515 Wyoming Avenue, Cincinnati, Ohio 45215 TEL:[513]861-4001 FAX: [513]761-4988 

www.sierraclub.org/oh

LAW OFFICE OF ROBERT UKEILEY

433 CHESTNUT STREET

BEREA, KY 40403

TEL: (859) 986-5402 FAX: (859) 986-1299

RUKEILEY@IGC.ORG

VIA E-MAIL ONLY

July 26, 2005

John Mooney

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Region 5, 

77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604

mooney.john@epa.gov

Re: Comments on Regional Material in EDocket 

(RME) ID No. R05-OAR-2005-OH-0002

Dear Mr. Mooney:

On behalf of the Sierra Club and its Ohio Chapter, Buckeye Environmental 

Network, Ohio Citizen Action, ECO: Environmental Community Organization, and 

Citizens Against Pollution, Inc., I am writing in support of the United States 

Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposal to disapprove Ohio’s requested 

revisions to the Ohio State Implementation Plan (SIP) that provide for use of continuous 

opacity monitoring data but allow more exceedances of the general opacity limit in cases 

where an eligible large coal fired boiler opts to use these data for determining 

compliance. We incorporate by reference herein the reasons EPA stated for its proposed 

disapproval. Please note these comments due on address the other SIP changes that were 

proposed in the same Federal Register notice. In further support of EPA’s disapproval of 

Ohio’s we state the following.

EPA mentions that Ohio has continuous opacity monitoring systems (COMS) data 

showing numerous sources complying with the current opacity limit for numerous 

quarters. In fact, EPA possesses additional information showing coal-fired power plants 

can and do comply with 20% opacity limits on a continuous basis. The Hayden Plant in 

Colorado is a prime example. Hayden had no opacity violations for the whole of 2004. 

EPA should have the Hayden Title V annual compliance certification documenting the 

lack of opacity exceedances and we incorporate by reference this annual compliance 
515 Wyoming Avenue, Cincinnati, Ohio 45215 TEL:[513]861-4001 FAX: [513]761-4988 

www.sierraclub.org/oh

certification. Hayden was subject to an opacity enforcement action in the 1990s and it 

would seem that this enforcement action was the motivation for Hayden to comply with 

its opacity limit. 

It is clear that motivation, rather than a technical or economic limitation is what 

keeps some sources from continuously complying with their opacity limits. Many coalfired power plants in Ohio have particulate matter control devices based on 1960s designs 

which are 30 or 40 years old. Replacement of these particulate matter control devices 

with new control devices of modern design and appropriately sized will allow sources to 

continuously comply with their opacity limits. 

In addition, many coal-fired power plants use fuel oil or diesel fuel for start up 

and flame stabilization. However, several recently permitted proposed facility, such as 

the Prairie State Generating Station in Illinois, are proposed to use natural gas for startup 

and flame stabilization. Use of natural gas rather than fuel oil or diesel fuel will help in 

ensuring that sources continuously comply with their opacity limits, as well as have 

added tangential benefits such as decreasing U.S. dependency on foreign oil. It may also 

actual be cheaper in terms of operating costs.

Furthermore, any argument that the use of COMS for monitoring results in a 

stricter opacity emission limit is unfounded. EPA has required coal-fired power plants to 

use COMS for over a quarter of century. In requiring COMS, EPA noted that COMS 

could be used for compliance determinations. Furthermore, as the EPA and several 

courts have noted, the use of COMS as a monitoring device does increase the stringency 

of the emission limitation. The analogy EPA and the courts have used is a radar gun and 

the speed limit. The fact that the police may start to use a radar gun to enforce a speed 

limit where historically the police have not used a radar gun does not change the speed 

limit. 

In addition, it is important to note that some power plants which Ohio’s proposed 

revision would affect are in particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 

microns or less (PM 2.5) nonattainment areas such as Stuart Station in Adams County. 

Therefore, this relaxation of the opacity emission limitations would contribute to NAAQS 

violations.

EPA has noted in its most recent Criteria Document for PM 2.5 that there is little 

or no evidence that there is a safe ambient level of PM 2.5, in terms of population level 

effects on public health. Thus, a relaxation of the opacity limitation would increase the 

risk of public health impacts, even in attainment areas. These public health impacts 

include premature mortality. As EPA has repeatedly noted in the PM 2.5 NAAQS setting 

and the so called Clean Air Interstate Rule, there are also significant economic 

consequences from PM 2.5 emissions. 
515 Wyoming Avenue, Cincinnati, Ohio 45215 TEL:[513]861-4001 FAX: [513]761-4988 

www.sierraclub.org/oh

In addition, as EPA has noted some mercury is bound to particulate matter 

emissions from coal-fired power plants. Relaxing the opacity standard would also risk 

increased releases of mercury, resulting in increased ambient mercury levels including 

mercury levels in water bodies. This includes water bodies that are mercury “impaired” 

under the Clean Water Act. 

Therefore, we request that EPA approve the provisions that create COMS as the 

reference method for opacity but disapprove the provisions that provides sources that use 

COMS with expanded exemptions from those limits. To the extent EPA cannot approval 

part and disapproval part of these provisions, we request that EPA disapproval this whole 

provision. We note that that COMS are still required for coal-fired power plants with 

heat inputs above 250 mmBtu/hour and that the credible evidence rule still allows COMS 

data to be used in enforcement actions of alleged opacity limit violations. We also 

request that EPA put a clear explanation of this disapproval in the Code of Federal 

Regulations and on the EPA web page containing the Ohio SIP, rather than simply using 

incorporation by reference, so that there is not confusion on this issue in the future. In 

any event, the CAM rule will require the use of COMS for monitoring compliance with 

the opacity limits.

Sincerely,

Robert Ukeiley

Counsel for Sierra Club

Marilyn Wall, Conservation Chair

Ohio Chapter Sierra Club

Marilyn.wall@ohio.sierraclub.org

Teresa Mills

Buckeye Environmental Network

Millstb@aol.com

Karen Arnett

ECO: Environmental Community Organization

Karen.arnett@env-comm.org

Citizens Against Pollution INC.

Paul Stinson, President

405 Roush Lane 

Cheshire Oh 45620

Sandy Buchanan
515 Wyoming Avenue, Cincinnati, Ohio 45215 TEL:[513]861-4001 FAX: [513]761-4988 

www.sierraclub.org/oh

Ohio Citizen Action

sbuchanan@ohiocitizen.org