted under 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC, the 

WEB source shall ensure that, where applicable, identifying information is consistent with the identifying 

information provided in the most recent certificate of representation for the WEB source submitted under 

20.2.81.102 NMAC. 

[12/3 1/03] 

II : 

20.2.8T.107 ALLOWANCE TRANSFERS \ 

A. Procedure: To transfer allowances, the Account Representative shall submit the following 

information to the Tracking System Administrator: 

(1) The transfer account number(s) identifying the transferor account; 

(2) The transfer account number(s) identifying tde transferee account; 

(3) The serial number of each allowance to be transferred; and 

(4) The transferor's Account Representative's name and signature and date of submission. 

B. Deadline: The allowance transfer deadline is midnight Pacific Standard Time March 1 of each 

year (or if this date is not a business day, midnight of the first business day thereafter) following the end of the 

control period. By this time, the transfer of the allowances into the WEB source's compliance account must be 

- correctly submitted to the Tracking System Administrator in order to demonstrate compliance under Subsection A of 

20.2.8 1 .I09 NMAC for that control period. 

C. Retirement of Allowances: To transfer allowances for the purpose of retirement, the Account 

Representative shall submit the following information to the Tracking System Administrator: 

(1) The transfer account number(s) identifying the transferor account; 

(2) The serial number of each allowance to be retired; and 

(3) The transferor's Account Representative's name and signature and date of submission 

accompanied by a signed statement acknowledging that each retired allowance as no longer available for future 

transfers fiom or to any account. 

[12/3 1/03] 

20.2.81.108 USE OF ALLOWANCES FROM A PREVIOUS YEAR 

A. Any allowance that is held in a compliance account or general account shall remain in such an 

account unless and until the allowance is deducted in conjunction with the compliance process, or transferred to 

another account. 

B. In order to demonstrate compliance under Subsection A of 20.2.8 1.109 NMAC for a control 

period, WEB sources shall only use allowances allocated for that current control period or any previous year. 

Because all allowances held in a special reserve compliance account for a WEB source that monitors certain units in 

accordance with Subsection B of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC will be deducted for compliance for each control period, no 

banking of such allowances for use in a subsequent year is permitted by 20.2.8 1 NMAC. 

C. If flow control procedures for the current control period have been triggered as outlined in Section 

C4.2 of the SO2 Milestones and Backstop Trading Program Implementation Plan, then the use of allowances that 

were allocated for any previous year shall be limited as follows: 

(1) The number of allowances that are held in each compliance account and general account as of the 

allowance transfer deadline for the immediately previous year and that were allocated for any previous year shall be 

determined. 

(2) The number determined in Paragraph 1 shall be multiplied by the flow control ratio established in -" accordance with Section C4.2 of the SO2 Milestones and Backstop Trading Program Implementation Plan to 

20.2.8 1 NMAC 
determine the number of allowances that were allocated for a previous year that can be used without restriction for 

the current control period. 

(3) Allowances that were allocated for a previous year in excess of the number determined in (2) may 

also be used for the current control period. If such allowances.are used to make a deduction, two allowances shall be 

deducted for each deduction of one allowance required under 20.2.81.109 NMAC. 

D. Special provisions for the year 2018. After compliance with the 2017 allowance limitation has 

been determined in accordance with Subsection A of 20.2.81.109 NMAC, allowances allocated for any year prior to 

20 18 shall not be used for determining compliance with the 20 18 allowance limitation or any future allowance 

limitation. 

[12/31/03] 

20.2.81.109 COMPLIANCE 

A. Compliance with Allowance Limitations: 

(1) The WEB source shall hold allowances, in accordance with Paragraph 2 of Subsection A of 

20.2.8 1.109 NMAC and 20.2.8 1.108 NMAC, as of the allowance transfer deadline in the WEB sourcd's compliance 

account (together with my current control year allowances held for the WEB source by the Department under 

Subsection B of 20.2.81 .I06 NMAC in an amount not less than the total SO2 emissions for the control period fiom 

the WEB source, as determined under the monitoring and reporting requirements of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC. 

(a) For each source that is a WEB source on or before the Program Trigger Date, the first 

control period is the calendar year that is six years following the calendar year for which SO2 emissions exceeded 

the milestone in accordance with procedures in Section A of the SO2 Milestones and Backstop Trading Program 

Implementation Plan. 

@) For any existing source that becomes a WEB source after the Program Trigger Date, the 

first control period is the calendar year that is four years following the inventory year in which the source exceeded 

the SOz emissions threshold. 

(c) For any new WEB source after the Program Trigger Date the first control period is the fust 

full calendar year that the source is in operation. 

(d) If the WEB Trading Program is triggered in accordance with the 2013 review procedures in ~IL 

section A4 of the SO2 Milestones and Backstop Trading Program implementation plan, the first control period for 

each source that is a WEB source on or before the Program Trigger Date is the year 2018. 

(2) Allowance transfer deadline: An allowance may only be deducted fiom the WEB source's 

compliance account if 

(a) the allowance was allocated for the current control period or meets the requirements in 

20.2.81.108 NMAC for use of allowances fiom a previous control period, and 

@) the allowance was held in the WEB source's compliance account as of the allowance 

transfer deadline for the current control period, or was transferred into the compliance account by an allowance 

transfer correctly submitted for recording by the allowance transfer deadline for the current control period. 

(3) Compliance with allowance limitations shall be determined as follows: 

(a) the total annual SO2 emissions for all SO2 emitting units at the source that are monitored 

under Subsection B of 20.2.8 I .I06 NMAC, as reported by the source in Paragraph 2 or 4 of Subsection 0 of 

20.2.81.106 NMAC, and recorded in the emissions tracking database shall be compared to the allowances held in the 

source's special reserve compliance account as of the allowance transfer deadline for the current control period, 

adjusted in accordance with 20.2.8 1.108 NMAC. If the emissions are equal to or less than the allowances in such 

account, all such allowances shall be retired to satisfy the obligation to hold allowances for such emissions. If the 

total emissions fiom such units exceeds the allowances in such special reserve account, the WEB source shall 

account for such excess emissions in the following Subparagraph b. 

(b) the total annual SO2 emissions for all SO2 emitting units at the source that are monitored 

under Subsection A of 20.2.81.106 NMAC, as reported by the source in Paragraph 2 or 4 of Subsection 0 of 

20.2.81.106 NMAC, and recorded in the emissions tracking database, together with any excess emissions as 

calculated in the preceding Subparagraph a, shall be compared to the allowances held in the source's compliance 

account as of the allowance transfer deadline for the current control period, adjusted in accordance with 20.2.8 1.108 

NMAC. 

(4) Other than allowances in a special reserve compliance account for units monitored under 

Subsection B of 20.2.81.106 NMAC, to the extent consistent with 20.2.81.108 NMAC, allowances shall be deducted 

for a WEB source for compliance with the allowance limitation as directed by the WEB source's Account - 

Representative. Deduction of any other allowances as necessary for compliance with the allowance limitation shall 

20.2.81 NMAC 18 
- be on a first-in, first-out accounting basis in the order of the date and time of their recording in the WEB source's 

compliance account, beginning with the allowances allocated to the WEB source and continuing with the allowances 

transferred to the WEB source's compliance account from another compliance account or general account. The 

allowances held in a special reserve compliance account pursuant to Subsection B of 20.2.81 .lo6 NMAC shall be 

deducted as specified in Subparagraph a of Paragraph 3 of Subsection A of 20.2.81.109 NMAC. 

B. Certification of Compliance: 

(1) For each control period in which a WEB source is subject to the allowance limitation, the 

Account Representative of the source shall submit to the Department a Compliance Certification report for 'the 

source. 

(2) The Compliance Certification report shall be submitted no later than the allowance transfer 

deadlihe of each control period, and shall contain the following: 

(a) Identification of each WEB source; 

@) At the Account Representative's option, the serial numbers of the allowances that are to be 

deducted from a source's compliance account for compliance with the allowance limitation; and 

(c) The Compliance Certification report according to Paragraph 3 of this section. 

(3) In the Compliance Certification report, the Account Representative shall certify, based on 

reasonable inquiry of those persons with primary responsibility for operating the WEB source ip compliance with 

the WEB Trading Program, whether the WEB source for which the compliance Lertification is submitted was 

operated during the control period covered by the report in compliance with the requirements of the WEB Trading 

Program applicable to the source including: 

(a) Whether the WEB source operated in compliance with the SOz allowance limitation; 

@) Whether SOz emissions data has been submitted to the Department in accordance with 

Subsection A of 20.2.8 1.106 NMAC and other applicable guidance, for review, revision as necessary, and 

finalization for forwarding to the SOz Allowance Tracking System for recording; 

(c) Whether the monitoring plan that governs the WEB source has been maintained to reflect 

the actual operation and monitoring of the source, and contains all information necessary to attribute SOz emissions 

to the source, in accordance with Subsection A of 20.2.81 .lo6 NMAC; - (d) Whether all the SOz emissions from the WEB source if applicable, were monitored or 

accounted for either through the applicable monitoring or through application of the appropriate missing data 

procedures; 

(e) If applicable, whether any SOz emitting unit for which the WEB source is not required to 

monitor in accordance with Paragraph 3 of Subsection A of 20.2.81.106 NMAC remained permanently retired and 

had no emissions for the entire applicable period; and 

(f) Whether there were any changes in the method of operating or monitoring the WEB source 

that required monitor recertification. If there were any such changes, the report shall specify the nature, reason, and 

date of the change, the method to determine compliance status subsequent to the change, and specifically, the 

method to detennine SOz emissions. 

'C. Penalties for any WEB source exceeding its allowance limitations: 

(1) Allowance deduction penalties 

(a) If emissions from a WEB source exceed the allowance limitation for a control period, as 

determined in accordance with Subsection A of 20.2.8 1 .lo9 NMAC , the source's allowance held in its compliance 

account will be reduced by an amount equal to two times the source's tons of excess emissions. If the compliance 

account does not have sufficient allowances allocated for that control period, the required number of allowances 

shall be deducted from the WEB source's compliance account regardless of the control period for which they were 

allocated, once allowances are recorded in the account. 

@) Any allowance deduction required under this Section shall not affect the liability of the 

owners and operators of the WEB source for any fine, penalty or assessment or their obligation to comply with any 

other remedy, for the same violation, as ordered under the Clean Air Act, implementing regulations or applicable 

state or tribal law. Accordingly, a violation can be assessed each day of the control period for each ton of SOz 

emissions in excess of its allowance limitation if the Department so chooses. 

(2) Financial penalties: A financial penalty of $5,000 per ton of SOz emissions in excess of the WEB 

source's allowance limitation shall be levied. Each ton represents a separate violation. 

D. Liability: 

+- (1) WEB Source liability for non-compliance: Separate and regardless of any automatic penalties 

assessed for allowance deduction penalty and financial penalty, a WEB source that violates any requirement of 

20.2.81 NMAC is subject to civil and criminal penalties under the Air Quality Control Act and the Clean Air Act. 

20.2.81 NMAC 
Each day of the control period is a separate violation, and each ton of SO2 emissions in excess of a source's 

allowance limitation is a separate violation. 

(2) General liability 

(a) Any provision of the WEB Trading Program that applies to a source or an Account 

Representative shall apply also to the owners and operators of such source. 

@) Any person who violates any requirement or prohibition of the WEB Trading Program shall 

be subject to enforcement pursuant to applicable state, tribal or federal law. 

(c) Any person who knowingly makes a false material statement in any record, submission, or 

report under this WEB Trading Program shall be subject to criminal enforcement pursuant to the applicable state, 

tribal or federal law. 

[I213 1/03] 

20.2.81.110 SPECIAL PENALTY PROVISIONS FOR YEAR 2018 

A. If the WEB Trading Program is triggered as outlined in Section A of the S02Milestones and 

Backstop Trading Program Implementation Plan, and the first control period will not occur until after the year 201 8, 

the following provisions shall apply for the 20 18 emissions year. 

(1) All WEB sources shall register, and open a compliance account within 180 days after the Program 

~ri~~e?'Date, in accordance with Subsection A of 20.2.8 1.103 NMAC and 20.2.8 1.1 05 NMAC. ,I I ( 

(2) The Tracking System Administrator shall record the allowances for the 201 8 control period for 

each WEB source in the source's compliance account once the Department allocates the 2018 allowances under 

Section C1 and Dl of the SO2 Milestones and Backstop Trading Program Implementation Plan. 

(3) The allowance transfer deadline is midnight P cific Standard Time on May 30,2021. WEB 

sources may transfer allowances as provided in Subsection A of 0.2.81 .I07 NMAC until the allowance transfer 

deadline. 

1 

(4) A WEB source shall hold allowances allocated for 201 8 including those transferred into the 

compliance account by an allowance transfer correctly submitted by the allowance transfer deadline, in an amount 

not less than the WEB source's total SO2 emissions for 2018. Emissions shall be determined using the pre-trigger 

monitoring provisions in Section B of the SO2 Milestones and Backstop Trading Program Implementation Plan, and 

20.2.73 NMAC. 

(5) An allowance deduction penalty and financial penalty shall be assessed and levied in accordance 

with Subsection D of 20.2.8.108 NMAC, Paragraph 4 of Subsection A of 20.2.81.109 NMAC and Subsection C of 

20.2.81.109 NMAC except that SO2 emissions shall be determined under Paragraph 4 of Subsection A of 

20.2.81.1 10 NMAC. 

B. The provisions in 20.2.81.1 10 NMAC shall continue to apply for each year after the 2018 

emission year until: 

(1) The first control period under the WEB trading program; or 

(2) The Department determined, in accordance with section A3.10 of the Implementation Plan, that 

the 201 8 SO2 milestone has been met. 

C. If 20.2.8 1.1 10 NMAC was implemented, the following shall apply to each emissions year after 

the 201 8 emissions year: 

(1) The Tracking System Administrator will record the allowances for the control period for the 

specific year for each WEB source in the source's compliance account once the Department allocates the allowances 

under Section C1 of the SO2 Milestones and Backstop Trading Program Implementation Plan. 

(2) The allowance transfer deadline is midnight Pacific Standard Time on March I of each year (or if 

this date is not a business day, midnight of the first business day thereafter) following the end of the specific 

emissions year. WEB sources may transfer allowances as provided in Subsection A of 20.2.81 .I07 NMAC until the 

allowance transfer deadline. 

(3) A WEB source must hold allowances allocated for that specific emissions year, or any year after 

201 8, including those transferred into the compliance account by an allowance transfer correctly submitted by the 

allowance transfer deadline, in an amount not less than the WEB source's total SO2 emissions for the specific 

emissions year. Emissions are determined using the pre-trigger monitoring provisions in Section B of the SO2 

Milestones and Backstop Trading Program Implementation Plan, and 20.2.73 NMAC. 

(4) An allowance deduction penalty and financial penalty shall be assessed and levied in accordance 

with Subsection D of 20.2.81 .I08 NMAC, Paragraph 4 of Subsection A of 20.2.81.109 NMAC, and Subsection C 

of 20.2.81.109 NMAC, except that SO2 emissions shall be determined under Paragraph 3 of Subsection C of 

20.2.81.1 10 NMAC. 

20.2.81 NMAC 
20.2.81.111 NMAC SO2 MONITORING OF FUEL GAS COMBUSTION DEVlCES 

A. Applicability 

(1) The provisions of this protocol are applicable to fuel gas combustion devices at petroleum 

refineries. 

(2) Fuel gas combustion devices include boilers, process heaters, and flares used to burn fuel gas 

generated at a petroleum refinery. 

(3) Fuel gas means any gas which is generated and combusted at a petroleum refinery. Fuel gas does 

not include: 

(a) natural gas, unless combined with other gases generated at a petroleum refinery, 

(b) gases generated by a catalytic cracking unit catalyst regenerator, 

(c) gases generated by fluid coking burners, 

(d) gases combusted to produce sulfur or sulfuric acid, or , 

I, 11 ( (e) process upset gases generated due to startup, shutdown, r malfunctions. 

, 1' $B, Monitoring Requirements \ 7 

(1) Except as provided in Paragraphs 2 and 3 of 20.2.81.1 1 1 NMAC, fuel gas combustion devices 

shall use a continuous fuel gas monitoring system (CFGMS) to determine the total sulfur content (reported as H2S) 

of the fuel gas mixture prior to combustion, and continuous fuzl flow meters to determine the amount of fuel gas 

burned. ,I 

(a) Fuel gas combustion devices having a common source of fuel gas may be monitored for 

sulfur content at one location, if monitoring at that location is representative of the sulfur content of the fuel gas 

being burned in any fuel gas combustion device. 

(b) The CFGMS shall meet the performance requirements in Performance Specification 2 in 

Appendix B to 40 CFR Part 60, and the following: - (i) Continuously monitor and record the concentration by volume of total sulfur 

compounds in the gaseous fuel @) reported as ppmv H2S. 

Have the span value set so that the majority of readings fall between 10 and 95% of 

the range. 

(iii) Record negative values of zero drift, for initial certification and daily calibration 

error tests. 

(iv) Calibration drift shall be 5.0% of the span. 

(v) Methods 15A, 16, or approved alternatives for total sulfur, are the reference methods 

for the relative accuracy test. The relative accuracy test shall include a bias test in accordance with Paragraph 3 of 

Subsection D of 20.2.81.1 11 NMAC. 

(c) All continuous fuel flow meters shall comply with the provisions of section 2.1.5 of 

Appendix D to 40 CFR Part 75. 

(d) The hourly mass SO2 emissions rate for all the fuel combustion devices monitored by this 

approach shall be calculated using the following equation: 

where: E, = Total SO2 emissions in Ib/hr fiom applicable fuel gas combustion devices 

Cs = Sulfur content of the fuel gas as H2S(ppmv) 

Qr= Fuel gas flow rate to the applicable fuel gas combustion devices (scfk) 

K = 1.660 x lo-' (lb/scf)/ppmv 

(2) In place of a CFGMS in Paragraph 1 of Subsection B of 20.2.81.1 11 NMAC, fuel gas combustion 

devices having a common source of fuel gas may be monitored with an SO2 CEMS flow CEMS and (if necessary) a 

moisture monitoring system at only one location, if the CEMS monitoring at that location is representative of the 

SO2 emission rate (Ib S02/scf fuel gas burned) of all applicable fuel gas combustion devices. Continuous fuel flow 

16- 

meters shall be used in accordance with Paragraph 2 of Subsection B of 20.2.81.1 11 NMAC, and the fuel gas 

combustion device monitored by a CEMS shall have separate fuel metering. 

20.2.81 NMAC 
(a) Each CEMS for SO2 and flow, and (if applicable) moisture, shall comply with the operating 

requirements, performance specifications, and quality assurance requirements of 40 CFR Part 75. 

(b) All continuous fuel flow meters shall comply with the provisions of section 2.1.5 of 

Appendix D to 40 CFR Part 75. 

(c) The SO2 hourly mass emissions rate for all the fuel gas combustion devices monitored by 

this approach shall be determined by the ratio of the amount of fuel gas burned by the CEMS-monitored he1 gas 

combustion device to the total fuel gas burned by all applicable fuel gas combustion deGces using the following 

equation: 

E, = (Ed(QJI(Q3 

where:, E, = Total SO2 emissions in Iblhr fiom applicable fuel gas combustion devices. 

Em = SOz emissions in lbh from the CEMS-monitored fuel gas combustion device, calculated using 

Equation F- 1 or (if applicable) F-2 in Appendix F to 40 CFR Part 75 

Q, = Fuel gas flow rate (scf7hr) fiom applicable fuel gas combustion devices. 

Q, = Fuel gas flow rate (sch) to the CEMS-monitored fuel gas combustion device. 

(3) In place of a CFGMS in Paragraph I of Subsection B of 20.2.81.1 1 l NMAC, hel gas combustion 

devices having a common source of he1 gas may be monitored with an SO2 - diluent CEMS at only one location, if 

the CEMS monitoring at that location is representative of the SO2 emission rate (lb S021mmBtu) of all applicable 

he1 gas combustion devices. If this option is selected, the owner or operator shall conduct he1 gas sampling and 

' analysis for gross calorific value (GCV), and shall use continuous he1 flow metering in accordance with Paragraph 

1 of Subsection B of 20.2.8 1.11 1 NMAC, with separate he1 metering for the CEMS-monitored fuel gas combustion 

device. 

(a) Each SO2. diluent CEMS shall comply with the applicable provisions for SO2 monitors and 

diluent monitors in 40 CFR Part 75, and shall use the procedures in section 3 of Appendix F to Part 75 for 

determining SO2 emission rate (IbIrnmBtu) by substituting the term SO2 for NO, in that section, and using a K factor 

of 1.660 x (lblscf) ppmv instead of the NO, K factor. 

(b) All continuous he1 flow meters and he1 gas sampling and analysis for GCV to determine 

the heat input ratio shall comply with the applicable provisions of section 2.1.5 and 2.3.4 of Appendix D to 40 

CFR Part 75. 

(c) The SO2 hourly mass emissions rate for all the fuel gas combustion devices monitored by 

this approach shall be determined by the ratio of the he1 gas heat input to the CEMS-monitored fuel gas combustion 

device to the total he1 gas heat input to all applicable fuel gas combustion devices using the following equation: 

Et = FJ(QJ/(GCV) 1 lo6 

where: E, = Total SO2 emissions in Ibsh fiom applicable fuel gas combustion devices. 

