November 28, 2011 

Delivered Electronically 

Revisions to Federal Implementation Plans to Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and 

Ozone; Proposed Rule 

EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) 

Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW 

Washington, DC 20460 

RE: Comments for Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491 

Attached are the comments of the Kansas City Power & Light Company regarding the Revisions to 

Federal Implementation Plans to Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone 

proposed rule. If you have any questions, please contact me at (816) 556-2899 or paul.ling@kcpl.com. 

Sincerely, 

 /s/ Paul M. Ling 

 Paul M. Ling, P.E. 

 Manager of Environmental Services 

 Kansas City Power & Light Company 

Attachment 
Comments of Kansas City Power & Light Company 

on the 

Proposed Revisions to Federal Implementation Plans to Reduce Interstate Transport of 

Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone; 

(Proposed Revisions to the Transport Rule) 

76 Fed. Reg. 63860 (October 14, 2011) 

Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491 

November 28, 2011 

________________________________________________________________________ 

On October 14, 2011, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA” or the “Agency”) 

published its Proposed Revisions to Federal Implementation Plans to Reduce Interstate Transport 

of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone (“Proposed Revisions to the Transport Rule”) with the 

public comment period ending on November 28, 2011. 

Kansas City Power & Light Company (“KCP&L”) submits the following comments on the 

Proposed Revisions to Transport Rule. KCP&L is a regulated utility operating 15 generating 

facilities with a capacity of over 6,100 megawatts to serve more than 820,000 customers in both 

Kansas and Missouri. As a member of the Utility Air Regulatory Group (“UARG”) and the 

Edison Electric Institute (“EEI”), KCP&L has reviewed and is supportive of the comments 

submitted by these groups. 
Introduction

KCP&L commends EPA’s proposed changes to the final Cross-State Air Pollution Rule 

(“CSAPR”) which generally constitute an appropriate first step toward remedying significant 

flaws in the rule. KCP&L proposes more changes are necessary to correct deficiencies in the 

rule. KCP&L urges EPA to address thoroughly and comprehensively all of the CSAPR’s 

deficiencies before mandating compliance with the rule’s requirements. 

Specific Comments

I. KCP&L Supports EPA’s Proposal to Defer the Assurance Penalty Provisions Until the 

2014 Compliance Periods. 

KCP&L supports EPA’s proposal to amend the effective date of the assurance provisions 

under the CSAPR to make them effective beginning January 1, 2014, instead of January 1, 2012. 

See 76 Fed. Reg. at 63870. Electric generating units regulated under the rule face substantial 

uncertainty when the first compliance periods begin because, although the rule is “final,” state 

budgets and unit-level allocations under the rule remain in flux. Deferring the effective date of 

the assurance provisions until the compliance periods beginning in 2014 will mitigate a 

significant additional category of uncertainty and provide a measure of badly needed flexibility 

for regulated entities during the first two compliance periods under this extraordinarily 

demanding and stringent rule. 

II. KCP&L Supports EPA’s Proposed Revisions to Units Covered by Existing Consent 

Decrees. 

KCP&L supports EPA’s incorporation of the emission reduction requirements of existing 

utility consent decrees. See 76 Fed. Reg. at 63868. EPA now recognizes that the unit-level 

allowance allocations under the CSAPR did not properly account for provisions in those consent 

decrees that effectively require the surrender of “excess” CSAPR allowances. As a result, 

2 
CSAPR allowance allocations to certain units reduced the availability of some of those 

allowances to other sources in the state. 

 EPA should finalize revisions of CSAPR unit-level allocations for the specific units subject 

to these consent decrees. These revisions would not alter the state budgets but would have the 

effect of increasing the number of allowances within the budget that are available for compliance 

purposes and that would not otherwise be available without this proposed change to the 

allocation of allowances. 

III. KCP&L proposes additional changes to correct deficiencies in the rule.

1. New Unit Set-Aside for KCP&L’s Iatan Unit 2 

KCP&L requests increased new unit set-aside allowances for SO2, ozone season NOx, 

and annual NOx because the final CSAPR calculation of the new unit set-aside erroneously 

omitted Iatan Unit 2’s projected emissions. This request is similar to the request granted to 

Arkansas’s Plum Point Unit 1 in the Proposed Revisions to Transport Rule. See 76 Fed. 