Em = SO2 emissions in IbImmBtu fiom the CEMS - monitored fuel gas combustion device. 

Q, = Fuel gas flow rate (scE/hr) to the applicable fuel gas combustion devices. 

GCV = Fuel Gross Calorific Value (Btu/scf) 

,lo6 = Conversion fiom Btu to million Btu 

(d) The owner or operator shall calculate total SO2 mass emissions for each calendar quarter 

and each calendar year based on the emissions in Ibh and Equations F-3 and F-4 in Appendix F to 40 CFR'Part 75, 

Appendix F. 

C. Certification and Recertification Requirements: All monitoring systems are subject to initial 

certification and recertification testing as follows: 

(1) The owner or operator shall comply with the initial testing and calibration requirements in 

Performance Specification 2 in Appendix B of 40 CFR Part 60 and Subparagraph b of Paragraph 1 of Subsection B 

of 20.2.81.1 1 l NMAC for each CFGMS. 

(2) Each CEMS for SO2 and flow or each SO2-diluent CEMS shall comply with the testing and 

calibration requirements specified in 40 CFR Part 75, section 75.20 and Appendices A and B, except that each S02- 

diluent CEMS shall meet the relative accuracy requirements for a NO,-diluent CEMS (IbImmBtu). 

(3) A continuous fuel flow meter shall comply with certification requirements in section 2.1.5 of 

Appendix D of 40 CFR Part 75. 

D. Quality AssurancelQuality Control Requirements 

(1) A quality assurance and quality control (QAIQC) plan shall be developed and implemented for 

each CEMS for SO2 and flow or the SO2-diluent CEMS in compliance with sections 1,l. 1, and 1.2 of Appendix B 

of 40 CFR Part 75. 

20.2.81 NMAC 
STATE OF NEW MEXICO NMED Exhibit 2 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENT BOARD 

PETITION FOR HEARING ON 

PROPOSED 20.2.81 WESTERN BACKSTOP 

SULFER DIOXIDE TRADING PROGRAM EIB 03-O8C 

DIRECT TESTIMONY OF MARY HILBERT 

INTRODUCTION 

I am here to propose adoption of 20.2.81 NMAC, which contains the requirements that shall 

apply to major industrial sources of sulfur dioxide as a backstop re latory program if the SO2 

milistones f" are exceeded. The rule may never be implemented if tfie goal to meet the regional 

SO2 milestones through voluntary means is achieved. If the proposed rule is implemented, it 

establishes the procedures and compliance requirements for sources in the Western Backstop 

SO2 Trading Program. I' 

,I 

7 

To assure that trading program requirements are consistent across the Grand Canyon Visibility 

Transport Commission (GCVTC) region the Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP) asked 

the Western States Air Resources (WESTAR) Council to help them develop template language 

,- for a model SIP and model rule for state and tribal programs to use in development of the 

individual rules and SIPs they will use to administer the trading program required in the 

Regional Haze rule. 

WESTAR formed a working group comprised of state, tribal, and EPA staff with experience in 

regulatory and State Implementation Plan (SIP) and Tribal Implementation Plan (TIP) 

development. The advantages to this approach were two-fold; it brought together the diversity of 

western air quality regulatory program and SIP development experts, and these experts will bring 

back to their own agencies the necessary knowledge to incorporate the model rule and SIP into 

their respective SIPs. New Mexico collaborated with Utah, Arizona, Wyoming, the National 

Tribal Environmental Council, and EPA as part of the WESTAR working group in development 

of the template language for the Model SIPITIP and the Model Rule. Proposed Part 81 and 

revisions to Part 73 are based on the Model Rule, as is the stationary source section of the SIP 

- document also before the Board. 

Under the Clean Air Act, states must require certain older large facilities to install the best 

emission controls available as part of state strategies for meeting the requirements of the federal 

Regional Haze rule. This requirement, known as the Best Available Retrofit Technology 

(BART) requirement, applies to plants emitting pollutants that contribute to visibility 

degradation. 

The BART requirement applies to facilities built between 1962 and 1977 that have a potential to 

emit more than 250 tons a year of visibility-impairing pollution. Those facilities fall into 26 .,- 
categories, including utility and industrial boilers, and large industrial plants such as pulp mills, 

refineries and smelters. 

Proposed 20.2.8 1 NMAC applies to any stationary source that is considered BART-eligible due 

to sulfur dioxide emissions or any source that has actual SO2 emissions of 100 tons or more a 

year. If regional SO2 emissions exceed the milestones 20.2.81 NMAC will come into effect and 

sources will be required to adhere to the requirements of the Western Backstop Sulfur Dioxide 

Trading program. 

proposed rule 20.2.81 NMAC contained some typographical errors, which have been corrected. 

The word "excepted" was used in the wrong context and has been corrected to read "accepted". 

This is an overview of the sections that make up proposed rule 20.2.8 1 NMAC. ,' 

20*2.8Fp~ 

C - General Applicability: 

1. WEB urce means a stationary source that meets the applicability requirements of 

&lo1 NMAC. 20.2.81 .I01 is the applicability section of the proposed Western 

Backstop Trading Program rule. This definition would apply to the sources as described 

in this section. The Best Available Retrofit Technology requirement or BART 

requirement applies to facilities built between 1962 and 1977 that have a potential to emit 

more than 250 tons a year of visibility-impairing pollution. In addition, all other 

stationary sources that have actual SO2 emissions of 100 tons or more per year in the 

Program Trigger Years or any subsequent year would be included. 

20.2.81.101 NMAC - Sections C and D: 

Once a source is subject to the trading program, it will remain in the program every year 

thereafter. Section D includes requirements for sources who wish to apply for a retired source 

exemption. 

/ 20.2.81.102 NMAC - Accou t Re resentatives for Web Sources: 

Owners and operators of ~~urces ar required to appoint an account representative to 

represent them in matters pertaining to the trading program. The account representative will 

transfer allowances, submit monitoring plans, register the source in the program, submit 

certification applications, sulfur dioxide emissions data and compliance reports and complete any 

other administrative matters pertaining to the trading program. 

20.2.81.103 NMAC - Registration: 

Once the trading program is triggered, each source that is a WEB source must register by 

submitting an initial certificate no later than 1 80 days after the program has been triggered. 

20.2.81.104 NMAC - Allowance Allocations: 

This section of the proposed rule outlines the requirements necessary to implement the Western 

Backstop SO2 Trading program. Once the trading program has begun states participating in the 

hadingprogram will establish a regional tracking system administrator. Each state participating 

in the trading program will be responsible for submitting a drafi allocations report to all other 

participating states and the tracking system administrator. The report will list all WEB sources 
in the state, allowance allocations for each source, early reduction bonus allocations and 

allocations for new or modified WEB sources. The tracking system administrator will compile 

this information into a draft regional allocation report, and submit this draft regional report to the 

participating states and tribes for review. 

The draft regional report will also include a proposed budget for each state and tribe and, the 

proposed allocation for each WEB source. The proposed allocation will be available for public 

review and comment. States and tribes will submit proposed changes of the preliminary 

allocations and budget to the tracking system administrator. The tracking system administrator 

will compile these proposed changes and submit a final draft regional allocation report to trading 

program participates for approval. States and tribes participating in the trading program are 

committed to working together to review regional reports. 

20.2.81.105 NMAC- Establishment of Accounts: 

The federal Regional Haze rule requires states and tribes participating in the western Backstop 

SO2 Trading program to provide a centralized system for the tracking of allowances and 

emissions. The centralized system is referred to as the WEB Allowance Tracking System (WEB 

ATS). 

The WEB ATS will provide all necessary information regarding emissions, allowances, and 

transactions in a publicly available secure, centralized database. Specifications of the WEB ATS 

such as emissions tracking, the recording of allowance transactions, account management, 

system integrity and transparency are described in a report prepared for the WRAP, titled 

"Western Emissions Backstop (WEB) Emissions and Allowance Tracking System (EATS) 

Analysis" (July, 2003). A copy of this report is provided in Appendix C-1 in the proposed 

Regional Haze SIP. 

This report and this section of the proposed rule detail how a WEB source will register for the 

allowance tracking system and the source will, through an account representative, establish 

accounts, transfer allowances, and track unused allowances from a previous year. 

20.2.81.106 Monitoring, Recordkeeping and Reporting: 

The Regional Haze Rule includes specific requirements for monitoring, recordkeeping aid 

reporting of sulfur dioxide emissions from WEB sources once the trading program is triggered. I 

refer the Board to ~xhibit4 "Summary Fact Sheet for WEB trading program: Monitoring, 

Recordkeeping and Reporting". This section of the rule was developed by a WRAP workgroup 

with the technical expertise in monitoring methodology necessary to address the needs and 

minimize burdens on the affected sources and provide flexibility to the wide variety of facilities 

and emissions units that will be covered under the Western Backstop SO2 Trading Program. 

20.2.81.107 NMAC - Allowance Transfers: 

The Regional Haze Rule includes provisions for the trading program detailing the process for 

transferring allowances between parties. Transfers are defined as the conveyance from one 

account to another account (compliance account or general account) of one or more allowances 

-- by whatever means, including but not limited to purchase, trade, or gift in accordance with the 

procedures in 20.2.81 .lo7 NMAC. This section includes the requirements necessary for the 
WEB sources' account representatives to submit information to the tracking system administrator 4 

and transfer allowances. 

20.2.81.108 NMAC - Use of Allowances From a Previous Year: 

The federal Regional Haze Rule requires that allowances kept for use in future years may be 

used in calendar year 201 8 only to the extent that the Implementation Plan guarantees that such 

allowances will not interfere with the achievement of the 20 18 milestone. 

20.2.8 1.108 NMAC addresses this requirement by prohibiting the use, after the year 201 7, of 

allowances allocated for the years 2003 - 2017. This provision ensures that actual emissions will 

be less than the 201 8 milestone because only allowances allocated for the year 201 8 could be 

used to show compliance in that year. The provision also maintains flexibility by resetting the 

baseline to the year 20 18 and then allowing sources to once again use extra allowances to show 

compliyce in any future year. 

I, 1'1 

, .(II \ 

~hii flexibility is important for sources that have variable operations because the source may 

build up a reserve of unused allowances for use in a high production year. 

,' / 

20.2.81.109 NMAC - Compliance: 

When a WEB source exceeds its allowance limitation, the Western Backstop SO2 Trading 

program requires the Tracking System Administrator to deduct allowances from the following 

year's allocation in an amount equal to two times the WEB source's emissions of SO2 in excess 

of its allowance limitation. This deduction shall be made from the WEB source's compliance 

account. If sufficient allowances do not exist in the compliance account for the next control 

period to cover this amount, the Tracking System Administrator will deduct the required number 

of allowances, regardless of the control period for which they were allocated, whenever the 

allowances are recorded in the account. 

Penalties for any WEB source exceeding its allowance limitations: 

The amount of the penalty shall be evaluated at each five-year SIP review, and adjusted to ensure 

that penalties per ton substantially exceed the expected cost of allowances to ensure that this 

remains a stringent penalty. 20.2.81 NMAC establishes a penalty of $5000 per ton for each ton 

of emissions above the source's allowance limitation. In addition, two allowances fiom the next 

year's allocation will be deducted from the account for each ton of exceedance. Under 20.2.81 

NMAC, sources are also liable for penalties for each day of violations of the program's other 

requirements. 

20.2.81.110 NMAC -Special Penalty Provisions for Year 2018 

If the WEB Trading Program is triggered and the first control period will not occur until after the 

year 2018, a special penalty shall be assessed for the exceedance of the 201 8 milestone. 

The Department shall allocate allowances to all WEB sources as established in the 2013 SIP 

revision. WEB sources will have the option to buy and sell allowances during a two-month 

allowance transfer period as provided in 20.2.81.1 10 NMAC. 
- At the end of this two-month allowance transfer period, compliance with the allowance 

limitation will be determined for each source. Penalties shall be assessed for SO2 emissions that 

are greater than the allowance limitation for each WEB source. 

20.2.81.111 NMAC - SO2 Monitoring of Fuel Gas Combustion Devices: 

This section of 20.2.8 1 NMAC was developed by a WRAP workgroup with the technical 

expertise in monitoring methodology needed by specific facilities and emissions units that will 

be participating in the Western Backstop SO2 Trading program. 

These monitoring requirements are applicable to fuel gas combustion devices at petroleum 

refineries. Fuel gas combustion devices include boilers, process heaters, and flares used to bum 

fuel gas generated at a petroleum re nery. Fuel gas means any gas which is generated and P combusted at a petroleum refinery. Fuel gas does not include: (1) natural gas, unless combined 

with other gases generated at a refinery, (2) gases gener ted b a catalytic cracking 3 unit Catalyst regenerator, (3) gases generated by fluid coking burners, (4) gases combusted to 

produce sulfur or sulfuric acid, or (5) process upset gases generated due to startup, shutdown, or 

malfunctions. 

This section of the rule includes monitoring plan and reporting requirements, certification 

requirements, quality assurance / quality control requirements and missing data procedures 

specific to petroleum refineries. 

- 20.2.81.112 NMAC - Predictive Flow Monitoring Systems for Kilns with Positive Pressure 

Fabric Filters: -.{ , .- 

This section of 20.2.81 NMAC was also developed by a workgroup withtiieetechnical 

expertise in monitoring methodology needed by specific facilities and emissions units that will 

be participating in the Western Backstop SO2 Trading program. 

These monitoring requirements are applicable to cement kilns or lime kilns that (1) are controlled 

by a positive pressure fabric filter, and (2) have operating conditions upstream of the fabric filter 

that the WEB source documents would reasonably prevent reliable flow monitor measurements. 

This section of the rule includes monitoring plan and reporting requirements, certification 

requirements, quality assurance / quality control requirements and missing data procedures 

specific to cement or lime kilns controlled by positive pressure fabric filters. 

Conclusion 

All states submitting a SIP under Section 309 of the Regional Haze Rule will adopt virtually 

identical rules to implement the Western Backstop Trading Program. It is critical that states 

administer the trading program in a consistent manner. This is an essential piece of the 

stationary source program for the SIP. 
Western Backstop (WEB) 

Emissions and Allowance Tracking 

System (EATS) Analysis 

Prepared by: 

Penin Quarles Associates, Inc. 

675 Peter Jefferson Parkway, Suite 200 

Charlottesville, VA 2291 1 

NMED Exhibit # 3 
Table of Contents 

Page 

I . Introduction ........................................................... 1 

II . Overview of the System and Analysis ........................................ 1 

ILI . Functional Areas ...................................................... 3 

A . Source Inventory ................................................ 3 

B . User Management ............................................... 5 

C . Account Management .............................................. 6 

D . Allowance Allocations (htial and Ongoing) ............................. 7 . 

E . Allowance Trading .............................................. 10 I1 F . Annual Compliance Assessment ................ ( ......... : ..... '. ... 12 I 

G . Emissions Tracking and Emissions Reporting ........................... 15 

H . Program Assessment and Analysis ................................... 18 

I . Public Information Needs and Requirements ............................ 19 

IV . Types of Users ...................................................... 19 

A . State and Tribal Users ........................................... 20 

B . IndustryUsers ................................................. 21 

C . General Account Holders ......................................... 22 

D . Tracking System Administrator ..................................... 23 

E . Publicusers ................................................... 24 

V . Technical Architecture ................................................. 24 

A . Security ...................................................... 25 

B . System Performance ............................................. 27 

C . Maintainability ................................................. 28 

D . System Outputs ................................................ 28 

E . Application of Platform Selection Criteria ............................. 29 

VI . Design and Development Approach ....................................... 30 

A . Recommended lmplementation Methodology .......................... 30 

B . Tirning!Schedule ................................................ 32 

C . CostFactors .................................................. 32 

W . TSA Responsibilities and Performance Criteria .............................. 33 

A . TSA Responsibilities ............................................. 33 

B . TSA Performance Criteria ........................................ 36 
List of Fieures 

Page 

Figure 1: Overall WEB EATS Model .......................................... 2 

Figure 2: Flow Chart of Allowance Allocation Process ............................ 10 

Figure 3: Flow Chart of kual Compliance Assessment Process .................... 14 

Figure 4: Use Case Diagram: State and Tribal Users ............................. 20 

Figure 5: Use Case Diagram: Industry Users ................................... 21 

Figure 6: Use Case Diagram: General Account Holdem ........................... 22 

Figure 7: Use Case Diagram: Tracking System Administrator ...................... 23 

Figure 8: Use Case Diagram: Public Users .................................... 24 
July 3 1,2003 

Western Backstop (WEB) 

Emissions and Allowance Tracking System (EATS) Analysis 

I. Introduction 

This section of the State Lmplementation PlanfTribal Lmplementation Plan (SIPnP) is an 

analysis of the information management needs of the Western Backstop Emissions and 

Allowance Tracking System (WEB EATS) which is a requirement for the program under 40 

CFR 5 1.309. Section 309(d)(h)(4)(v) of the Regional Haze rule requires that "the 

Implementation Plan must provide for submitting data to a centralized system for the tracking of 

allowances and emissions." The purpose of this document is to describe the architectural and 

l,il , ! 

system requirements necessary to support a StateRegional emissions trading program 

,.I i , information system. The document summarizes the overall needs a& objectives of an emissions 

trading system to ensure successfid implementation of the program. It is intended to serve as a 

roadmap to help WRAP implement the program once it has been triggered. 1' 

i i 

II. Overview of the System and Analysis 

Figure 1 contains a graphical depiction of the overall information system, including the 

basic users, hctionality needed for each of these user types, and a high level architecture. 

Section III describes each hctional area of the application. Section IV describes the primary 

user groups and how they relate to the hctional areas. Section V describes the considerations 

affecting the choice of technical architecture for the application Section VI describes 

recommended design and development approaches, and Section VII addresses the overall 

responsibilities of the Tracking System Administrator (TSA). 

The development and deployment of this application, if needed, would most likely occur 

after 2013, possibly later. It is assumed that currently available technology would not be used, 

nor is it possible to project what advancements in technology would be available. For this 

reason, this report does not address specific technologies, except as a reference point for better 

understanding or describing capability that would be needed. The focus is on general issues 

related to technology and the functional requirements for designing and implementing the 

program. 

The scope of the application and information system needs which are described do not 

extend to several areas relating to the possible implementation of the Backstop Trading Program 

envisioned by Section 309. Excluded areas include the baseline emissions inventory for 

determining whether the program triggers, performing initial allowance allocations, and evaluating 

and tracking early reduction credits. Also, it has been assumed that it is not necessary to 

support a significant level of variation in requirements or needs from different States or tribes and 

that areas in which these requirements may vary, such as enforcement activities beyond the 

automatic provisions of the program, would be addressed in other systems. 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

III. Functional Areas 

The system to support the WEB Trading Program must contain hctionality to support 

implementation of the trading program in the following areas: source inventory, user 

management, account management, allowance allocations, allowance trading, emissions 

reporting and collection, compliance, and program assessment. At this time, the system 

functionality does not include consideration of allowance transfer price data. However, there 

may be a need to include this functional area in the final system design, and the overall system 

design needs to allow for this possible expansion of the bctional areas. Because the core 

requirements for allowance transfer price tracking remain uncertain, this section does not discuss 

this functional area in Mer detail. Each of the other areas of functionality is described below. 

'I, ' In addition, core requirements relating to the areas are defined. ,I I I 

A. Source Inventory 

1. Description 

a. Facilities and Units 

The central focus of the system is the list or inventory of sources which are affected by 

the program. This inventory is initially derived fiom the baseline emissions inventory developed 

to support the development and approval of the WEB Trading Program as part of the SLP/T'IP 

approval process. To this initial inventory, it is expected that States and Tribes may add 

sources, either during the period prior to triggering the program or after the Program Trigger 

Date. Throughout, it is expected that sources will permanently cease operation or "retire." To 

support the dynamic inventory, the information system must allow the addition of new sources 

and track the status, including the regulatory status, of all sources identified as potential program 

participants beginning with the baseline period. 

To support changes in facility operation and ownership in both the pre-trigger and posttrigger period, it will be necessary to track basic changes in facility identity, including facilities 

which, due to these types of changes, change "identity" or divide into two facilities. This 

functionality would include tracking facility name changes. 

It is assumed that States and Tribes would be responsible for identifying all "new" 

sources to the database and for making decisions and entering data about the applicability of the 

program to a new source. Once a source is identified as being subject to the program, the 

maintenance of these data would be the primary responsibility of the owners and operators of 

affected sources through the source representative. A single, secure portal for changing these 

data would be provided to authorized industry representatives. 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

b. Source Owners 

The owners and operators of each source authorize individual(s) to represent them , 

regarding allowance trading, emissions reporting and all other compliance activities. The identity 

of the owners and operators should be tracked to ensure that legal responsibility for compliance 

can be accurately determined at any point in time during which compliance is required. The 

WEB EATS should track changes in owners and operators for a source. 

c. Source Representatives 

The designated representatives appointed by the owners and operators of the source are 

also tracked so that appropriate communication about program activities involving the soand compliance is facilitated. Under the Duty to Register provisio~, representatives of a source 

' initially must register and use consistent source identifiers with the source program data fitst 

entered by the State or Tribe. The representative is responsible for the accuracy of submissions 

and certifying source compliance. Program rules should be structured to ensure that at no time 

during the operational phase of the program is an affected source unrepresented. 

Additional information about the facility and units, including fiels, controls, and other 

operational information would be necessary for program implementation, particularly with 

respect to emissions monitoring, and for program assessment. During the design phase for 

WEB EATS development an assessment of these needs and the availability of information from 

other sources (for example, a shared air program database at EPA or in a Statenribe) should 

be performed. 

2. Core Data Entities and Attributes 

! Facilities. Location, source category or type, permit IDS, size, Federal and Statenribal 

cross identifiers with other data systems, program status, operational status (including 

retirement status), initial on-line date (for new sources). 

! m. Relationship to facilities, type, Federal and Statoribal cross identifiers with 

other data systems, operational status (including retirement status), initial on-line date 

(for new units). 

! People. Type and dmtion of relationship of representatives to facilities, tM>e and 

dmtion of agent relationship to representatives, address, affiliation, security level, user 

ID, passwords (or equivalent), phone numbers, email or equivalent. 

! Owners/operators. Address, relationship to facilities. 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

! Prom applicability. Exemptions, opt-in or other program status information, including 

year affected (or non-affected), identification of Category 1 and 2 sources, etc. Could 

include permitted production capacity or other permit data. 

3. Core Functional Requirements 

Populate initial facilities and units. 

Add and update facilities and units. 

Add and update ownerloperator information. 

Change ownerloperators for facilities. 

Add and update individual information for any person utilizing or identified in' the 

application. \ Change representatives for facilities. 

For on-line changes, provide to users documentation of changes in owners and 

representatives to meet recordkeeping requirements. This could be ernail or other 

electronic format. 

Track changes in facility names and program identifiers and relationship to prior entities. 

Communicate/veri@ facility and unit inventory changes, particularly where change 

impacts regulatory status or responsibilities or triggers deadline. 

Add and update program applicability data. 

B. User Management 

1. Description 

User security and authentication are key requirements for the WEB EATS. To support 

these requirements the application must contain hctionality to store user identifyrng information 

and associate each user with the appropriate security level. A system adminisbator, or person 

designated by the system administrator, must use tools provided in the application to review and 

approve user accounts, and to access and monitor usage. 

For any on-line access and submission by an industry user, the system should require 

appropriate compliance certifications and contain a record of certifications. 

2. Core Data Entities and Attributes 

! People. Relationship to facilities or to representatives and their agents, address, 

affiliation, type, security level, user ID, passwords (or equivalent), phone numbers, email 

or equivalent. 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

! User Access Reauests. User identification (per People), information to facilitate 

approval, status of request (approval, denial). 

! Certification Records. Content of certification, date, user identification. 

3. Core Functional Requirements 

! Receive requests for user registration. 

! Approveldeny requests and establish security groups. 

! Provide notification of request status and assigned user ID and passwords (or 

equivalent). 

II ' ! Develop and apply user privileges for specific functional arkas and categories of data. 

" ! Delete or archive users. \ 

! Revoke or modify user access privileges. 

! Display appropriate certification statements for review and agreement. I' 

I 

C. Account Management 

1. Description 

In the model rule, an Allowance Tmcking System account is defined as an account 

"established for purposes of recording the allocation, and for holding, transferring, or deducting 

allowances." The WEB EATS should contain at least four types of accounts: general, 

compliance, retirement and government accounts. It must include a range of functionality to 

support each type of account. 

A compliance account holds allowances which are used for compliance purposes. 

There is one compliance account for each source subject to emissions trading requirements and 

the compliance account is assumed to have the identical owners and representatives as its 

associated source. A compliance account should be automatically created for each new source 

when a source has met the appropriate registration requirements. For specified periods, 

compliance accounts or the allowances in those accounts may be subject to restrictions on 

mding to facilitate annual compliance assessment. 

A general account allows anyone to hold allowances separate from the compliance and 

true-up process. A representative for a facility must move allowances from a general account to 

a compliance account before the true-up deadline in order to use them for current year 

compliance. A general account is created upon request of any individual or entity, and like a 

facility's compliance account, must have a defined owner and an individual person named as an 

account representative. General accounts are populated through trading functions, described 

below. The system administrator should have the ability to archive or deactivate a general 

account if specified criteria are met (such as containing no allowances for a specified period of 

time). For analysis purposes, the type of general account holder should be identified. 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

A retirement account holds allowances which have been used for annual compliance to 

offset emissions or which have been voluntarily removed fiom the market by its owners. At 

least one retirement account will be identified initially; additional accounts may be necessary to 

meet specific needs, if a detailed analysis of requirements indicates that separating retired 

allowances would be usell for analysis or other purposes. 

A government account holds allowances which are still under the control of a State or 

Tribe (or, as their agent, the Tracking System Administrator). These accounts will contain 

serialized allowances to be allocated in the future. The new source set-aside, for example, is a 

government account. 

.II :2. Core Data Entities and Attributes ,I I , 

! Accounts. Identification number, type, restrictions, relationship to source (if any), 

Stateflribe, or ownerlrepresentatives, over type. , 

i 

! People. Type and direction of relationship to accounts and representatives and their 

agents, address, affiliation, security level, user ID, passwords (or equivalent), phone 

numbers, email or equivalent. 

! Ownersloperators. Address, relationship to accounts. 

3. Core Functional Requirements 

! Addcreate general accounts. 

! Change ownerloperators for general accounts. 

! Change representatives for general accounts. 

! Addcreate retirement, government, and compliance accounts (system admin only). 

! Implement freeze on account or specific allowances within account. 

! Archive or delete accounts. 

! Notification of changes to user and other responsible persons. 

D. Allowance Allocations (Initial and Ongoing) 

1. Description 

The system should support both initial and ongoing allocations of allowances fiom 

government accounts into compliance accounts. The initial allocation for the first five year 

period would be provided by States or Tribes in a format to be defined by the TSA and system 

designers. It is recommended that the allocation process replicate the transfer of allowances 

from account to account, thus creating an audit trail of the allowance back to its origrnal issuing 

State or Tribe. It is recommended that the system design include a standard file format for 

submission of initial allowance allocations by the State or Tribe. 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

All allowances would be serialized according to a numbering system to be determined as 

part of the system design when they are initially populated in the application. This serial number 

would be a permanent attribute of each allowance and could not be changed. 

Ongoing allocations, which occur every five years for all allowances, would be 

supported through a process similar to the initial allocation, depending primarily on a standard 

file format, containing allocations determined by the State or Tribe for the period. 

The application should generate a draft and final Regional Allocation Report for each 

five year allocation period. 

The application should support periodic allocations of allowances to compliance 

' accounts for new sources from the new source set-aside. Specialiqed tracking and reporting 

would be needed to record the date of all requests and the status of the set-aside account. 

When this account is depleted, the tracking information would be used to prioritize allocation of 

future allowances to these sources. 

The application must support allocations of allowances for opt-in sources on an annual 

basis. It is assumed that the State or Tribe would provide data to support opt-in source 

allocation (including source identification) either on-line or in an electronic format. 

The application must support notification of all allocations to registered sources and to 

the appropriate State or Tribe. 

If a source representative elects a monitoring option for a unit under I.@) of Section I 

(Monitoring, Recordkeeping and Reporting) of the model rule, the source representative would 

submit a request to the State or Tribe about this election, and must provide information about 

the portion of the facility's allowance allocation attributable to these units. Upon approval of the 

'request by the State or Tribe, the TSA (or the State or Tribe directly) would mark the 

appropriate number of allowances as "non-tradeable" in the allowance account for the source 

for all years already allocated. A record of the request and approval would be stored, so that 

future allocations would also be marked as non-tradeable. If the special monitoring status under 

Section I1 .(b) is revoked or no longer applicable, the "non-tradeable" status of the allowances 

would be changed by the TSA. 

2. Core Data Entities and Attributes 

! u. Identification number, type, restrictions, relationship to source, StatetTribe, 

or owner/representatives, owner type. 

! AIlowances. Serial number, type, origin, year (if not indicated by serial number), nontradeable indicator. 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

! Transactions. Transaction identifier, date, allowance range, transferor account, 

transferee account, type of transaction. 

! Action Log Type of submission or request, user, source, status, etc. 

3. Core Functional Requirements 

! Import of allowance allocations fiom file provide by State or Tribe. 

! Assign serial numbers to new allowances. 

! Notification system to automatically inform industry users of allocations and hk 

responsibilities. 

! Notification or report system to keep States and Tribes informed re allocation status. 

! Tracking capability for new source set-aside requests. 

! Allocations to compliance accounts from new-source set aside: 
E. Allowance Trading 

1. Description 

WEB EATS Analysis 

July 31,2003 

Figure 2 

Flow Chart of Allowance Allocation Process 

allowance allocations 

from file provided by 

State or Tribe 

WEB EATS assigns 

serial numbers to new 

allowances 

WEB EATS 

automatically notifies 

industry users of 

allocations and future 

responsibilities 

automatically notifies I States and Tribes 

regarding allocation 

status 

The ability to trade allowances supports the underlying principle of an emissions trading 

program and the functionality to support allowance transfers is critical to the WEB EATS. 

Security of the data and transparency of the transfer record are critical to the overall program 

and should be carefilly evaluated. The WEB EATS must provide the TSA the ability to 

maintain information on all current account holdings and an audit trail of all allowance 

transactions, including both market transactions and regulatory transactions. The current 

standard for emissions trading programs established by EPA is to allow industry users to record 

allowance transfers on-line in real-time. These applications support both interactive, on-line 
, WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

mfers and batch transfers using specified file formats to transfer larger numbers of allowances. 

For batch transfers, industry has developed software to monitor allowance ownership and 

submit large volumes of allowance transfers with a minimum of user intervention It is assumed 

that the technical capability for secure system-to-system interactions will continue to improve, 

and that this approach will be more widely used in the future. Current allowance trading systems 

also support transfers performed by the TSA based on the receipt of paper forms. It is assumed 

that the reliance on paper forms will continue to diminish. Whether this hctionality should be 

supported in the WEB EATS should be evaluated. 

During the true-up period, activity in compliance accounts is frozen to allow the TSA to 

conduct the necessary compliance evaluation and allowance retirement. Two alternative 

'1 approaches should be considered. Under one approach, the WEB ,EATS would.allow users to 

submit allowance transfers for allowances involved in an ongoing compliance process, but these 

transfers would be held and recorded following the completed process: All affected parties 

would be informed of the status of these bansfers both when submitted and when finally 

recorded or denied. Under the altemative approach, allowance transfers for allowances 

involved in on-going compliance would be rejected, and transfers would have to be resubmitted 

(reflecting deductions carried out for compliance) after the compliance process is completed. 

For on-line transfers performed interactively by the transferor, the WEB EATS should 

provide access only to those accounts over which the transferor currently exercises control. 

Account access would be determined by the WEB EATS based on the useis relationships to 

specific general or compliance accounts. From these accounts, the user would select the 

accounts and specific allowances for the mfer. The user would then identifjl the account into 

which the allowances should be transferred. It is assumed that eligible recipients include general 

accounts, compliance accounts or a voluntary retirement account. The user would be asked to 

review and verifjl the transfer prior to its taking affect. 

The process for electronic transfers of batch transfers will be more technology 

dependent. It would undoubtedly require def~tion of fde bansfer formats and security . 

standards to ensure authentication of the submitter and completeness and quality of the data. It 

is not feasible to predict standards or available technology for this process at this time. 

The paper-based process used by the TSA would be similar to the interactive process. 

Depending on the volume of paper transfers, redundancy of data entry or additional verification 

should be considered to ensure data quality and accuracy. 

For all transfers (interactive, batch or paper), the WEB EATS must support a process 

of communication to both the transferor and transferee so that bansfers recorded are fully 

disclosed to all parties and errors or other disputes between parties can be quickly identified and 

resolved. 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

The WEB EATS must support a process of either transaction reversal or transaction 

error correction, or both. This hctionality would be restricted to the TSA. 

In addition, the WEB EATS must support a process of review of transfers to ensure that 

they are valid under the trading program rules (e.g., that they involve allowances actually held in 

the transferor account) and to reject invalid transfers. The WEB EATS must support a process 

of communication to the transferor concerning the acceptance or rejection of transfers. 

Reports would be available to the TSA and designated Statemribe users to review 

specific transactions or overall transaction activity at any time. 

,ll'. ! 

2. Core Data Entities and Attributes 

.I I I 

! Accounts. Identification number, type, relationship to source, Stataribe, or 

owner/representatives. , i 

! Allowances. Serial number, type, origin, year (if not indicated by serial number). 

! Transactions. Transaction identifier, date, allowance range, transferor account, 

transferee account, type of transaction, status. 

3. Core Functional Requirements 

! Interactive transfer. 

! Batch transfer. 

! Capability to freeze colnpliance accounts with regard to allowances involved in ongoing 

compliance assessment. 

! Notification to transferor and transferee. 

! Reports and summaries. 

! Allowance transaction audit bail. 

F. Annual Compliance Assessment 

1. Description 

Following each control period, the TSA must perform an assessment of annual 

compliance with the basic program requirement that each affected source hold a number of 

allowances equal to or exceeding the tons of SO, emissions for the period. The compliance 

module of the WEB EATS would support receipt of annual compliance notifications and 

certifications by the source representative. It is expected that most representatives would 

provide the certificatiozs and designate allowances to be deducted using an on-line access 

similar to the allowance transfer capability. Following receipt of the annual compliance forms, 

the WEB EATS would then compare the allowances held in the compliance account and the 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

level of emissions for the source (taking into account the year of allowances, flow control 

limitations and prior exceedances) and deduct the appropriate allowances from compliance 

accounts into retirement accounts. Emissions reported at the unit level would be "rolled" up to 

the facility level. The process would result in a compliance report or compliance assessment 

notification to source representatives, States and Tribes. 

In addition, the WEB EATS would assess the need to apply flow control in the 

subsequent year and determine the appropriate flow control factor. 

Finally, the WEB EATS would identifL any failure to meet allowance limitations. Based 

on the level of excess emissions the WEB EATS would compute the appropriate penalties, both 

11.11, : monetary penalties and deduction of subsequent year allowances. , \ ,to, 

2. Core Data Entities and Attributes 

.( / ! Annual compliance certifications. Facilities, submitter narne/lD, year, compliance 

certification statements. 

! track in^. List of facilities for whom an annual compliance certification is required, 

received, etc. 

! Compliance Results. Penalties, deductions, status, year. 

3. Core Functional Requirements 

! Receive and store annual compliance certifications. 

! Perform compliance assessment. 

! Calculate exceedances. 

! Calculate flow control applicability and ratios. 

! Communicate compliance results. 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

Figure 3 

Flow Chart of Annual Compliance Assessment Process 

WEB EATS calculates 

total emissions per 

Source including 

rollup to Facility level 

Source Representatives 

place appropriate amount of 

allowances to be deducted in 

compliance accounts 

WEB EATS compares 

allowances held in 

compliance accounts 

and the total level of 

emissions 

v 

WEB EATS deducts 

appropriate allowances 

in compliance 

accounts 

WEB EATS provides 

compliance assessment 

notification to Source 

Representatives, 

States, and Tribes 

WEB EATS assesses need to 

apply flow control in subsequent 

yean and compute appropriate 

flow control factor 

WEB EATS computes 

penalties based on 

exceedances 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

G. Emissions Tracking and Emissions Reporting 

1. Description 

Emissions tracking and reporting for compliance purposes following the program trigger 

will require a wide range of hctionality and data tables. There will be a need to evaluate 

carefully how and whether the fbctionality of the Emissions Tracking Database used for 

milestone tracking inventory purposes can be utilized to support the post-trigger emissions 

reporting. Also, it will be very useful to identify any potential overlap with existing emissions 

reporting systems used for other national or regional trading programs. For example, 'EPA plans 

to put into place the Emissions Collection System (ECS) and Monitoring Plan System (MPS) 

sometime afier 2004. Although the sohare itself may not be adaptable for use as the emissions 

reporting module of WEB EATS, the system requirements and design should be consulted as an 

additional, more detailed, roadmap in the initial stage of system design. , 

The following general areas of hctionality would be required: 

Reporting Requirements and Tracking Information. To facilitate program 

implementation, the WEB EATS would iden* monitoring and reporting obligations of each 

source participating in the prom and track the receipt of required information. At least three 

types of reporters are envisioned: 

! Part 75 reporters (submitting SO, emissions reports directly to EPA); 

! Hourly non-Part 75 reporters; and 

! Annual reporters (not participating in trading because of monitoring limitations). 

For each of these type of reporting there are distinctly different reporting obligations and 

fbctionality to support submissions and reported information. 

Monitoring and Emissions Information for Part 75 Units. For Part 75 affected 

sources who are reporting SO, monitoring and emissions data directly to EPA, the assumption is 

that redundant submission of these data would not be required. Instead, the WEB EATS would 

access or receive information fiom the EPA system about submissions and reported values 

under Part 75. Although EPA does not share these data directly with other data systems 

currently, it is anticipated that technological advances and the demand for shared data by other 

emissions trading programs would make this not only viable, but routine, by the time the 

prom trigger occurs. 

Monitoring Information for Non-Part 75 Units. For non-Part 75 units monitoring 

under Section 1 of the model rule, the submission requirements are not spelled out in the model 

rule. We recommend and assume that the program require and support the electronic 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

submission of monitoring plans that are needed to establish an identification base for monitoring 

methodologies, monitoring locations and monitoring systems. These data are needed to support 

periodic reporting of hourly emissions data and to ensure that the data from monitoring systems 

are certified and quality assured. Tracking capability would be needed to assist in identifying 

whether required submissions (electronic and hardcopy) have been received, reviews conducted 

and approvals issued. This capability would assist States and Tribes, the TSA, and source 

representatives in the implementation phase of the monitoring program. 

Because monitoring plans contain important components which are either graphics or 

documentation and are not easily stored as data elements, system designers should consider 

including document management capability to complement the tracki~g of information and 

.II, sharing of data between all parties. A robust document manager co d provide a submission 11 A' "f , process and eliminate or greatly reduce submission of hard copy material. This is an area in 

which technical options and standard practices may improve significantly prior to the program 

trigger year. dm 

I 

Emissions Data for Non-Part 75 Units. o or non-Part 75 sources required to monitor 

SO, emissions, the WEB EATS would support submission, processing and storage of hourly 

emissions data. By current standards, the volume of and processing capability for hourly data 

could be large. However, it is expected that processing power and data storage capability will 

continue to expand and costs will decline. It is also expected that the submission process would 

utilize the next generation of broadband access and communication, in whatever direction 

technology dictates. Standardization of data reporting protocols would probably facilitate 

design and implementation of data submission requirements. The shape of the WEB EATS 

would be dictated to a large degree by available technology, supporting basic hctionality of 

receipt, tracking, checking, analysis, and communication between the regulated sources and 

program management. 

Quality Assurance of Emissions Data. Underlying successhl cap and trade programs 

is the assumption that the emissions recorded and traded are comparable from State to State, 

Tribe to Tribe and industry to industry. Clear monitoring protocols and quality emissions data 

are needed to maintain the viability of the program. The monitoring and emissions data 

collection process should include the appropriate level of checking, analysis to ensure accurate 

and complete monitoring and reporting. Part 75 is a usell model of standards and checking 

which has provided the appropriate level of market assurances about the quality of emissions. 

The designers and developers of the WEB EATS should provide comparable capability, 

including calculation checks, assessment of monitoring system quality assurance compliance, and 

the accuracy of missing data routines. Emissions data should be evaluated to check routinely 

and periodically for anomalies and inconsistencies. 

Petition Tracking. To meet SIP approval requirements, petitions for alternative 

monitoring would require joint approval of the Statembe and the U.S. EPA. The WEB EATS 

should provide a mechanism to track petitions and their approval and disapproval in a centrally 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

accessible location for all State, Tribal and EPA program administrators. The WEB EATS 

should highl~ght and define elecbonicdy any aspect of the petition which results in allowable 

changes to reporting of monitoring or emissions data. 

Annual Emission Statements for Reduced Monitoring Units. For units with reduced 

monitoring requirements under Model Rule Section 11 .(b), the owner or operator would submit 

an annual emissions statement. The WEB EATS would track receipt of these submissions and 

record the emissions value reported. Annual production data or other information may also be 

required on a case-by-case basis as a condition of State or Tribe acceptance of the request 

under Paragraph b. These data should also be recorded in the data system. Consideration 

should be given as to whether more frequent emissions reporting than annual reporting (e.g., 

11, * quarterly) should be required in order to facilitate data quality assyce, and the overall system 1.1 I , 

, design should allow for this possibility. 

2. Core Data Entities and Attributes I' 

, i 

! Tracking. Including projected monitoring and reporting deadlines, submissions, and 

approvals or other status. 

! Emissions Methodologv/Revorter Type. Compliance period, FacilityNnit. 

! Monitoring Locations. Units, stacks and pipes and attributes. 

! Monitoring Systems Detail. Monitoring systems, formulas. 

! Certification and Ongoing Oualitv Assurance Test Data. Test dates, overall results, test 

detail data. 

! Cumulative quarterly and Annual Emissions. 

! Hourlv Emissions Data. 

3. Core Functional Requirements 

Track deadlines, requirements and submissions. 

Communicate with users about upcoming deadlines or deficiencies. 

Receive emissions report, quarterly and annual. 

Receive orid and revised monitoring plans. 

Receive monitoring system certification and quality assurance data. 

Receive quality assurance test data and perform quality assurance checks. 

Address data quality problems. 

Provide final emissions data for annual compliance. 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

H. Program Assessment and Analysis 

1. Description 

Ongoing prom assessment and evaluation is an explicit resporisibility of the TSA arid 

the system design and requirements should reflect the needs for various types of assessment 

including: environmental benefits, geographic impacts, market hction, implementation 

successes and failures, co-benefits, and SO2 control strategies. In each of these areas, the 

proposed database design should be evaluated to determine whether anticipated needs will be 

met. The analyhcal utility of the data in WEB EATS will be enhanced in some cases by ensuring 

that accurate qd complete links to other databases are supported and maintained. Similarly, 

geographic analyses will be enhanced by having high quality and complete locational infoription. 

These data will facilitate the availability and use of deposition and other modeling data. 

It is important to consider the needs of users who want access tb basic and repeatable 

analyses and the needs of users who want access to the data to perform complex analysis or 

one-time analysis. The basic user may best be served by providing standard reports designed to 

provide a program overview, summary statistics or status reports on specific types of activity. 

Combined with basic filtering and sorting options, a well designed report will meet many of the 

ongoing needs. More flexibility in data analysis could be provided by developing a more robust 

query tool, perhaps with control over report formats and output file types. For the high end user 

with more complex analytical needs or requiring use of data volumes beyond the capability of 

the user interface platform, the ability to request and deliver data in standard formats should be 

considered. If it is determined that the basic user needs include access to large volumes of data 

in predictable summary formats or quick access to complex data, the design and development of 

a data warehouse to facilitate this access should be considered 

2. Core Data Entities and Attributes 

! Data warehouse. To provide easier access to aggregated data for analysis purposes., 

3. Core Functional Requirements 

! Generate standard reports. 

! Provide data query tool. 

! Provide capability for data export and delivery. 

! Provide links to other information systems. 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

I. Public Information Needs and Requirements 

1. Description 

To support market trading, information about market activity must be available to 

market participants and the general public. This includes, in particular, information about 

allowance trades and the identity of market participants, including representatives. The specific 

data content would be evaluated in detail at the time of design and development. It is expected 

that public access to some data, for example the tribal allocations for set-aside, would be 

limited 

dl. : It should be noted that the timeliness of the data is a critic aspect; but it may be 

, 9 appropriate to provide access to different types of information at dfferent intervals. For 

example, a daily update cycle for allowance trading and representative changes has been 

adequate for the Federal trading programs; access; to reported emissions data may be provided 

quarterly or even annually. I 

The ease of access for the public is also important. The current standard is to publish 

data though the Web, either in a readable format such as .pdf, in a standard spreadsheet format 

or through a query tool which rebieves and displays data in .html format through a browser. 

Although the technology available for public access to information in the next decade is not 

easily predicted, it would be expected that similar methods of providing access would be 

selected. The technical architecture and data formats should be selected based on security, 

speed or performance, overall accessibility to the technology, and flexibility offered in terms of 

both output and format. 

2. Core Data Entities and Attributes 

! Data warehouse. To provide easier access to aggregated data for analysis purposes. 

3. Core Functional Requirements 

! Timely public access to source inventoy, account, allowance and representative 

information. 

! Public access to periodic emissions data. 

! Data downloading or extraction. 

IV. Types of Users 

As depicted in Figure 1, there are five basic categories of users for the application: 

State and Tribal users; industry users; general account holders; the Tracking System 

Administrator; and public users. 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

A. State and Tribal Users 

Staff members of a State or Tribe participating in the Backstop Emissions Trading , 

Program would be key stakeholders and users of the application. These users would have 

read-only access to almost all data in the application and a variety of reports. They would ' 

provide key data to the system using a combination of data upload or on-line capability. These 

, , would include facility and unit and program applicability data, general allowance allocations, 

allocations from new source set asides, and approvals of monitoring submissions. These users 

would have no day-to-day responsibilities for the operation, management or maintenance of the 

application or data. 

Figure 4 

Use Case Diagram: State and Tribal Users 

States and Tribes 

Allowances to 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 31,2003 

B. Industry Users 

Representatives of the regulated community would also be key users of the application. 

These users would have access to data relating to sources under their control, as defined by , 

their roles and responsibilities as source representatives. In this capacity, they would be able to 

maintain source and unit information, transfer allowances in compliance or general (that they set 

up) accounts to and from other accounts, and submit required emissions data and compliance 

certifications. 

Figure 5 

Use Case Diagram: Industry Users 

Industry 

Change Source 

Representat~ves 

Characlerist~cs 

V~ew Reports 

Cert~ly Cornpl~ence Submit Em~ssion 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

C. General Account Holders 

A representative for a general account would also have access to the application to 

update general account infomati on, create new accounts, transfer allowances out of their 

general accounts to other accounts and to view reports. The general account holder would have 

limited (or no) access to source information, unless the holder is also a compliance account 

holder or until such information is determined to be public information. 

Figure 6 

Use Case Diagram: General Account Holders 

' II General Account ,II Holders 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

D. Tracking System Administrator 

The Tracking System Administrator (TSA) would ulilke virtually all fimctionality 

contained within the application. In appropriate circumstances the TSA would act on behalf of 

Stataribal, indusby and geneml account users. In addition, the TSA would perform all types 

of system management and maintenance activities to ensure effective operation of the 

application. The TSA would approve access for all users of the application. 

Figure 7 

Use Case Diagram: Tracking System Administrator 

I (11 'I, , 'Tracking System Administrator 
.WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

E. Public Users 

Public users have read-only access to selected data within the system. This access , 

would be consistent with the security requirements of the application and data. 

Figure 8 

Use Case Diagram: Public Users 

V. Technical Architecture 

A key component of system design is the selection of a common architecture. One of 

the major components of system architecture is the number of levels or layers in a system. An 

application installed on a user's machine that does not communicate with any other applications 

or systems is a 1 -tier system. A client-server system, where one application sits on a user's 

computer (client) and another, related application sits on the server is a 2-tier system. Most 

Web applications are 3-tier systems, where there is a browser and Web server (client), a 

business logic server and a database server. The system should be built with at least three layers 

to separate the display (client), business logic, and database, so that each layer could be 

modified without having to change other parts. The exact architecture would be determined at 

the time of system design. 

The final decisions about system architecture should consider many factors, including 

security, performance, and maintainability. 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

A. Security 

Due to the importance of data integrity and accuracy in the WEB, EATS, security will be 

extremely important. The security measures should be based on current best practices and , 

standards. The system's security can be divided into two areas: application and server level 

security. 

1. Application Level Security 

The system's application level security consists of the protective measures designed into 

the application's code. These include the logical measures to determine which usels 'may access 

which areas of the system, the manner in which session management is handled and the 

protection of sensitive information, like passwords, at the application level. 

! Password Encryption. The system must include a process to authenticate all authorized 

users to the system. Today's system utilizes encryption to protect the vulnerable data 

elements, such as user passwords. Implementation of an extremely robust encryption, 

routine or its equivalent should be incorporated into the system. 

! Separate Logins. Each user should maintain a unique usemame and password, with the 

password encrypted and stored in a secure database. Each user should be assigned a 

unique ID. The technology available for security in the next decade is not easily 

predicted; available alternative technology to the use of passwords should be 

considered. 

! Separate User Tvpes. The access rights and restrictions should be controlled at the user 

group level. Each user group would have a unique set of rights and restrictions within 

the WEB EATS. Upon user login to the system, the user's specific user group security 

should be verified and rights and restrictions set for the session. If the user belongs to 

multiple user groups, they should be assigned the highest rights for a given section or . 

action among their user groups. 

! Audit Trail. The system design should include specific requirements to maintain an audit 

trail of data adds, updates, and deletes for critical data elements. This audit trail should 

be designed to detect and resolve challenges to the data (for example, allowance 

ownerships), and as an additional means of restoring data should there be a breach of 

data integrity. 

! Session Management. Strict session management control, in which session tokens are 

properly protected and validated, is essential. When two applications are run remotely 

fiom each other (like a browser and a server), they require session tokens to be able to 

communicate about the application state. To prevent attackels &om hijacking active 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

sessions and assuming the identity of a user, session tokens need to be regularly revalidated. 

2. Sewer Security 

The system's server level security consists of the protective measures designed to 

protect the server itself from inappropriate access. These include proper server maintenance 

and the modifyrng of default system passwords. 

! Server-Side Data Validation and Business Logic. To the extent possible, all business 

logic and data validation should be checked and handled at the server level and not be 

.II ! coded at the client or browser level. Server-side validation qnproves performance and 

1, 11 I a reduces the risk of a user bypassing business logic designed to prevent them from 

submitting invalid data. Server-side validation includes business logic as well as basic 

data type validation (i.e., length, range, data,type, characters sets). 

I 

! Server Maintenance. The servers or host p)atforrn should be maintained according to 

security standards. For example, many of today's current servers are patched on a 

regular basis with the latest security releases as soon as they are available. Because 

flaws in server software are usually well known in the hacker community, it is important 

to protect the server from attackers. 

! System Passwords. The system passwords to the servers or host platform should be 

modified fiom their defaults and changed on regular intervals. Because the default 

passwords for commercial servers are commonly known, they pose a security threat 

and should be changed. Also, standard security practices should be followed regarding 

the regular changing of passwords. 

3. Physical Data Security 

Physical data security should be provided by the measures to protect the data center, a 

specialized facility that hosts an application, from dangers. These dangers include theft, natuI.al 

disasters, manrnade catastrophes, and accidental damage (e.g., from electrical surges, extreme 

temperatures, spilled coffee, etc.). The data center that hosts the WEB EATS should maintain 

strong security practices and undergo periodic audits. 

4. Backup and Recovery 

The database should be backed up at least daily and the application files should be 

backed up regularly. It may be advisable to back-up the allowance transaction data at a more 

fiequent interval, based on the frequency of use and level of recoverdbility deemed necessary. 

A copy of the backup files should be stored off-site fiom the data center to ensure minimum 

downtime should a catastrophe occur. 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

A Catastrophe Recovery Plan (CRP) should be created to enable the application to 

return to service as soon as possible following a catastrophe. Most CRPs contain the following: 

! Threat analysis, 

! Risk assessment, 

! Mitigation steps, 

! Response and recovery plans, 

! Damage assessment process, 

! Salvage procedures, and 

! Rehabilitation plans. 

11 B. System Performance I 

The system's performance can be greatly improved with the intelligent application of 

best practices and procedures for performance tuning and system design. These include the 

following: 

1. Database Design and Query Optimization 

The database should be designed with performance in mind. All database queries 

should be optimized to maximize performance. Use of views and indices or similar database 

hctionality should be considered to maximize database performance. By limiting the results to 

only those that will be utilized immediately, the system will minimize the server and network 

resource load. 

2. Session Variables 

System design or programming technologies that overuse session variables can degrade 

' the performance of the system Therefore, only information that absolutely must be maintained 

to keep the session active should be stored in session variables. Following a user logout or the 

expiration of a short time limit, session variables should be explicitly purged hm memory. 

3. Archiving Data 

Data should be archived regularly to conserve database space and enhance 

performance. A mechanism should be provided for retrieving the archived data for reporting 

purposes. 

4. Data Volume 

The data volume of the WEB EATS will be largely determined by the number of 

sources and the frequency of data collection. With a planned number of sources of less than a 

thousand, which may include the periodic submittal of hourly data collection, the database is 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

projected to grow approximately 4GB per year. To ensure maximum performance, the 

database should be regularly re-indexed and monitored for performance. It is recommended 

that the emissions data collection component sit on a separate server fiom the business logic 

server for performance gabs. 

5. Frequency of Use 

The system design should take into account the number of users, the level of access, and 

the volume of data provided by users for specific processes. The WEB EATS usage is 

expected to be well within the normal expectation of capability for a small to moderate size 

application. For emissions data submission, the volume of data may be relatively high (by 

current standards) and require special design consideration. 

.(I. : 

,I 1 , \ 

C. Maintainability 

To achieve a flexible system that evolves wifh program needs, the system should be 

developed for maximum maintainability. If the application is based on vendor software, it should 

be built upon well-known technology and platforms. If it is custom developed, it should be well 

documented and based upon best programming practices and standards and developed in a 

common development language. These measures will minimize time and cost to maintain the 

appljcation following implementation. 

In addition, the programming team should be required to adhere to programming 

standards, including code organization and documentation, to facilitate support and 

enhancements after deployment. 

Post-deployment modifications should be developed by a set protocol including input 

from users. 

D. System Outputs 

The system should support various types of outputs, including data transfers, electronic 

communications, like email, and connections to external systems. During the system design, the 

needs of the proposed users and the archiving of data should determine exactly which system 

outputs should be available. 

1. Data Transfers 

The periodic transfer of emissions and related data should be communicated to the 

application via'a standard information exchange protocol. The exact protocol and procedure 

will need to be determined based on best practices and volume of data at the time of 

implementation. Each data record should be error checked to verifjr its integrity during the 

submission process. 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

2. Electronic Communications 

The application should contain hctionality that notifies parties via electronic 

communication upon the execution of certain actions. These actions would include, for example, 

allowance transfers, freezing!unfreezing accounts, and system maintenance notices. The exact 

list of actions, subsequent message media, recipients, and structures should be determined as 

part of system design. 

3. External System Connections 

The application would be expected to provide data to extepl data systems such as the 

a : Emissions Inventory System that the WRAP will be using to perfo~. the program trigger 

'".! . evaluations tracking. The system should also support connectivity wlth the National 

Environmental Information Exchange Network and Tribal Emissions Implementation Software 

Solution (TEISS). The exact methods used to connect ,! other systems will be determined at the 

time of system design. i I 

The application should also be able to communicate and transfer data files to and from 

other EPA data and allowance tmcking systems, such as the system supporting the federal SOz 

emissions trading programs. 

E. Application of Platform Selection Criteria 

During the prehmry phases of the system design, a significant decision will be the 

selection of the technology platforms or architecture for the system. These platforms include the 

Web server, business logic server, database server, and client interface. For each of these 

platforms, consider these issues with the following questions in mind: 

! Data volume. Will the volume of data which must be maintained, tmferred and 

analyzed be supported by the database andlor the application? Be sure to calculate the 

data volumes over the estimated life cycle of the project keeping in mind any applicable 

program specific or overarching regulatory requirements relating to govemment 

recordkeeping. 

! Performance. What are the minimum performance requirements for basic application 

tasks, such as accessing the system, updating source information, transferring 

allowances? What are the minimum performance requirements for infrequent tasks, 

such as annual compliance assessments, data quality analyses, or submitting hourly 

emissions data? What are the performance requirements for reports? 

! Relative Costs. What are the overall cost constraints? What is the acceptable ratio of 

design costs to development costs and initial deployment costs versus maintenance 

costs? Research these issues for comparable systems and platforms. 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

! Maintainability. What specific standards and assumptions should be imposed for 

maintainability? 

! Connectivity. Whjch connectivity standards should the system support? 

! Eficiency. Are there specific design choices which will impact the efficiency of program 

implementation? Examine design options and platform options to maximize efficiency 

benefits of the information system for the overall operation of the program. To what 

extent should the efficiency benefits to regulated industry, general account holders and 

the public be taken into account? 

! Availability. What level of system availability is acceptable for each type of user? 

VI. Design and Development Approach 

The second objective of this document is to serve asa roadrnap to help the States and 

Tribes implement the program once it has been triggered. Outlined below is an implementation 

methodology that the States and Tribes can follow to design, develop and deploy the system. In 

addition, this section provides an analysis of cost and scheduling factors that should be 

considered. 

A. Recommended Implementation Methodology 

Upon the trigger of the WEB Trading Program, detailed system requirements will need 

to be assessed. The following section recommends, steps to design, develop and implement an 

information system for the program. It is recommended that a workgroup be created and 

assigned responsibility for this task. The workgroup should be comprised of user group 

representation, program analyst(s), and technical specialist(s). 

1. Requirements Verification 

The first step following the need to implement the program will be to verifjr the 

requirements of the information system. Since many of the procedural elements of the SIP/TIP 

will be decided in the future, the exact hctionality may have changed since the creation of this 

document. Therefore, detailed requirements should be verified and incorporated into a system 

analysis document. It is expected that this stage of the process will require significant 

participation of all stakeholders, particularly the States and Tribes participating in the program. 

2. Assessment of Current Standards and Technology 

Following the verification of requirements, the workgroup should research and assess 

the current standards and technologies applicable to this type of information system. Since this 

application would probably not be designed until many years after this document, it was 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

determined that the current standards would have little value and these have not been evaluated 

or referenced. 

3. Technical Architecture Option Evaluation 

Just as the standards and technology should be evaluated, so should the possible 

technical architectures, as discussed above. Most systems at the time of the creation of this 

document are 3-tier, but that should certainly not limit the architecture of the WEB EATS. Also, 

the suggested measures for security and maintainability may no longer be applicable, and should 

thus be re-evaluated. 

4. Closeness of Fit 

Based upon the system analysis requirements, standards, and architecture assessments, 

the workgroup should perform a Closeness of Fit study to analyze the available products, 

technologies, and platforms available. By analyzing the field of products, technologies, and 

platforms available, the Closeness of Fit study should conclude with a recommended product or 

set of development technologies and standards. 

5. Decision 

Based upon the Closeness of Fit study, the workgroup should select a product from a 

vendor(s), develop a custom system, or a combination of the two. 

6. Design/Customization/Development Strategy 

Following the decision to either select a Commercial Off-the-shelf (COS) product, 

develop a custom application, or customize an existing application, the workgroup should select 

' a developer and/or TSA to design, develop and implement the system. 

The development plan should include a careful review of the schedule of program 

implementation and requirements to ensure that the necessary elements of the application are in 

place at the appropriate time. A staged process, with design, development, and deployment of 

specific system modules, is recommended. For example, the initial phase of development would 

probably focus on the source regsttation capability and initial allowance allocations. Later 

development could include allowance transfers capability, annual compliance assessment or 

overall program assessments. 

7. Development 

Following agreement upon the system design, the developer or TSA should develop the 

system utilizing modem development best practices and procedures. It is recommended that the 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

developer andlor TSA work with the members of the requirements gathering workgroup to reaffm and adjust requirements as needed. 

8. Quality Assurancemesting 

Following the successll development of the system, the developerRSA should submit 

the system for rigorous testing. A test environment should be set up and a test database should 

be populated with data that closely match the quantity and type of data that will be utilized 

during live transactions. All phases of the system should be rigorously tested by the 

developer/TSA, States and Tribes, and a select group of end-users. 

.I,,. 9. Deployment 11 ,i i , 1 

Following successhl quality assurance of the system, the workgroup and the 

developer/TSA should agree that the system is ready to be deployed or implemented in a 

production envhnrnent. Prior to production, the &&base wii need to be populated with the 

necessary baseline information including source &entory data, emissions data, users, etc. The 

developerRSA should provide trainin~insmctions to users of the system along with appropriate 

documentation. It is assumed that participating States and Tribes will work closely with the 

TSA to define and implement a communication strategy to ensure compliance with all program 

requirements and 111 use of the information management system developed to ensure its success. 

If there is no simcant delay after program trigger in the initiation of the information 

system design and development process and if a staged approach to deployment is adopted, 

then an implementation schedule in which the necessary system elements are in place is 

achievable. This objective should be stated at the outset of the project. 

It should be noted that the use of COS or the custornization of an existing system rnight 

reduce the initial development time for the system. To filly design, develop and deploy a 

custom application by today's standards might extend one to two years. Additional time might 

be necessary if there were significant issues relating to functionality or process about which State 

and Tribal participants could not agree. Technology trends indicate that forthcoming design and 

development methodologjes will likely reduce this estimate. 

C. Cost Factors 

Factors driving the cost of the information system include technical platform, design 

complexity, data volume, security level, and the level of and approach to integration with other 

data systems. The availability of and use of COS or another application as the basis for the 

application would also affect costs. 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

1. Technical Platform 

The technical platform includes the server so&are and business logic systems that are 

required. There are a wide range of options for the level of solution required and cost. A 

middle-ground solution is most likely the most suitable for the WEB EATS, one that maximizes 

flexibility and maintainability. 

2. Design Complexity 

The level of complexity incorporated into the system design will be a large cost factor. 

Generally, the more complex systems are, the more they cost. Based on the current system 

11 analysis, the system design appears to be moderately complex. yith any application, the ,I I I, requirements phase of the project may result in relatively more or less complex requirements, 

directly affecting costs. 

3. Data Volume i I 

The mount or volume of data will be a key cost driver in selecting the database server. 

If only one database is utilized for both the allowance and emissions data in WEB EATS , the 

database will grow quickly and will require a high-end solution to maintain performance levels. 

It is expected that the relatively high data volume will require database optimization and regular 

tuning, which will add to the maintenance costs. 

4. Security Level 

The level of security built into the system will certainly affect the cost. The more robust 

the security model is, the more time consuming and costly to implement. The security level 

detailed in Section UI(A)(I) dictates a moderate level of security. 

VII. TSA Responsibilities and Performance Criteria 

A. TSA Responsibilities 

The Tracking System Administrator (TSA) will have responsibility for the deployment of 

the site, ongoing maintenance and the day-to-day program implementation tasks associated with 

the program. It seems likely that the TSA would also design and develop the information 

system, but it is not necessary that both development and support should be provided by the 

same organization. Regardless, the ongoing responsibilities of the TSA would include two types 

of support: information system and program implementation. 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

1. Information System 

This category of support is to ensure that the information system is. properly 

administered, supported and performs all required hctionality. 

! pats security. The TSA would assume responsibility for ensuring that the security of the 

site and the data is monitored and protected on an ongoing basis. This would include 

monitoring access to the site and attempted but failed access (particularly if occurring in 

significant volume). 

! Data intemity. The TSA would assume responsibility for ensuring that the integrity of the 

data is monitored and protected on an ongoing basis. This would include ensuring that 

the referential integrity of the data is maintained, a data backup plan is implemented, and 

any oppom'ties for data corruption are identified and addressed. 

! Data qualily assessment and corrective maintenance. The TSA would develop within 

the application and be responsible for performing data checks to identify duplicative 

information, data omissions or other data of poor quality that are not easily prevented by 

error checks or data standards. The TSA would make corrections to the data, as 

necessary, and maintain documentation of changes. 

! WEB EATS enhancements. The TSA would document and evaluate any proposed 

enhancements, modifications or additions to the application. Working with the 

Statemribe participants in the trading program and within established budget constraints, 

the TSA would perform, test and deploy the modifications (in coordination with the 

assigned programming team). 

! WEB EATS documentation The TSA would have responsibility for maintaining all 

technical documentation for the WEB EATS (including enhancements and for 

maintaining records relating to its ongoing operation). 

! User technical support. The TSA would provide technical support to all users of the 

application. This would include telephone support and responses to requests or inquiries 

through other means of communications. The TSA would maintain records of all 

technical support and the TSA response. Technical support needs could also be 

addressed through the use of other support tools, comparable to the FAQs or online 

support systems currently in use. 

! Performance monitoring. The TSA would be responsible for monitoring the overall 

performance and availability of the application for all types of users. This would include 

identifjmg the causes of any disruption of servjce or availability and identifying any 

persistent problems experienced by the user community. 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

! Database administration The TSA would monitor data performance and perform all 

maintenance and optimization tasks affecting the performance of the database. The 

TSA would maintain records of all database admihistration activities. 

2. Program lmplementation 

The TSA is also expected to implement the program for the consortium of States and 

Tribes participating in the program. This is necessary to ensure that the program will be 

implemented consistently and cost effectively. 

! User access administration This support would include evaluating and responding to 

.II : user access requests, password changes, and related usage\issues. ,I I / 

! Coordination with States and Tribes. The TSA will coordinate, as necessary, with each 

State or Tribe participating in the program to ensure that the State or Tribe fulfills their 

responsibilities and is aware of the need for'their participation in decisions or issues. 

This includes aiding the States and Tribes in developing enforceable procedures for 

recording the necessary data. For example, the TSA would obtain allocation lists, 

petitions, retirement approvals, information about new sources, and reduced emissions 

monitoring under Section I1 .(6) of the model rule fiom the State or Tribe. 

! Perform allowance allocations. Using the information provided by the State or Tribe, 

the TSA would perform allowance transfers fiom government accounts to compliance 

accounts. The TSA would provide a report (or electronic file) to the State or Tribe of 

these actions. 

! Perform allowance transfers. Using the information provided by the representative of 

the account in which the allowances are held, the TSA would perform valid allowance 

transfers from the account to another account. The TSA would provide notice to the 

representative of these actions or of rejections or invalid transfers. 

! Periodic status reports on system activity and prom implementation issues. On a 

regular basis (monthly, quarterly and annually), the TSA would provide to the 

participating State and Tribes a summary of program activity. This report would 

include, for example, a summary of allowance transfer activities, a status report on 

emissions reports, or the level of public access to the database. 

! Annual compliance assessment. The TSA would perform the annual compliance 

assessment or true-up and would coordinate with industry, States and Tribes regarding 

the results of this process. Following review or approval by the participating States and 

Tribes, the TSA would finalize the compliance assessment by retiring the appropriate 

number of allowances fiom compliance accounts. An end-of-year compliance report 

would be made available. 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

! Communication stratew development~implementationlsupp~rt. Throughout the life of 

the program, the TSA would work with the participating States and Tribes to maintain 

and implement a communication stntegy and plan. The purpose of the plan would be. to 

ensure full participation of affected sources in the emissions trading program and to 

maximize understanding of and knowledge about the program among all interested ' 

parties. The content of the plan would include a strategy for general guidance, day-today communications to sources about their actions (transfer confirmations, data receipts, 

etc.), State~Tribal reports, communications between States and Tribes about ongoing 

program issues such as monitoring approvals or petitions, participant or public meetings 

and publications containing program results or environmental assessments. ' 

I ! Overall prom assessment. The TSA would assist the States and Tribes ,in designing 

and conducting an assessment of the overall program opedtion, costs, and 

environmental benefits on a periodic basis. 

! Error correction. followuv and docurnentatio~ The TSA would be responsible for 

correcting any data entry errors reported by users that are not within the security limits 

for the user. 

B. TSA Performance Criteria 

To ensure adequate support for the program, it will be necessary to establish 

performance criteria for the TSA. 

1. Technology Standards 

For the WEB EATS and technology support, the key criteria should be based on 

technology standards prevalent at the time of deployment and they should be tailored to the 

technical architecture selected for the WEB EATS. The following criteria would fall into this 

categoq and should be defined at the appropriate time. The importance of each of these factors 

should also be considered during the WEB EATS system design phase and in the selection of a 

technical architecture. 

! System performance (response time, number of concurrent users supported, frequency 

of WEB EATS or database errors, etc). 

! System availability (average downtime). 

! Timeliness of public access to data. 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

2. Contract Performance Standards 

Other important criteria relating to TSA performance would be the traditional criteria 

relating to overall performance with respect to basic contract terms. These would include: . 

! Responsiveness to customer concerns, 

! Timeliness and quality of status reports, 

! Overall cost, and 

! Budget accuracy. 
WEB EATS Analysis 

July 3 1,2003 

References 

1. Jenkins, George Henry. Information Systems Policies & Procedures Manual. Paramus, 

NJ: Prentice Hall, 1997. 

2. "The Ten Most Critical Web Security Vulnerabilities." The Open Web Security Project. 

13 Jan. 2003. <http://www.owasp.org/>. 

3. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Clean Air Market Programs. 

Emissions & Allowance Tracking System 

I 4. United States Environmental Protection Agency. StatefEPA ' onnation Management 

" ,I i , , Workgroup. Blueprint for a National Environmental ~nforrha~on r Exchange Network. 

June 200 1. 
May 30,2003 

Summarv Fact Sheet for WEB Trading Program: 

Monitorine. Recordkeeping and Reporting 

The monitoring provisions for the WEB trading program balance the need for 

accurate monitoring to provide certainty for the trading of allowances with the goals of 

minimizing burdens on the affected sources and providing flexibility for the broad range of 

industries that would be subject to the program. The provisions build on the successhl 

model of monitoring under the Acid Rain Program, but adopt special provisions to address 

the wide variety of facilities and einissions units that would be covered under the WEB 

backstop trading program. This fact sheet provides a brief overvikw of the monjtoring 

'{piovisions, and highlights some key issues. I 

Acid Rain Program Units 

, 

For electric generating sources already subjkct to Part 75 monitoring under the 

Acid Rain Program the rule does not require any additional monitoring or 

recordkeeping. 

For reporting, the rule establishes the legal authority for a state or tribe to receive 

directly a copy of the reports that the sources provide EPA, as well as an annual 

summary report of cumulative SO, emissions. But, the rule anticipates that this 

inforn~ation may be provided directly from EPA to the WEB Tracking System 

Administrator without the need for a submittal by the source. 

- 

Other Units 

Option to Co~tinue to Use Milestone Tracking Monitoring 

Some facilities (either for an entire facility or for certain units at a facility) can 

continue to use the same monitoring they use for pre-trigger inilestone tracking in 

certain circumstances. These sources would implement a unjque non-tradeable 

allowance option in return for the reduced monitoring obligations. 

This option is available to: 

-- Smelting operations with hgitive SO, emissions 

-- Flares (except to the extent they are used as a he1 gas combustion device) 

-- Units where the underlying allocations did not assume any control levels (e.g., 

cement and lime kilns) 

For unitslsources that implement ths option, the owner or operator will have to 

submit: 

-- Notice of all applicable units at the applicable source? specibing the units to be 

covered by the option. 

NMED Exhibit # 4 
WEB Monitoring Overview 

May 30,2003 

Page 2 

-- The portion of the source's overall allowance allocation attributable to any units 

covered by the option. 

-- Identification of any units that are permanently retired. -- A modified notice for each new unit at a source electing th'e non-tradeable 

allowance option for which the Account Representative applies for an 

allocation under the new source set-aside provisions of the WEB rule. 

The state or tribe would evaluate the request to llnplement the non-tradeable 

allowance option. If necessary, the state or tribe can exclude any units that did not 

qualifjr for the option and adjust the portion of allowances that did qualify to'be 

consistent with the methodology used to establish the floor level (and reducible 

allocation) for the source. I 

\ 

The state or tribe would hold allowances equal to the adjusted portion of the 

source's allowances in a special reserve account maintained by the state or tribe. 

No hold back of allowances in this reserve'would be required for permanently 

retired units that fall into this category of "non-tradeable allowance" units. 

The source's Account Representative would subinit an annual e~nissions statement 

for each unit included in the non-tradeable allowance option. The source would be 

required to maintain records to estimate annual emissions consistent with the 

methodology used to establish the fioor level (and reducible allocation) for the - 

source. 

s Based on this report, the state or tribe would retire allowances to account for 

emissions for units included in the non-tradeable allowance option. If the estimated 

einissions fi-om all the "non-tradeable allowance" units at the source are less than or 

equal to the number of allo~~ances held in the special reserve account by the state 

or tribe for the source, the state or tribe would retire all of the reserve allowances. 

If the estimated elnissions are greater (generally because of increased operating 

levels or some other change in operating practices at the source), the source's 

Account Representative would have to reporr the excess amount as part of the 

cumulative annual enissions report for the source and would be required to use 

other allowances in the source's coinpliance account to account for these emissions. 

Sources electing the non-tradeable allowance option would not be subject to the 

other requirements of the WEB rule. 
WEB Monitoring Overview 

May 30,2003 

Page 3 

Other Options for Non--4cid Rain Progran~ Units 

For other SO, emitting units not subject to Part 75, the WEB rule generally 

requires the use of Part 75 monitoring, but also includes special protocols for (a) 

refinery fuel gas units and (b) cement or lime ltilns that use positive pressure fabric 

fd ters. 

It is important to note that the Part 75 monitoring options include non-continuous 

emission monitoring system (CEMS) options. For small, gas or oil fired boilers and 

turbines (525 tons per year SO2), Part 75 allows the use of default SO: values and 

maximum heat input values (or long term heat input calchlations) to estimate SO, 

mass emissions. For larger gas or oil fired units, Part 75 allows the use of he1 

sampling and fuel flow metering to calculate SO, mass emissions. Other units must 

use CEMS for SO, and stack flow. , 

Refinery fuel gas colnbustion devices may use a special WEB protocol designed to 

build on existing monitoring practices under the New Source Performance 

Stardards for petroleum refineries. See the sunmary: below, of Appendix A to the 

WEB rule for a detailed overview of this methodo logy. 

Emission inventory data indicate that so~ne cement and lime kilns use positive 

pressure fabric fdters. These units do not have suitable stacks for locating a 

monitor downstream of the control device. Based on experience in the South 

Coast AQMD in California: flow monitot-&g upstream of the control device may be 

difficult because of the particulate loading in the gas stream. Appendix A to the 

WEB rule establishes a protocol for these situations -- see the summary, below, of 

Appendix A. 

Sources also can petition for alternative monitoring requirements. Any petition will 

require approval by the state or tribe and U.S. EPA. 

Other Elenze~zts -- Monitoring Plans and Colnpliance Deadlines 

To ensure that states and tribes have an early understanding of the basic approach a 

source will use to meet these requirements, sources would submit a simplified, 

initial monitoring plan in advance of a more detailed monitoring plan. 

For sources that are WEB sources on or before the Program Trigger Date, the 

initial monitoring plan would be due 180 days after the Program Trigger Date. 

Existing sources that become WEB sources after the Program Trigger Date would 

have to submit an initial monitoring plan by September 30 of the year following the 

inventory year in which the source exceeded the emissions threshold. New WEB 

sources would have to submit the plan with their permit application for New 

Source Review. 
WEB Monitoring Overview 

May 30,2003 

Page 4 

The detailed monitoring plan uses the model established in Part 75. Rather than 

refer to Part 75, the elements of the plan are set forth in the WEB monitoring rule. 

this approach makes the WEB rule self-contained for these requirements, and 

eliminates a few inappl?cable requirements in the Part 75 provisions. 

Sources would have to install and certify monitoring systems as follows: (a) if a 

WEB source on or before the Program Trigger Date? taro years prior to the start of 

the first control period as provided for in the rule; (b) if a WEB source after the 

Prograin Trigger Date, one year after the monitoring plan is due; (c) if a new web 

source, the earlier of 90 unit operating days or 180 calendar days after the date the 

new source commences operation. This will provide a ulindow of time for sources 

,II : to work out any monitoring and reporting issues well in advance of the fist control .I I , 

period. I 

Other EZe?nents -- Substitute Data Requil-ements 

I 

Because the monitoring under a trading program needs to account for all emissions, 

sources would be required to substitute for missing or invalid unit data in 

accordance with either Part 75 (or WEB Appendix A, if applicable). 

For SO, ernitling units without a certified (or provisionally certified) monitoring 

system in place at the beginning of the first control period, sources would be 

required to substitute for missing or invalid unit data in accordance with either (a) 

the conditional data validation proceduresf 40 CFR 75.2O(b)(3) [for CEMS]; (b) 

section 2.4 of appendix D to Part 75 [for the fuel sampling and metering option]; 

(c) the appropriate einission factor in 40 CFR 75.19 and the unit's maximum rated 

hourly heat input [if using the default monitoring for small units under Part 751; or 

(d) the provisions in WEB Appendix A, if applicable. 

Other Elements -- Repol-ting 

8 Quarterly reports would be required within 30 days after the end of each calendar 

quarter. An annual statement oftotd annual SO, emissions for all SO, emitting 

units at the source would be required within 30 days after the end of the control 

period. 

8 No particular reporting format and software are specified at this time. The 

expectation is that quarterly reporting comparable to Part 75 will be required. This 

approach will allow WEB sources to use the reporting software already developed 

for EPA trading progams rather than being required to develop separate custom 

software just for the WEB program. 
WEB Monitoring Overview 

May 30: 2003 

Page 5 

Overview of WEB Monitoring Protocols (Appendix A) 

Appendix A of the SO2 monitoring provisions for the WEB trading program 

include two additional monitoring protocols as optional alternatives to Part 75 methods for 

petroleum refinery he1 gas combustion devices: and cement or lime kilns controlled by 

positive pressure fabric filters. 

WEB-1 SO, Monitoring of Fuel Gas Combustion Devices 

11 General Requirements/Options I I I 

This protocol allows petroleum reheries to monitor SO, mass elnissions from fuel 

gas combustion devices (boilers, process heaters, and flares burning fuel gas generated by 

the refmery) based on existing monitoring technolpy required by the refinery New Source 

Performance Standards in 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart J. It also allows for monitoring at a 

smgle location to detennine elnissions fioin a group of combustion devices if emissions at 

that location are representative of emissions for the unrnonitored units. There are three 

possible approaches a refinery can choose under this protocol: 

* Use continuous fue! gas monitoring system (CFGMS) to detennine the total sulfur 

content of the fuel gas combined with continuous fuel flow metering to deterinine 

the amount of he1 gas burned. SO, rilass elnissions in Ibsh are detennined using a 

mass balance approach assuming all the he1 - sulfur is converted to SO,. 

Use continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS) for SO, and stack flow at a 

representative stack combined with continuous he1 flow metering. The SO, mass 

emissions rate in Ibshr &om the representative stack (fuel gas combustion device) 

is detennined based on Part 75 SO, CEMS and flow CEMS. This representative 

emission rate is multiplied by the rzit io of the total amount of fuel gas burned by all 

the applicable combustion devices to the amount of fuel gas monitored by the 

CEMS-monitored fuel ?as com~ustion device. 

Use an SO,-Diluent CEMS at a representative stack combined with coiltinuous fuel 

flow metering, and fuel sampling and analysis for fuel heat content. The SO, mass 

emissions rate in lb/mrnBtu from the representative stack is determined using the 

SO,-diluent CEMS. This representative emission rate is multiplied by the ratio of 

the total fuel heat input to all ofthe applicable combustion devices to the heat input 

to the CEMS-monitored fie1 gas combustion device. 

Other Key Technical Features 

The SO? CEMS, SO1-diluent CEMS, continuous he1 flow meters: and he1 

sampling and analysis are all subject to Part 75 performance specifications and 

quaiity assurance'quality control requirements. 
WEB on it or in^ Overview 

May 30,2003 

Page 6 

The CFGMS performance specifications and quality assurancelquality control 

requirements are based on a combination of EPA Performance Specification 2, 

South Coast Air Quality Management District requirements, and Part 75. " 

A bias test as described in Appendix A to Part 75 is applied to emission 

measurements made under each option. 

Applicable Part 75 substitute data approaches are used for inissing data periods. 

There are additional monitoring plan requirements for sources measuring at a single 

represeatative location for a group of units. For instance, the source would specif\! 

I in the monitoring plan an identifier for a group of units monitored by a single 

protocol. The source would report the emissions from thk group under that 

identifier and would not apportion mass emissions to each individual unit. 

MTEB-2 Predictive Flow Monitoring Systems for Kilns with Positive Pressure 

Fabric Filter 

9 This protocol applies only to cement or lime Itilns controlled by positive pressure 

fabric filters. Positive pressure fabric filters typically do not have a suitable stack 

location for installing an SO, CEMS or flow CEMS after the control device. 

CEMS can be installed in the ductwork prior to the fabric filter, but stack flow 

rnonitors may have in~erference problems d-ue to the high uncontrolled particulate 

loading at upstream locarions. This protoccl specfies requirements for a predictive 

flow monitoring sysrem (FFMS) for these limited situations. 

@ The results of the predictive flow monitoring under this protocol are combined with 

measurements from a Part 75 SO, CEMS upsrream of the fabric filter to determine 

' the SO, emission rate. 

The protocol defmes a PFMS and outlines perforn~mce specifications; certification, 

quality ~surance/quality control, and substitute data requirements. The parameters 

monitored by the PFMS are not specified: but thePFMS must be abl'e to pass a 

flow RATA, and is subject to a bias adjustment factor (BAF). 

The monitoring plan must document the reasons for selecting the parameters 

included in the PFMS. The plan also must document why the upstream interference 

is significant enough to make stack flow CEMS unreliable. 
ElB HEARING RE 20.2.81, 1111 8/03 

OF-. 

I 

--**- - 

3 

1 INDEX 

2 PAGE 

3 WITNESSES: 

4 MARY HILBERT, MARY UHL, RITA TRUJILLO and 

5 PATRICK CUMMINS 

6 Dlrect Examlnatlon of Mary Hilbert 

7 by MS. Hughes 8 

8 Cross Examination by the Board 21 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

2 0 

2 1 

2 2 

2 3 

2 4 

25 

4 

1 EXHIEITS 

2 M?.RKED/ADMI TTET 

3 NMED: 

4 1. Proposed regulation 20.2.81 NMAC 2 0 

5 2 Direct Testimony of Mary Hilbert 20 

6 3. Western Backstop (WEB) Emissions and 2 0 

7 P.llowance Tracklng System (EATS) 

8 Analysis 

9 4. Summary Fact Sheet for WEB Tradlng 20 

10 Program: Monltorlng, Recordkeeplng 

11 and Reporting 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

2 0 

2 1 

2 2 

23 

2 4 

2 5 

COURT REPORTERS 

8 50 

1 

1 STATE OF NEW MEXICO 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENT BOARD 

2 

3 No. EIB 03-08C 

4 IN THE MATTER OF 

PETITION FOR HEARING ON 

5 PROPOSED 20.2.81 - WESTERN BACKSTOP 

SULFUR DIOXIDE TRADING PROGw 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 TRRNSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS 

11 

12 BE IT REEEMBERED that on the 18th day of 

13 November, 2003, the above-entitled matter came on for 

14 hearlng before the New Mexlco Envlroqmental Improvement 

15 Board, taken at the State Capltol Bulldlng, Room 321, 

16 Santa Fe, New Mexlco, at the hour of 9:47 AM. 

17 

18 

19 

2 0 

2 1 

22 

2 3 

2 4 

2 5 

2 

1 APPEARANCES 

2 

3 For the Environmental Improvement Board: 

4 GAY DILLINGHAM, Chalr 

GREGORY GREEN, Secretary 

5 GWEN WARDWELL 

HAROLD TSO 

6 DOLORES HERRERA 

7 MARY H. SMITH 

A~sistant Attorney General 

6 Offlce of the Attorney General 

111 Lomas Bouleverd, Northwest 

9 Sulte 300 

Albuouerque, New Mexlco 67102 

I" 

I 

I 

- 

11 For the New Mexlco Envrronment Department: 

12 TWCY HUGHES 

Speclal P-sslstant Attorney General 

13 Ofilce of General Counsel 

New Mexlco Environment Department 

10 1190 St. Francls Drlve 

Santa Fe, Neh Mexlco 87505 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

2 0 

2 1 

122 

23 

2 4 

2 5 

KA-rw TOWSEND 

505243-501 
MS. HERRERA: Good morning, everybody. 

I want to welcome everybody to the 

Environmentai Improvement Board. 

This is a hearing in EIB 03-08C to consider 

amendments to 20.2.81 NMAC, the rules governing the 

Western Backstop Sulfur Dioxide Trading Program. 

Today is November 17th, 2003 -- lath, and 

we're meeting in Room 321 of the State Capitol. 

I am Dolores Herrera, an Environmental 

Improvement Board member designated as the Hearing 

Officer in this matter. 

The petitioner in this matter is the New 

Mexico Environment Department. Petitioner states that 

the reason for the proposed amendments is to enable the 

State Implementation Plan, or SIP, S-I-P, and its rules 

EIB HEARING RE 20.2.81, 11/18/03 

to comply with the federal regional haze rule. 

5 

'I, Petitioner further states that 20.2.81 New .I I , ~e<ico -- NMAC establishes the procedures and compliance 

7 

requirements for sources in the Western Backstop Sulfur 

Dioxide Trading Program. 

The Environmental Improvement Board is 

mandated by Section 74-1-8.A.(41 of the Environmental 

Improvement Act and Sectlon 74-2-7 of the Air Quality 

Control Act to adopt rules regarding air quality 

manaoement. 

6 

This hearing will be condccted in accordance 

with the Board's rule-making procedures and in a fair 

and impartial manner so as to assure that the relevant 

facts are fully elicited and to provide a reasonable 

opportunity for all persons to be heard without making 

the hearing unreasonably lengthy or cumbersome or 

burdening the record with unnecessary repetition. 

The Rules of Civil Procedure and Evidence 

shall not apply to this hearing. As Hearing Officer, I 

will make such orders as may be necessiry to preserve 

decorum and to protect the orderly hearing process. 

The heiring shall proceed as previously 

detailed by Hearing Officer Harold "so with regard to 

the nearing in SIB @3-08A to consider revisions to the 

Regional Haze State Implementation Plan. 

Now we will proceed with ali persons h7ho h7ish 

co testliy at this hearing on behalf of the petitior~er. 

Will you please stand so that the court 

reporcer may administer the oath? 

MARY HILBERT, RITA TRUJILLO, 

MARY UHL and PATRICK CUMMINS 

having been first duly sworn or affirmed, were 

examined and testified as follows: 

THE REPORTER: Would you each please state 

MS. HILBERT: Mary Hilbert. 

MS. TRUJILLO: Rita Trujillo. 

MS. UHL: Mary Uhi. rr** 

MR. CUMMINS: Patrick Cummins. 

MS. HERRERA: At this time, I'm going to ask 

if the petitioner would like to make a brief opening 

.statement, and if so, please come to the table and make 

that statement. 

MS. HUGHES: Thank you, Madam Hearing Officer. 

Very briefly, as you stated, this hearing is a 

regulatory hearing. You're going to -- we're going to 

walk you through the regulations that are being proposed 

for the sulfur dioxide as a backstop program if the 502 

milestones are exceeded. This is 20.2.81 NMAC. We'll 

refer to it as Part 81. 

Testifying for the Department will be Mary 

Hilbert, ayld, thankfully, the other Environment 

Department witnesses that were sworn in are available 

for cross-examination and questions, help to answer 

questions that the Board may have, as a pznel. 

So we would like for just Ms. Eilbert to 

present direct testimony, and then the remaining 

witnesses will be availabie for cross-examination. 

With that, we're ready to proceed. 

MS. HERRERA: Okay. You can go ahead. t-i 

Petitioner may now present direct testimony on these -- 

the proposed rule amendments. 

MR. TSO: Madam Hearing Officer, jrst a 

question on procedure here. 

1 note that Ms. Ely and Mr. Norton did not 

rise with the panel. 

Are you going to be involved in this, also? 

MS. ELY: We are not testifying in this 

hearing. 

MR. TSO: Okay. Good. Thank you. 

MS. HERREW.: Okay. 

Are you all right with that? 

MR. TSO: Yes. 

MS. HERRERA: All right. 

Go ahead, proceed. 

MS. HUGHES: Thank you, Madam Hearing Officer. 

DIRECT EDJ-lINATION OF MPRY HILBERT 

BY MS. HUGHES: 

Q. Please state your name. 

A. Mary Hilbert. 

Q. And your educational background? 

h 

A. I have a bachelor of science degree in 

environmental science and menagement from New Mexicc 

Hiqhlands University. 

25 your names? Q. And where are you employed? 

wrHY TOWNSEND COURT REPORTERS 
1 A. I work for Control Strategies Section of the I 1 

will be required to adhere to the requirements of the 

EIB HEARING RE 20.2.81, 1 111 8/03 

2 Air Quality Bureau. 

3 Q. And what do you do for that section? 

4 A. We develop -- we work on the SIPS, as we are 

9 

2 Western Backstop Sulfur Dioxide Trading Program. 

5 Proposed Part 81 contains some typographicai 

4 errors which have been corrected. The word "excepted" 

11 

policies for air quality issues throughout the State of 

New Mexico. And we develop educational materials and go 

out to communities and talk with the public about 

different issues that we have. 

Q. Okay. 

And you have written testimony that was 

prefiled, and that's Exhibit Number 2; is that correct? 

A. Yes. 

1 5 today in this hearing. We develop regulations and 1 

Q. Okay. 

And with that, would you please read your 

pgpfkled testimony? 

,I I 

,. 'A. Good morning. 

I'm here to propose adoption of 20.2.81 NMAC, 

hereafter which I'll refer to as Part 81, which contains 

the requirements that will apply to major industrial 

sources of sulfur dioxide as a backstop regulatory 

5 was used in the wrong context and has been corrected to 

prooram if the SO2 milestones are exceeded. 

The rule may never be implemented if the gozl 

to meet the regional SO2 milestones through voluntary 

means is achieved. If the proposed rule is implemented, 

10 

lt establishes the procedures and compliance 

requirements for sources in the Western Backstop Sulfur 

Dioxide Trading Program. 

Under the Clean Air Act, states must require 

certain older large facilities to install the best 

emission controls available as part of state strategies 

for meeting the requirements of the federal regional 

haze rule. 

This requirement, known as the best available 

retrofit ~echnology, or BART requirement, applies to 

plants emitting pcllutancs that contribute t o v i s i b i l i t y 

degradation. 

The BART requirement applies to facilities 

built between 1962 and 1977 that have a potential to 

emit more than 250 cons a year of visibility-impeiring 

pollution. These facilities fall into 26 categories, 

including urility and industrial boilers and large 

industrial plants such as pulp mills, refrneries end 

smelters. 

Proposed Part 81 applies to any stationary 

source that is considered BART eligible due to sulfur 

dioxide emissions or any source that has actual SO2 

emissions of 100 tons or more per year. 

If regional SO2 emissions exceed the 

read "accepted." 

I'll now give you a little overview of the 

sections that make up proposed Part 81. 

As far as applicability, I've already 

described these sources that will need to comply with 

this Part 81. 

Subsections C and D. Once a source is subject 

to the trading progrzm, it will remain in the program 

every year thereafter. Section D includes requirements 

for sources who wish to apply for retired source 

exemptions. 

I Sectlon 102. Owners and operators of WEE 

sources are required to appolnt an account 

representative to represent them in matters pertaining 

to the trading program. 

The account representative wili transfer 

allowances, submit monitoring plans, register the source 

in the program, submit certification applications, 

sulfur dioxide emissions data and compliance reports and 

complete any other administrative matters pertaining to 

12 

the trading program. 

Section 103. Cnce the trading program is 

triggered, each source that is a WEB source must 

register by submitting an initial certificate no later 

than 180 days after the program has been triggered. 

Section 104. This section of the proposed 

rule outlines requirements necessary to implement the 

trading program. Once the trading program is begun, 

states participating in this trading program will 

establish a realonal tracking system administrator. 

Each stace participating in the trzding 

program will be responsible for submitting a draft 

allocations report to a11 other participating states and 

to the tracking system administretor. The report will 

list all WEB sources in the state, ellowance allocations 

for each source, early reduction Donus allocations and 

allocations for new or modified WEB sources. 

The cracking system administrator will compile 

this information into a draft regional allocations 

report and submit this draft regional report to the 

participating states and tribes for review. 

The draft regional report will also include a 

proposed budget for each state and tribe and the 

proposed allocation for each WEB source. The proposed 

125 milestones, Part 81 will come into effect, and sources 125 allocation will be available for public review and 

KATHY TOWNSEND COURT REPORTERS 
EIB HEARING RE 20.2.81. 1 111 8/03 

13 

comment. 

States and tribes will submit proposed changes 

of the preliminary allocations and budget to the 

tracking system administrator. The tracking system 

administrator will compile these proposed changes, 

submit a draft final regional allocation report to 

trading program participants for approval. 

States and tribes participating in the trading 

program are committed to working together to review 

these regional reports. 

Section 105. The federal regional haze rule 

requires states and tribes participating in the trading 

program to provide a centralized system for tracking of 

allowances and emissions. The centralized system is 

referred to as the WEB Allowance Tracking System, or WEB 

E.T S . 

The WEB ATS will provide necessary information 

reparding emissions, allowances and transactions in a 

publicly available, secure, centralized database. 

Specifications of the WEB ATS, such as 

emissions tracking, the recording of illowance 

transactions, account management, system integrity and 

transparency, are described in a report prepared for the 

WaP titled Western Emissions Backstop Emissions and 

the process for transferring allowances between parties. I 

Transfers are defined as the conveyance from 

one account to another account, be char a compiiance rl*h, I 

1 account or a general account, of one or more allowan 

by whatever means, including but not limited to 

purchase, trade or gift in accordance with the 

procedures in Part 81, Section 107. 

This section includes the requirements 

necessary for'the WEB sources' account representatives 

to submit information to this tracking system . 

administrator and transfer allowances. I 

The federal regional haze rule -- this is I 

Section 108 -- requires that allowances kept for use in 

future years may be used in ~alendar year 2018 only to 

the extent that the implementation plan guqrantees that 

such allowances will not interfere with the achievement 

of the 2018 milestone. ' 

Section 108 addresses this requirement by 

prohibiting the use after the year 2017 of allowances 

allocated for the years 2003 through 2017. This 

provision ensures that actual emissions will be less 

than the 2018 milestone because only allowances 

allocated for the year 2018 could be used to show 

compliance in that year. 

/ 2 

C-1 in the proposed Regional Haze SIP and as Eshibir: 3 1 2 allowing sources to once again use extra allowances tc 1 

25 f.llowance Tracking System, or EATS, Knalysis. 

14 

1 A copy of this report is provided in Appendix 

3 included in this testimony. 3 show compliance in any future year. l This report and this section of the proposed I This flexibility is important for sources tha: 

2 5 The provision also maintains flexibility by 

1 resetting the baseline to the year 2018 and then 

rule detail how A WEE source will recister for the 

allowance cracking system, and the source will, through 

an account representative, establish accounts, transfer 

allowances and track unused allowances from a previous 

year. 

Section 106. The federal regional haze rule 

includes specific requirements for monitoring, 

record-keeping and reporting of suifur dioxide omissions 

from WEB sources once the trading program is trioaered. 

I refer the Board to Exhibit 4, the Summary 

Fact Sheet for the WE6 Trading Program: Monitoring, 

Recordkeepinc and Reporting. 

This section of the rule was developed by a 

WRAP workgroup with che technical expertise in 

19 mor.itoring methodology necessary to address the needs I 

20 anc' minimize burdens on the affected sources and provide 

21 flexibility to the k-ide variety of facilities and 

22 emissions units that will be covered under the Western 

23 aackstop Trading Program. 

2 4 Section 107. The federal regional haze rule 

have variable operations because the source may build up 

a reserve of unused allowances fcr use in a kiqh 

production year. 

Section 109. When a WEB source exceeds its 

allowance limitation, the trading pzogram requires the 

tracking system administrator to deduct allowances from 

the following year's illocation in an amount equzi to 

two times the WEB source's emissions of SO2 in excess of 

its allowance limitation. This deduction shall be made 

from the WEB source's compliance account. 

If sufficient allowances do not exist in the 

compliance account for the next control period to cover 

this amount, the tracking system administrator will 

18 deduct the required number of allowances, regardless of 

19 the control period for which they have been allocated, 

20 whenever the allowances are reported in that account. I 

2 1 The amount of the penalty shall be evaluated 

22 at each five-year SIP review and adjusted to ensure 

23 penalties per ton substantially exceed the expected cost 

24 of allowances to ensure that this remains a stringent 

( 25 includes provisions for the trading program detailing 1 25 penalty. 1 

KATHY TOWSEND COURT REPORTERS 
EIB HEARING RE 20.2.81, 11/18/03 I I I 

1 Part 81 establishes a penalty of $5,000 per 

l7 I 1 conditions upstream of the fabric filter that the WEB 

ton per day for each ton of emissions above the source's 

aliowance limitation. In addition, two allowances from 

the next year's allocation will be deducted from the 

account for each ton of exceedance. Under Part 81, 

sources are also liable for penalties for each day of 

violations of the program's other requirements. 

Section 110. If the WEB Trading Program is 

triggered and the first control period will not occur 

until after the year 2018, a special penalty shall be 

assessed for the exceedance of the 2018 milestone. 

The Department shall allocate allowances to 

all WEB sources as established in the 2013 SIP revision. 

WEB sources will have the option to buy and sell 

allowances during a two-month allowance transfer period 

a91.provided in Section 110 of Part 81. 

.!I ', At the end of this two-month allowance 

transfer period, compliance with the allowance 

limitation will be determined for each source. 

Penalties shall be assessed for SO2 emissions that are ' I 

greater than the allowance limitation for each WEB 

source. 

Section 111. This section of Part 81 was 

developed by a WRAP workgroup with the technical 

participating in the trading program. 1 

expertise in monitoring methodology needed by specific 

18 

These monitoring requirements are applicable 1 

25 

to fuel gas combustion devices at petroleum refineries. 

Fuel gas combustion devices include boilers, process 

heaters and flares used to burn fuel gas generated at a 

petroleum refinery. Fuel gas means any gas which is 

generated and combusted at a petroleum refinery. 

Fuel gas does not ir~ciude natural gas, unless 

combined with other gases generated at the refinery, 

qases generated by a catalytic tracking unit catalyst 

reqenerator, gases generated by fluid coking burners, 

gases combusted to produce sulfur or sulfuric acid or 

process upset gases generated due to start-up, shutdown 

or malfunctions. 

This section of the rcle includes monitoring 

plan and reporting requirements, certification 

requirements, quality assurance/quality control 

requirements and missing data procedures specific to 

petroleum refineries. 

Section 112. This section of 20.2.81 NYAC was 

also developed by a WRAP technical workgroup. 

These monitoring reqnirements are applicable 

to cement kilns or lime kilns that are controlled by a 

facilities and emissions units that will be 1 

source documents would reasonably prevent the reliable 

flow monitor measurements. 

This section of the rule includes monitoring 

plan reporting requirements, certification requirements, 

quality assurance and quality control requirements and 

missing data procedures specific to cement kilns or lime 

kilns by positive pressure fabric filcers. 

In conclusion, I'd like to say that all states 

submitting a SIP under Section 309 of the regional haze 

rule will adopt virtually identical rules to implement 

the Western Backstop Trading Program. It is critical 

that states administer the trading program in a 

consistent manner. This is an essential piece of the 

stationary source program for the SIP. 

And that concludes my testimony. 

S. HUGHES: Madam Hearing Officer, if I may, 

the NMED Exhibit Number 1 is che proposed rule. 

Exhibit Number 2 is Ms. Hilbert's direct 

Exhibit Number 3 is the western Emissions 

Eackstop (WEB) Emissions and Allowance Tracking System 

(EATS) Analysis, which is also Appendix C-1 of the SIP. 

Exhibit 4 is the Summary Fact Sheet for WEB 

Trading Program: Monitoring, Recordkeeping and 

2 0 

Reporting 

So at this time, I'd move for admission of 

NMED's Exhibits 1 throuch 4. 

MS. HERREN: Okay. 

Did we get a11 that in the record? 

THE REPORTER: Yes. 

MS. HERRERq: You're so fasr. Okay. 

Are there any objections from the Board 

members? 

MR. ?SO: Mzdhm Hearing Officer. 

MS. HERREN: Yes, sir. 

MR. TSO: I move that we sccfpt the exhibits 

for this presentation. 

MS. DILLINGHAN: I'll second chat. 

MS. HERRERA: Okay. They'll get entered into 

that record. 

MS. SMITH: You admit them. 

MS. HERRERL;: I admit them into the record. 

(Exhibits NMED 1 through 4 were marked for 

identification and admitted into evidence.) 

MS. HERREW: Does the Board have questions or 

wish to cross-examine this witness? 

MS. HUGHES: Madam Hearing Officer, we'd like 

to bring up the additional witnesses we listed in our 

25 positive pressure fabric filter and have operating 
So if a facility comes forward in advance of 

the time when the program might be triggered znd makes 

emission reductions that go beyond -- well beyond the 

expected reductions for that facility, they would be 

eligible for allowing -- to be awarded allowances for 

the extra reduction that they make. 

And those reductions would essentially come 

away from other source -- the allocation of allowances 

for other sources, thereby rewarding the source that 

ElB HEARING RE 20.2.81, 11/18/03 

25 comes in early and goes beyond what's expected 

21 

1 Mr. Cummins, to assist with questions on this part. 

2 MS. HERREFA: Okay. 

3 MS. HUGHES: Is there any -- 

4 MS. HERRERA: Is that okay with everybody? 

5 MR. GREEN: Yeah. 

6 MS. HERREN: All right. 

7 CROSS EXAMINATION 

8 BY THE BOARD: 

9 MS. HERREN: Yes, sir. Start with you. 

10 MR. GREEN: Can you tell me a little more 

11 about the early bonus program, expand on that? 

12 MR. CUMMINS: The program contains incentives 

13 for early reductions that go beyond what the source 

14 would otherwise be expected to achieve under the 

15 program. 

There is an overall limit on how many early 

reduction credits could be granted in order to ensure 

that :he other sources from which those allowances would 

De coining away -- be taken away from still have enough 

allowances to operate as a clean unit. 

Give you a minute to absorb that. 

MR. GREEN: Yeah. Let me try that -- see if I 

can repeat it. 

MR. CUMMINS: Okay. 

MR. GREEN: If I get these early allowances, 

are chey credited towards me and banked so I c,n use 

then later? 

MR. CUMMINS: Yes, they are. 

MR. GREEN: Can I also sell them? 

MR. CUMMINS: Yes, you can. 

MR. GREEN: Okay. 

So how -- hare's what I'm trying to wrap my 

brain around. With the clear skies initiative, with ell 

the e~rly bonuses, the early credits, all those kinds of 

things, they iooked at it where that you keep banking 

these things -- 

MR. CUMMINS: Right. 

MR. GREEN: -- and you end up with early 

reducrions that look really great on paper, but then 

23 

1 everybody's suddenly decided to spend their allotted 

2 early bonuses, their credits, everything they bought and 

3 all sorts of other things, and then you don't make yo4 2018 goal because of that. 

of the milestones is a hard cap on actual emissions and 

cannot be applied through banking. 

MR. GREEN: Okay. That's hvhat I wanted to 

hear. 

So somebody somewhere is going to realize how 

much people are early banking and how mcch they're 

5 MR. CUMMINS: Yes. 

6 MR. GREEN: What stops me -- what is different 

7 in this prograq? 

8 MR. CUMMINS: That's an excellent question, 

9 and there is h fundamental difference between this 

10 program and the national acid rain program as it exists 

11 today, or as it would exist as proposed under the clear 

12 skies legislation, for example. 

13 Knd that is that the emissions cap in 2018 for 

14 this program is a hard cap on actual emissions. So you 

15 can bank and trade allowances up to that point, but each 

trading, and even if they decide to spend their entire 

bank account, you're still going to make 20i8 hard 

goals. 

, 

2 5 MR. CUMMINS: That1$ ccrrect. 

24 

4 

1 MR. GREEN: Okay. Tt,at's what I wanted to 

2 hear. 

3 Explaln to me gifts. You could actually give 

4 these to each other so -- explain to me the glft 

5 program. 

6 Why would that happei.? Wo~id th;; be. 

7 intercompany? 

6 MR. CUMMINS: I would need to take a look at 

9 tha:. I belleve -- you know, if a source has an 

10 allowance chat it wants to transfer to another source 

and not -- you know, without assessing a fee for that, 

the program alloh~s for that. Why someone would do that, 

1 dcn't know. 

NR. GREEN: And alonc those lines, and that 

leads me into my next question, is the market going to 

set the fee, the amount this credit is worth, or is 

someone qoing to set that, and is my credit worth more 

in New Mexico versus a credit in Utah? I mean, is it 

going to get a little wonky? 

MR. CUMMINS: Nc. It's set by the market. 

MR. GREEN: So if I'm buying credits and 

somebody will sell them to me no matter what the Cost 

can -- that's -- the cost is the cost? 

MR. CUMMINS: That's correct. 

25 later on, it ramps you up, in the year 2015, when 2 5 MR. GREEN: Okay. 1 

KATHY TOWNSEND COURT REPORTERS 

12 a critical mass, how many states and how many sources 

El6 HEARING RE 20.2.81, 11/18/03 

13 need to be in the program in order for it to be a viable 

14 program. They haven't -- it may be that one state is 

15 sufficient. 

16 ,I, : We've got 30 sources, and it may be that New 

17 ~e'kito and Albuquerque and Utah, since Utah has adopted 

2 9 

1 MS. DILLINGHAM: Um-hum. Thank you. 

2 MR. GREEN: Can I do a follow-up to that 

3 question? Do you mind? 

4 MS. HERRERA: Well, just a moment, because -- 

5 MS. WARDWELL: That's okay. No. I'm -- 

6 MS. HERRERA: Oh, is that okay? 

7 MS. WARDWELL: That's fine. 

8 MS. HERRERA: All right. Go ahead. 

9 MR. GREEN: So what happens if it's only us 

10 and Utah? 

11 MS. TRUJILLO: EPA hasn't yet said what makes 

18 it, would be sufficient to have that trading program. 

19 That would be something that EPA would have to look at 

20 all the SIPS that are submitted and make that 

21 determination in approving the 309 SIPS. 

22 MS. HERRERA: Okay. 

23 MR. GREEN: Thank you. 

2 4 MS. HERRERA: Did you finish? 

2 5 MS. DILLINGHAM: Yeah. 

3 0 

1 MS. HERRERA: Okay. Thanks, Ms. Dillingham. 

2 Ms. wardwell: 

3 MS. WARDWELL: The trackin? program is 

31 

1 simply be checked on a regional basis against the 

2 regional cap. 

3 All sources will have to report their -,. 

4 emissions, we'll total it up for all sources greater 

5 than 100 tons per year and, all the states and tribes 

6 participating, compare that to the milestone. If it's 

7 below, we just keep goina. If it's above, the program 

8 is triggered. 

9 MS. WARDWELL: And that's when you start 

10 looking at individual -- 

11 MR. CUMMINS: And once the program is 

4 triggered when somebody exceeds one of the milestones; 

5 is that correct? 

6 MR. CUMMINS: Yes. 

12 triggered, then allowances would be made to individuai 

13 sources, and they would have to start meeting their 

14 allowance limit either by making these reductions or by 

15 purchasing allowances from other sources. 

16 MS. WARDWELL: Okay. 

17 Ad that milestone you said was -- could that 

16 be changed? 

19 MR. CUMMINS: No. As Ms. Trujillo already 

20 indicated, the milestones are established in federal 

21 regulation. 

22 MS. NARDWELL: What if the feds change their 

23 mind? 

2 4 MR. CUMMINS: The revisions to the regional 

25 haze rule incorporating this program were just adopte3 2 

1 in June of -- I believe in May or June of this year, and 

2 that was based on the submittal from the Western 

3 Regional Air Partnership based on a consensus of western 

4 states and tribes. 

5 I think it's inconceivable that EPA would 

6 move -- make any effort to changs those milestones 

from now, or whatever? 

MR. CUMMINS: The first milestone is actually 

2003. 

MS. WFRDWELL: Oh. 

MR. CUMMINS: So -- 

MS. WARDWELL: Haven't we already passed that? 

MR. CUMMINS: The first compliance check will 

be next year for -- 

MS. WARDWELL: for this year. 

MR. CUmINS: -- for this year. 

MS. WARDWELL: So if somebody has exceeded 

chat milestone, then the tracking program is rriggered, 

as you -- 

MR. CUMMINS: And just to be clear, when you 

say "lf someone," it's the total of regional emissions. 

MS. WARDWELL: Okay. Okay. The -- all right. 

MR. CUMMINS: Until the program is triggered, 

17 MS. WARDWELL: Like the first one five years 1 

tribes, which, again, is basically inconceivable from my 

standpoint. 

MS. WARDWELL: Well, I tlope you're right. 

MR. CUMMIIJS: On thls one, I'm pretty sure I 

can say that with confidence. 

MS. NARDWELL: Okay. That's all I have. 

MS. HERRERP.: Thanks. 

Mr. Tso. 

MR. TSO: Just a question so I can understand 

it. 

Ms. Hilbert, on your testimony, pape 5, 

paraoraph dealing with part -- Section 111, Part 81, I 

think it's the first full section there on page 5 -- 

MS. HILBERT: Um-hum. Adm 

MR. TSO: -- the second paragraph, you ment 

that the fuel gas includes boilers, process heaters and 

7 unless that was somehow requested by western states and 

flares used to burn fuel gas generated at a petroleum 

I 

25 individual sources will not have an allowance. It will 25 refinery. 1 

KATHY TOWNSEND COURT REPOR-TERS 
EIB HEARING RE 20.2.81, 11/18/03 

33 

Just so as I can understand this flare, is 

this the giant flame that you see at refineries as you 

pass them, whether it be morning, noon or night? This 

is -- is that that -- 

MS. HILBERT: Yes. I believe it is. Yes. 

MR. TSO: Okay. All right. Thank you. 

Oh, I do have another question related to 

that. 

Have these sources been monitored -- well, 

have they been monitored, and have they been modeled? 

I'm thinking in terms of air sheds, and not 

giant air sheds, but the mini air sheds, where they 

might be located in a bowl, in a depression, and they do 

flaring there. 

MS. UHL: Yes. And we do -- we do actually -- 

tl?r'e is mcnitoring in the sense that these facilities 

,I I $ 

al:' have permanent emission limits and monitoring 

requirements, such as periodic testing, record-keeping, 

reporting to the Department. 

We also do air dispersion modeling throughout 

the state for every permit issued, every air quality 

permit issued, and that modeling includes cumulative 

23 analysis. 

2 4 So it's not only the source that's requesting 

25 the permit, but also that all the surrounding sources 

3 5 

that are uncontrolled or undercontrolled and can very 

cost effectively reduce their sulfur dioxide emissions. 

So as far as the states outside the program, 

the thing that we have to recognize there is that they 

are not off the hook in any way. They still have to 

comply with the regional haze ruie under Section 308 

which requires them either to establish a similar 

emissions trading program or to seek reductions from 

these sources on a source-by-source basis. 

And they're also required to demonstrate that 

they're making reasonable progress toward improving 

visibility, not only at the Class I areas in their state 

but also addressing any impact that sources in their 

state have on Class I areas in other states. 

So there really is -- there's no safe harbor 

here where somebody could go end avoid the implications \ 

of the regional haze regulations. 

MS. DILLING-: Okay. Thank you. 

MS. HERRERA: Okay. Okeyaoky. I have a 

couple of questions now. 

I wanted to know in regard to the oversight 

22 that's going to need to happen, who's going to pay for 

23 that? How is it going to be paid for? 

2 4 And the reason that I'm asking is that you 

25 addressed special penalties, and yesterday I asked the 

1 and that source do not cause or contribute to a 

2 violation of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

3 or the state ambient air quzlity stzndards. 

4 MR. TSO: Thank you. 

5 MS. HERRERA: Is that it? 

6 Okay. 

7 Are there any other questions from the Board? 

MS. DILLINGHAM: I'll go ehead and ask another 

one. 

MS. HERRERA: Okay. 

MS. DILLINGHAM: Thank you. 

Has NMED studied eny potential impacts to 

industry if the other states don't make a decision and 

end up with 3067 Will industries end up migriting 

elsewnere out of the state? Do we -- do you have an 

assessment of that? 

MR. CUMMINS: The WWP did an analysis -- an 

economic analysis of where the reductions micht be 

expected to occur within the region if the program was 

triggered. 

The -- and what you see is a pretty uniform 

distribution of emission reductions. Every state has 

sources that can control cost effectively. And what 

we're really talking here is coal-fired power plants. 

3 6 

question in regard to doliars, and you said that -- or 

we were toid that money was going to go into the general 

fund. 

And so I wondered, could you expound on that a 

little bit? 

MS. UHL: The enforcement and penalties levied 

for this program will go into the general fund. There 

is money that flows to the regional planning 

orqanization, which in this case is the WRAP, and the 

WW.P helps us immensely ir. creating proqrems and even 

being able tc develop regulations, too. 

MS. ilERREm: Could I just interrupt just e 

minute? 

Money flows from where? 

MS. UHL: Well, for the penalties, it goes 

into the general fund. 

MS. HERREW.: Okay. But -- 

MS. UHL: It doesn't go back to the 

Environment Department. 

MS. HERRERA: Okey. I don't want to talk at 

the same time because then she'll come and she'll look 

at me and smile and make me feel very uncomfortable. 

Money flows from where? 

You just said to the WRAP. 

125 Every state in this program has coal-fired power plants 1 25 MS. UHL: Oh, from EPA -- 

KATHY TOWNSEND COURT REPORTERS 
EIB HEARING RE 20.2.81, 11/18/03 

I 37 39 1 

MS. HERRERA: From EPA. 

MS. UHL: -- to the regional planning 

organization, and that is -- that is the primary 

mechanism that EPA uses to get money to the states for 

regional haze programs. 

MS. HERRERA: And are those dollars guaranteed 

dollars? 

MS. UHL: Well -- 

MS. HERREN: Are they five-year plan? Is 

it -- 

MS. UHL: It's -- every year there's a grant. 

I mean, nothing's ever a guarantee with money. 

MS. HERRERA: Okay. 

So the second question that I have is in 

recard to your communications state to state. You found 

out that yesterday Utah had approved 109. 

What is your communication with the other 

Stites? 

MS. UHL: 309. 

MS. HERRERA: 309. Sorry. 

MS. UHL: And through the WRAP we have very, 

very good communication with the other states. We -- in 

fact, recently, as all the states have been preparing 

their State Implementation Plans on 309 and developing 

testify -- 

MS. SMITH: Present technical testimony. 

MS. HERRERA: -- present technical resrimon.- 

and these -- this testimony has to be limited to the 

matters contained in petitioner's direct testimony or 

petitioner's credibility. 

MS. SMTTH: No. 

MS. HERRERA: Oh. 

MS. SMITH: Just -- 

MS. HERRERA: My first part. She said'no, no, 

so -- 

MS. HUGHES: Madam -- 

MS. HERRERA: You guys get it. 

MS. HUGHES: Madam Bearing Officer, we're not 

aware of anyone else who's filed a notice of intent in 

this matter. 

MS. HERRERA: bkay. 

Now we go to number 10. 

This is my first time doing this, and it's 

pretty exciting, you guys. I'm enjoying this. She told 

me I wore a crown, and I sald of thorns, but it's -- now 

I'm going to -- let's see. 

Now, we have a sign-up sheet, and so I'm going 

to ask, are there any persons who have signed up to 

38 

weekly to discuss among the states. 

And so the minute that Utah's SIP for 309 was 

adopted by their Board, an E-mail went out to ell the 

other states that are working on 309 SIPS. 

I feel it's excellent communications wlth the 

other states. 

MS. HERRERA: Okay. 

I guess my point is, where are they swaying? 

25 regulations, we've had conference calls, lt seems like, 

Where are the other states swaying, since you have 

excellent communication? 

MR. CUMXINS: There are five states thac have 

proposed to submit Section 309 reglonal haze plans, and 

those are Utah, New Mexico, Orepon, Wyoming and Arizona. 

And I believe that the Navajo Nstion is also 

considering working with EPA to consider whether they 

should join the program. 

So we anticipate that there will be five 

states, including New Mexico, that submit Section 309 

plans by the end of next month, which is the deadline. 

MS. HERRERA: Okay. Thank you very much. 

25 provide nontechnical testimony? '41 

Does anyone else wish to cross-esamine the 

22 witnesses? 

I 

4 0 

1 NO. 

2 We have Greg Moore and Jordan Vauphn. 

3 Do you wish to give nontechnical testimony at 

4 this time -- 

5 MS. VAUGHN: No. 

6 MS. HEhRERA: -- at this hearing? 

7 Which hearing is it that you're going tc 

8 provide -- 

MS. VAUGHN: The 20.2.60 NMRC, open burnlng 

provision. 

XS. SMITE: Are YOU Jordan Vaughn? 

MS. SrAUGHN: I'm Jordan Vaushn. 

MS. SMITH: Okay. 

And Mr. Moore? 

MR. MOORE: The same one. 

MS. SMITH: 20.?.60? 

MR. MOORE: Yes, ma'am. 

MS. HERREN: This is great. 

So does the petitioner have a brief clcsing 

argument: 

2 1 And if so, come forward, make that. I 

22 -,I MS. HUGHES: Madam Hearing Offlcer, we do r , 

123 Speak now or forever hold -- o~ay. 23 hzve any closing remarks other than that the Departmerc ~ 

I 24 

Now I'm supposed to ask if -- let's see -- the 21 requests that a decision be made on this rule-making at ~ 

25 Department is aware of any other persons that want to 25 either the close of your heering or at the close of the 

KATHY TOWSEND COURT REPORTERS 

505243-501 8 so 
EIB HEARING RE 20.2.81, 11/18/03 I I I 

4 1 

Board meeting today or tomorrow. 

Thank you. 

MS. HERRERA: Okay. Thank you. 

Is there a reason why the Board would like to 

leave this hearing open or -- 

MR. GREEN: No. 

MS. DILLINGHAM: (Shakes head.) 

MS. HERRERA: Okay. The record of this public 

hearing is now closed. 

(Proceedings in recess.) 

MS. HERRERA: The hearing is reopened. 

MS. SMITH: For the sole purpose of asking 

this question. 

MR. GREEN: Ms. Hughes, don't I need to first 

vote on the first hearing on 309 in order to vote on the 

second part, which is a component of 309? Ccrrect? 

MS. HUGHES: Madam Hearlng Officer and 

Mr. Green, the -- it does make -- what you're suggesting 

does make sense, and what the Department would suggest 

is that the Board hold in abeyance its deliberations 

probably until the very end, consider them in the order 

that we have presented them and make decisions in that 

format. 

But a direct answer to your question is the 

Soard can do whatever the Board wants to do and can make 

43 

MS. DILLINGHAM: Okay. 

MS. HERRERA: Yeah. Point of order. 

MR. GREEN: Poinc of order. 

MS. DILLINGHAM: Thank you. So -- 

MS. HERRERA: All right. We open the meeting 

for an express purpose it's -- we've come to that 

juncture, and this meeting is now elosed -- or hearing 

is closed. , 

(Proceedings in recess.) 

MS. DILLINGHAM: The hearing is now reopened. 

MS. HERRERA: I'm opening the hearing once 

again. 

Mr. Green. 

Oh, I need to ask tAe witnesses to resume 

their positions, please, battle stations or'whatever. 

MR. GREEN: Fiyst, I1d.like to say, Madam 

Hearing Officer and members of Board, thank you for 

indulging me. , 

MS. WARDWELL: Just don't do it again. 

MR. GREEN: I know. 

I'd also like to say I'm very used to the 

legislative process, which you take testimony, close 

testimony down, deliberate and amend the tar out of it. 

So I have been legally beaten behind the 

woodshed, and so I'd like to ask cuestions about havinc 

42 

decisions or, any -- in any order it does, but I -- the 

logic that you are suggesting is correct. 

MK. GREEN: Right. 

So if I voted to accept these provisions and 

then voted for 308, these provisions -- we would just be 

contradicting ourselves. 

MS. HUGHES: It would seemingly invalidate 

the -- che reason that these regulations are being 

presented for the Board. That's correct. 

MR. GREEN: So we do need to take these ifi the 

order so -- 

MS. HUGHES: That would certainly be the 

Department's suggestion, is you do deliberatio~s in rhe 

order that we're presenting the hearings. 

MR. GREEN: Okay. Thank you. 

MS. DILLINGHAM: If I understand, I see it as 

two ways, either we vote on yesterday's hearing and 

proceed or we wait for all of them to deliberate 

together at the end. 

MS. WARDWELL: Yes. That seems like a -- 

MS. DILLINGHAM: And what would the Board 

prefer? 

MS. HERRERA: I'd like to vote. 

MR. GREEN: Well, I think we need to close 

4 4 

1 a report back to the EIB Board after the trigger. 

2 And my concern is a regional area buying up 

3 all the credits for five states and causing a regional 

4 health crisis or problem or -- and whsc I'd like to dc 

5 is a -- that after the trigger, that triggers a report 

6 that goes back to the EIB Board to three years :- and 

7 I'm looking to the Department t o t e l l me what -- hvhat 

trigper might actually have a good report back to the 

EIB Board, where you'd actually see this problem and see 

where the issue might arise, and maybe it's several 

reports, maybe it's every two years, maybe it's -- and 

I'd like to get additional tescimong on my concerns. 

MS. TRUJILLO: Mr. Green, the Department has 

no Froblem with adding a provision to the regulation 

that requires such a provision. And in fact, the 

Department has language ready to propose under Section 

100. The Department proposes to add Subsection C, 

entitled Report on The Program by the Department. 

And the subsection would read, "The Department 

shall report to the Environmental Improvement Board 

every two years following the trigger of this program on 

the distributions of emissions allowances under the 

program." 

MR. GREEN: My -- that almost -- that's almost 

this first and then discuss that. 25 my exact wording, by the way, and almost pets to my I 

KATHY TOWNSEND COURT REPORTERS 
El B HEARING RE 

4 5 

1 concern. 

2 What I'd like, though, the focus to -- and I 

3 don't know how to word this, so heip me, piease -- the 

4 focus to be on a city or town or region. 

5 Does that make sense to you, what I'm trying 

6 to get at? 

7 Let's say that -- I'm just going to pick on 

8 PNM. And I'm sorry if anybody is here from PNM. But if 

9 they decide to buy up all the credits for five years and 

10 use them all in Farmington, I'd want the report to focus 

11 on cities and towns. 

12 Does that make sense to you, what I'm trying 

13 to accomplish? 

14 MS. UHL: Are you -- you're speaking to the 

15 impact, the -- not just the emissions reductions -- 

16 MR. GREEN: Right, because -- 

17 'I; MS. UHL: -- or allowances. ,I I ( 

18 e' IS that -- 

19 MS. DILLINGHAM: I think it's che regulations. 

2 0 MR. GREEN: I guess what I'm getting at is my i 21 understanding of the trigger and the reporting 

22 mechanisms and everything else will be on how this 

23 affects the region and the milestones will be for the 

24 region. 

2 5 Now, you'll also have to hit those in each 

4 6 

1 Class I area, correct? 

2 MR. CUMMINS: If I could maybe try to answer 

3 that question. 

4 Once the program is triggered, you will be 

5 able to track -- you will be tracking allowances at the 

6 source level. And so the language that Rita read, a 

7 report on the distribution of allowances would provide 

8 you hrith the finest level of detail avzilable from which 

9 you could evaluate the impact at an individual source, 

10 at a group of sources in a particular air shed, at a 

11 state level. 

12 MR. GREEN: Okay. 

13 MR. CUMM1N.S: At a, you know -- 

14 MS. WARDWELL: A biock. 

15 MR. GREEN: City level, town levei. 

16 MR. CUWdINS: Pardon me? 

17 MS. WARDWELL: A block. 

18 MR. C'JMMINS: And so because we're talking 

19 about a report on the distribution cf allowances, that 

20 will be very detailed information from which you could 

21 do any number of types of enalysis. 

2 2 MR. GREEN: I think that's a great language, 

23 and I would accept that. 

2 4 MS. DILLINGHAM: Ms. Herrera, can I ask one 

25 question? 

KATHY TOWSEND 

505-243501 

20.2.81, I 111 8/03 

47 

1 US. HERRERA: Yes. 

2 Did you finish, Mr. Green? --% 

3 UR. GREEN: Yes. 

4 US. DILLINGHAI: I'm wonder~ng if -- in 

rl:?ou; 5 Gregory's example, if, let's say, there was a 

6 consolidation and four coal companies now -- or plants 

1 became one, and it was in one region, and t h e r e w a s a 

8 particular increase in one area, is there anything to 

9 prevent that from happening, or could that theoretically 

"'20" happen? 

11 US. UHL: That could theoretically happen. 

12 EOweVer, there are other programs that the Bureau 

15 admlnirters, such as the PSD increment program and 

14 guaranteeing compliance wlth the National Ambient Air 

1i::lv. 15 Quality Standards and the state ambient alr quality 

16 standards that happens with each permit rssuance, so 

17 that it would be difficult for samethlng like that to 

le occur. 

19 \ There are other programs, federal and state. 

n:xur 20 US. DILLINGHAU: Okay. I just wanted that in 

21 the record. 

22 UR. GREEN: And on that note, Ms. Dillingham, 

23 the -- my fear is the federal rollbacks and the 

24 no-mare-stringent-than law, though. 

:1:21w 25 us. UHL: we still have state rules thpt are 

KATHY TOWNSEND COURT REPORTERS 

110 Twelfth Street, Northwest, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102 

150s) 243-5016 - F~X 15051 243-3606 

r*r, 

4 8 

1 not subject to the no-mare-stringent-than, in some 

2 cases. You're right. on PSD we cannot be more stringent 

3 than. So there is -- there is some -- there are some 

4 things that could roll back. 

I: 5 There are also -- we have a very strong state 

6 mlnar source permitting program that has requ~remenra it, 

1 it, and there will still be PSD increments, even vith 

b the NSR reforms. They have not proposed reform of the 

9 PsD increments, so -- and that really helps us to -- to 

~>:xrrr 10 manage pr~vth in an area that's not in nonzttainment. 

11 US. HERRERA: okay. 

12 Do my colleagues have any other questions, 

13 reguests or anything else in reaard to crass-examining? 

14 UR. GREEN: I )ust vant to thank the Board's 

n:;;rr 15 indulqence and the Department's quick drafting, becacse 

16 that really does get at my concern, and that doer help. 

17 And with that, thank you. 

le IS. HERRERA: okay. Well, thank you, I 19 Mr. Green. 

11:2:m 20 Ms. SXITH: Could i ask the Depzrtment to 

21 repeat the language one more time? 

2 2 MS. TRUJILLO: Certainly. 

2 3 us. SUITH: Thank you. 

24 ns. TRUJILLO: section 100, Subsection C, the 

n:::v 25 title would be Report on the Program by the Department. 

KATSY TOWNSEND COURT REPORTERS 

110 Twelfth Street, Northwest, Albuquerque, New~Mexlco 81102 

(5051 243-5018 - Fax I5051 243-3606 

COURT REPORTERS 

8 50 

. . 
EIB HEARING RE 20.2.81. 1 111 8/03 

I 4 distributions of emi3sions allovancea under the I 

1 The language would be, "The Department shall report to I 2 the Environmental Improvement Board every two years i 3 following the trigger of this program on the I 

11:2?m 5 program." 

6 US. SMITH: And one more time, Rita, if you 

7 would. I got mo5t of it. 

e us. TRuJILLO: Report on the Program by the 

9 Department. "The Department shall report to the 

following the trigger of this program on the 

dlstributicns of emissions allovances under the 

pr~?ram." 

US. SHITH: And is lt emissions, plural? 

US. TRUJILLO: That's correct. 

US. SUITH: Thank you, Uadam Hearin! Officer 

US. HERRERh: Okay. Thank you, counsel. 

The hearing is closed. 

(Proceedings zdjourned at 11:23 AK.1 

I 1l::sar 10 Environmental Improvement Board every tvo years 

KATHY TOWNSEND COURT REPORTERS 

110 Twelfth Street, Northvest, Albuquerque, Ncv Utxicc 87102 

15051 243-5018 - Fax 1505) 243-3606 

I 

STATE OF NEW MEXICO I 

) SI 

COUNTY OF BERNALILLO I 

I, CHERYL ARREGUIN, the officer before vhom the 

foregoing proceeding vas taken, do hereby cortlfy that 

the vltnesses whose testimony appears in the foregoing 

transcript verr duly sworn or affirmed; that I 

personally recorded the testimony by mzchine shorthsnd; 

that rald transcript is a true record of the teatlmony 

plven by aeld witnesses; that I am neither attcrney nor 

counsel for, nor related to or employed by any of the 

psrtles to the action rn uhlch this proceeding is t-ken, 

and that I am not a relatrve or employes of any atrorney 

or counsel employed by the partler hereto or financially 

17 interested in the action. 

It 

1 C 

2 0 

21 

se Number: 21 

22 My Commission Expires: 12/10/03 I 

KATHY TOWNSEND COURT REPORTERS 

110 Tvelfrh Street, Northvest, Albuquerque. New Mexico 87102 

(505) 243-5018 - Tax (5051 243-3606 

I 

KATHY TOWSEND COURT REPORTERS 

505243-501 8 
5:21, 7:20, 14:14, 

20:8, 20:21, 21 :8, 

25:3, 34:7, 38:3, 41:1, 

41:4, 41 :20, 41 :25, 

42:9, 42:21, 43:17, 

44:1, 44:6, 44:9, 

affected - 14:20 44:20, 49:2, 49:lO 

affects - 45:23 Board's- 6:2, 48:14 

bought - 2312 

allocate - 17:12 

12:15, 12:16, 12:17, Ats- 13:16, 13117, 

13:21, 14:6, 16:9, available - 7: 18, 

cap - 23:13, 23:14, 

achieve - 21:14 1511, 15:4, 15:11, 

allows - 24:12 banking - 22:20, 

almost - 44:24, 

308 - 28:2, 28:13, 

amount - 16:ll, 

16.17, 16:21, 24:16 

analysis - 33:23, 

34:17, 34:18, 46:21 

KATHY TOWNSEND COURT REPORTERS 

110 Twelfth Street, Northwest, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102 

(505) 243-5018 - Fax (505) 243-3606 
14:7, 27:21, 35:7 

established - 17:13, 

Correct- 41:16 

evaluated - 16:21 

coal-fired - 34:24, 

17:12, 33:19, 36:19, 

38:25, 40:23, 41:19, 

44:7, 44:13, 44:16, 

44:17, 44:18, 44:19, 

48:20, 48:25, 49:1, Examination - 3:6, 

examine - 20:22, 

exceed - 10:24, 

37:17, 37:22, 38:lO 

exceedance - 17:5, 

excellent - 23:8, 

excepted - 1 1 :4 excess - 16:12 

exciting - 39:20 

exemptions - 1 l:16 

Exhibit- 9:12, 14:2, crown - 39:21 14:14, 1918, 19:19, 

16:16, 17:18, 30:14, cumbersome - 6:6 difficult - 47:17 

confidence - 32:12 consensus - 32:3 Dioxide - 1 :5, 5:6, 

abase - 13:19 

consolidation - entered - 20: 1 5 

entire - 23:22 

contained - 395 

contract - i7:1!3, 

December - 28: 10 44:22, 49:4, 49:12 

KATHY TOWNSEND COURT REPORTERS 

110 Twelfth Street, Northwest, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102 

(505) 243-5018 - Fax (505) 243-3606 

-----* - - - -* ..*- p-p-p- -A"--- 
helps - 36:10, 48:9 included - 14:3 

fee'- 24:11, 24:16 

20:11, 20:15, 20:18, inconceivable - filter - 18:25, 19:l 

finish - 29:24, 47:2 

indicate - 27:18 

fired - 34:24, 34:25 indicated - 31:20 

individual - 30:25, 

31:10, 31:12, 46:9 

induced - 25:13 

indulgence - 48:15 listed - 20:24 

indulging - 43:18 located - 33: 13 

29:23, 41:6. 41:14, 

47:22, 48:14. 48:19 Hilbert's - 19:19 

issuance - 47:16 maintains - 15:25 

issue - 44:'iO 

~OIIOW-UP - 20:2 

followi'ng - 16:11, 

man-controlled - 

man-made - 25:6, 

forever - 38:23 

format - 41:23 

manner - 6:3, 19:14 

implement - 12:7, 

8:16, 19:17, 20:10, 5:15, 6:15, 37:24 

20:23, 39:14, 40:22, 

41:17, 43:17, 49:16 

hearing - 1:14, 5:4, 

63, 6:6, 6:9, 6:11, matter - 1:13, 5:11, 

6:12, 6:14, 6:17, 7:10, 5:12, 24:22, 39:16 

7:11, 8:9, 9:5, 28:6, 

KATHY TOWNSEND COURT REPORTERS 

110 Twelfth Street, Northwest, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102 

(505) 243-5018 - Fax (505) 243-3606 
members - 20:9, 

3522, 41:14, 42:10, 

19:12: 19:25, 44:18, 

9:7, 24:18, 29:17, 42:1, 42:ll. 42:14, 

12:12, 13:7, 13:9, 

outside - 27:25, 

minimize - 14:20 nonattainment - 38:16, 44:21, 44:23, 

Northwest - 2:8 

modeled - 33: 10 

proposed - 514, 

7:12, 8:2, 9:25, 1 1:8, 

12:6, 12:23, 12:24, 

monitor - 1913 

monitored - 33:9, 

Monitoring - 4:10, proposes - 44:17 

18:3, 18:16, 18:23, 

19:4, 33:16, 33:17 

provisions - 14:25, 

26:13, 42:4, 42:s 

Psd - 47113, 48:2, 

KATHY TOWNSEND COURT REPORTERS 

110 Twelfth Street, Northwest, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102 

(505) 243-5018 - Fax (505) 243-3606 

- - -- -- P 
KATHY TOWNSEND COURT REPORTERS 

.~ 

110 Twelfth Street, Northwest, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102 

(505) 243-5018 - Fax (505) 243-3606 

43:6 

Q 

Quality- 5:23, 9:2, 

34:2,47:15 

quality - 5:24, 9:6, 

18:18, 19:6, 33121, 

34:3, 47:15 

questions - 7:19, 

7:20, 20:21, 21:1, 

34:7, 35120, 43:25, 

48:12 

quick - 48:15 

R 

rain - 23:lO 

ramps - 22:25 

read - 9:15, 11:6, 

44:19, 46:6 

ready - 7:24, 44:36 

realize - 23:20 

really - 22:24, 

34:24, 35:15, 48:9, 

48:l.b; ' 

reab!on - 514, 

35:24, 41:4, 42:8 

reasonable - 6:4, 

35:ll 

reasonably - 19:2 

recently - 37:23 recess - 41:10, 4319 

recognize - 35:4 

record - 617, 14:12, 

20:5,20:16,20:18, 

33:18, 4121, 47:21, 

50:ll 

record-keeping - 14:12, 33: 18 

recorded - 50: 10 

recording - 13:21 

Recordkeepinp 

4:10, 14:16, 19:25 

reduce - 352 

reduction - 12:16, 

21:21, 22:2 

reductions - 21:13, 

21:18, 21:19, 21:22, 

22:24, 275, 27:9, 

31:14, 34:18, 34:22, 

3518, 45:15 

refer - 7:15, 9:19, 

14:14 

referred - 13:15 

refineries - 10:18, 

18:4, 18:20, 33:2 

refinery - 18:7, 

18:6, 18:10, 32:25 

reform - 48:8 

reforms - 48:8 

regard - €313, 

3521, 36:1, 3735, 

48:13 

regarding - 524, 

13118 

regardless - 16118 

regenerator - 18:12 

region - 34:19, 

45:4, 4523, 45:24, 

47:7 

Regional- 6:15, 

14:2, 32:3 

regional - 516, 

9124, 10:7, 10:24, 

12:10, 12:19, 12:20, 

12:22, 13:6, 13:10, 

13:11, 14110, 14:24, 

15:12, 19:10, 25:24, 

26:10, 2E:18. 30:22. 

31:!, 31:2, 31:24, 

326, 331 7, 363, 

37:2, 375, 38:12, 

44:2, 44:3 

register - 11:22, 

12:4, 14:5 

regulation - 4:4, 

2524, 31:21, 44:14 

regulations - 7:12, 

9:5, 35:17, 36:11, 

37125, 42:8, 45119 

regulatory - 7:11, 

9:21 

related - 33:7, 50:13 

relative - 50:15 

relevant - 6:3 

reliable - 19:2 

remain - 11:13 

remaining - 7122 

remains - 16:24 

remarks - 40123 

Remembered- 1 : 12 

reopened - 41:11, 

43:lO 

repeat - 223, 48:21 

repetition - 6.7 

Report- 44:18, 

48:25, 49:8 

report - 12:13, 

12:14, 12:20, 12:22, 

13:6, 13:23, 14:1, 

14:4, 31:3, 44:1, 44:5, 

44:8, 44:20, 45:10, 

4617, 46:19, 49:1, 

49:9 

reported - 16:20 

reporter - 6:19 

Reporter- 6:24, 20:6 

reporting - 14:12, 

18:17, 195, 33:19, 

45:21 

Reporting- 4:1 I, 

14:16, 2011 

reports - 11 :24, 

13:10, 44:ll 

represent - 1 l:19 

representative - 11:19, 11:21, 14:7 

representatives - 159 

requested - 32:7 

requesting - 33:24 

requests - 40:24, 

48:13 

require - l0:4 

required- ll:l, 

11:18, 16:18, 35:lO 

requirement - 10:9, 

10:10, 10:13, 15:18 

requirements - 5:19, 920, 10:2, 10:7, 

ll:<, 11:14, 12:7, 

14:11, 15:8, 1717, 

18:3, 18:17, 18118, 

18:19, 18:23, 19:5, 

1916, 33:18, 48:6 

requires - 13:12, 

1513, 16:9, 35:7, 

44:15 

reserve - 16:6 

resetting - 16:l 

responsible - 12:12 resume - 43:14 

retired - 11115 

retrofit - 10:lO 

review - 12:21, 

12:25, 13:9, 16:22 

revision - 17:13 

revisions - 6:14, 

31:24 

rewarding - 21:24 

rise - 8:6 

Ritb 3:4, 6:20, 7:2, 

2521, 46:6, 49:6 

roll - 48:4 

rollbacks - 47:23 

Room 1:15, 5:8 

rule - 516, 6:2, 8:2, 

9:23, 9125, 103, 12:7, . 13:11, 1415, 14:10, 

14:17, 14:24, 15:12, 

18:16, 19:4, 19:11, 

19:18, 2519, 25:25, 

26:2, 31:25, 356, 

40:24 

rule-making - 6:2, 

25: 19, 40:24 

rules - 55, 5:15, 

524, 1911 1, 47:25 

Rules- 6:8 run - 27:24 . 

S 

safe - 35:15 

Santa- 1:16, 2:14 

science - 8:22, 8:23 

second - 20: 14, 

26:4, 32:22, 37:14, 

41:16 

Secretary - 2:4 

Section- 5:22, 5123, 

9:1, 11:14, 11:17, 

12:2, 1216, 13111, 

14:10, 14:24, 157, 

15:13, 15:18, 16:8, 

173, 17:16, 17:23, 

18:21, 19:10, 32:19, 

35:6, 38:12, 38:18, 

44:16, 48:24 

section - 9:3, 12:6, 

14:4, 14:17, 15:8, 

17:23, 18.16, 18:21, 

19:4, 32:20 

sections - 1 1 :8 secure - 13~19 see - 2217, 28:17, 

33:2, 34:21, 38:24, 

set - 24:16, 24117, 

24:20, 25:23 

several - 28:1P, 

44110 

Shakes - 47:7 

shall - 6:9, 6:12, 

16:13, 16:21,.17:10, 

17:12, 17:20, 44:20, 

49:1, 49:9 

shed - 46:10 

sheds - 33:11, 

33:12 

sheet - 39:23 

Sheet- 4:9, 14:15, 

19:24 

shorthand - 50:lO 

show - 15:23, 1613 

shutdown - 18:14 

sign - 39:23 

sign-up - 39123 

signed - 39:24 

similar - 35:7 

simply - 31:1 

Sip- 515. 14:2. 

16:22., 17:13, 19:10, 

19:15, 19:23, 28:19, 

28:23, 38:2 

Sips- 9:4, 27:6, 

28122, 29:20, 29:21, 

38:4 

skies - 22:18, 23:12 

smelters - l0:19 

smile - 36:22 

Smith- 2:7, 20:17, 

39:2, 39:7, 39:9, 

40:11, 40:13, 40:16, 

41:12, 48:20,48:23, 

49:6, 49:14,49:16 

So2 - 711 3, 9122, 

9:24, 10:22, 10124, 

16:12, 17:20, 25:14 

software - 27:23 

sole - 41:12 someone - 24: 12, 

24:17, 30:22 

somewhere - 23:20 

sorry - 4518 

Sorry - 37:20 

sorts - 2 :3 source -?10:21 

10122, 11:12, 1 1.:15, 

11:22, 12:3, 12:16, 

12124, 145, 14:6, 

165, 1623, 17:19, 

1722, 19:2, 19:15, 

21:13, 21:23, 21:24, 

24:9, 24110, 26:14, 

33:24, 34:1, 35:9, 

46:6, 46:9, 48:6 

source's - 16:12, 

16:14, 17:2 

source-by-source - 3519 

sources - 5:19, 

9:21, 10:2, 10:25, 

1l:O 11:15 1:8 

12:15, 12:17, 14:13, 

14:20, 1612, 16:4, 

17:6, 17:13, 17:14, 

; 21:24, 22:3, 25:15, 

26:12, 27:4, 29:12, 

29:16, 30:25, 31 :3, 

12:23; 26:14, 26:20, 

28:3, 29:14, 33:21, 

34:3, 34:15, 34122, 

34:25, 3512, 35:14, 

37:15, 46:11, 47:15, 

47:19, 47:25, 485 

statement - 7:7, 7:8 

States - 13:2, 13.8 

states - 513, 5:17, 

10:4, 12:9, 12:13, 

12:21, 13:12, 19:9, 

19:13, 26:9, 26:12, 

26:19, 27:13, 27:18, 

28:1, 28:6, 28:8, 

29:12, 31:5, 32:4, 

3217, 34:13, 353, 

35:14, 37:4, 37:18, 

37:22, 37123, 38:1, 

38:4, 38:6, 38:9, 

38:11, 38:18, 44:3 

stationary - 10:20, 

19:15 

stations - 43:15 

still - 22:4, 23:23, 

355, 47:25, 487 

stops - 23:6 

Strategies - 9:l 

strategies - 10% 

stringent - 16:24, 

47:24, 48:1,48:2 

strong - 485 

structure - 26:7 

studied - 34:12 

subject - ll:12, 

26:12, 48:l 

submit - 1 l:22, 

11:23, 12:20, 13:2, 

13:6, 15:10, 38:12, 

38:18 

submittal - 32:2 

submitted - 27:6, 

29:20 

submitting - 12:4, 

12:12, 19:lO 

Subsection - 44:17, 

48:24 

subsection - 44:19 

Subsections - 1 l:12 

39:22, 42:16, 4419 

seek - 35:8 

seemingly - 42:7 

sell - 17:14, 22:14, 

24:22 

sense - 33:16, 

41:19, 455, 45:12 

service - 27:19 

specific - 14:ll, 

17:25, 18:19, 197 

Specifications - 13:20 

spend - 23:'1, 23122 ss - 5C:2 

St- 2114 

staff - 27:23 

stand - 6:18 

Standards - 34:2, 

47:15 

standards - 34:3, 

47116 

standpoint - 32:9 

Start- 21 :9 

start- 18:14, 31:9, 

31113 

start-up - 18:14 

starting - 28:24 

State- l:l, 1:15, 

53, 5:15, 6:15, 9:6, 

37124, 5011 

state - 6:24, 8:19, 

10:6. 12:ll. 12:15. 

suggestion - 42:13 

Suite- 2:9 

sulfur - 7:13, 9:21, 

10:21, 1;:24, 14:12, 

18:13, 352 

Sulfur- 1:5.5:6, 

5:19, 1012, 11.2 

sulfuric - 18:13 

Summary - 4:9, 

14:14, 19:24 

supposed - 38124 

surrounding - 33:25 

swaying - 38:8, 

38:9 

sworn - 6:22, 7318, 

50:9 

system - 12:10, 

12:14, 12:18, 13:4, 

13:13, 1334, 13:22, 

14:6, 15:10, 16:10, 

16:17, 26122 

System - 4:7, 13:15, 

13:25. 19:22 

31:4, 31:13, 31:15, 

339, 33:25, 34:23, 

359, 3513, 46:lO 

sources' - 15:9 

speaking - 45:14 

special - 17:IO. 

35:25 

Special - 2:12 

substantially - 16:23 

suddenly - 23.1 

sufficient - 16:15, 

29115, 29:18 

suggest - 41:19 

suggesting - 41:18, 

4212 
4418, 44:21, 45121, 

viable - 29:13 30:15, 30:16, 30:17, 

violation - 34:2 

thereafter- ll:l4 

throughout - 9:6, Tso- 215, 6:13, 813, 

8:10, 8:13, 20:10, 

20:12, 32:15, 32:16, 

tomorrow - 41 :l 30:16, 30116, 30:23, 

31:9, 31:16, 31:22, 

32:10, 32:13, 42:20, 

total - 30122, 31 :4 

toward - 351 1 11:17, 12:3, 12:15, 

12:17, 12124, 13:15, 

13:17, 13:20, 14:5, 

14:13, 14:15, 15:9, 

tracking - 12:10, 

72114, 12:18, 13:4, 

30:3, 30:19, 4615 uncontrolled - Western- 115, 4:6, 

wish - 6:16, 11:15, 

13:7, 133, 13:12, 44122, 49:4, 49:12 20:22, 38121, 40:3 

14:13, 14:25, 1619, undercontrolled - witness - 20:22 

Witnesses- 3:3 

uniform - 34:21 witnesses - 7:18, 

unit - 18:ll, 225 7:23, 20:24, 38:22, 

units - 14:22, 18:l 43:14, 503, 50:12 

University - 8:24 wondered - 36:4 

14:15, 14:23, 173, unless - 18:9, 32:7 wondering - 25:17, 

KATHY TOWNSEND COURT REPORTERS 

110 Twelfth Street, Northwest, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102 

(505) 243-5018 - Fax (505) 243-3606 

---- --. -- - -.- ." P