Reg. at 63864. 

It appears from the Technical Support Documents associated with the final CSAPR 

that only one new unit in Missouri was modeled by EPA. The NEEDSv4.10 FTransport 

file indicates a SPPN_MO_Coal Steam unit with 300 MW capacity which appears to be the 

John Twitty Unit 2, formerly Southwest Power Station Unit 2. 

KCP&L requests that EPA increase Missouri’s SO2, ozone season NOx, and annual 

NOx budget to include an increased new unit set-aside. EPA should increase the portion of 

that budget dedicated to the new unit set aside. In the CSAPR, EPA had determined a 3 

percent new unit set-aside for ozone season NOx and annual NOx in Missouri. Both of 

those values should be changed to 6 percent. In the CSAPR, EPA had determined a 2 

percent new unit set-aside for SO2 in Missouri. This value should be changed to 3 percent. 

The revision is consistent with the new unit set-aside methodology described in the 

CSAPR. The 2 percent allocation should be maintained for future “planned” new units in 

Missouri. See 76 Fed. Reg. at 48291. 

The updated values simply reflect the revised classification of one unit to be treated as 

a new unit for purposes of unit-level allowance allocation. This unit, Iatan Unit 2, 

3 
commenced commercial operation on or after January 1, 2010, and therefore would be 

considered a new unit under the final CSAPR’s unit-level allocation methodology (See 76 

Fed. Reg. at 48290); however, the final CSAPR erroneously omitted this unit’s projected 

emissions from the calculation of Missouri’s SO2, ozone season NOx, and annual NOx 

budget new unit set-aside. Including this unit’s projected emissions in the calculation would 

yield a revised new unit set-aside of 3 percent for SO2and 6 percent for ozone season NOx 

and annual NOx of Missouri’s budget instead of the previous 2 percent and 3 percent values 

for the respective new unit set-asides. This change should be made for both Phase 1 

compliance commencing in 2012 and Phase 2 compliance commencing in 2014. 

Missouri 

New Unit 

2011 Annual 

NOx Emissions 

through Q3 

(tons) 

2011 Ozone 

Season NOx 

Emissions 

through Q3 

(tons) 

2011 SO2

Emissions 

through Q3 

(tons) 

KCP&L – Iatan 

Unit 2 

918 521 117 

City Utilities – 

John Twitty 

Unit 2 

596 281 1657 

Total Through 

Q3 

1514 802 1774 

Annual 

Projection (x 

1.33) 

2019 - 2365 

Missouri 

New Unit 

2012 Annual 

NOx 

Allowances 

2012 Ozone 

Season NOx 

Allowances 

2012 SO2

Allowances 

Current 

3%, 3%, 2% 

1571 683 4149 

Proposed 

6%, 6%, 3% 

3142 1366 6224 

2. Operational Constraints Necessitate Non-economic Dispatch at KCP&L Units 

KCP&L has identified unit-specific operational constraints not accounted for in the 

final CSAPR whose inclusion may warrant revisions in state budgets, with associated 

4 
revisions to the state assurance levels and unit-level allocations for existing units. KCP&L 

is submitting additional unit-level operational information that would have a material 

impact on the calculation of CSAPR state budgets (with associated impacts on 

corresponding assurance levels and unit-level allocations for existing units). See 76 Fed. 

Reg. at 63868. 

Operational requirements necessitating non-economic generation occur at KCP&L’s 

combustion turbine peaking units because of transmission congestion. These units include 

KCP&L’s Hawthorn 6-9, Northeast Station 11-18, Lake Road 5, Greenwood 1-4, Ralph 

Green 3, and South Harper 1-3 in Missouri and West Gardner 1-4 and Osawatomie 1 in 

Kansas. Each of these units was required to generate for reasons other than the regional 

economic sale of electricity which most often was transmission congestion management. 

KCP&L estimates during the ozone season and during the calendar year that such noneconomic generation is necessitated from these units about 20 percent of the time in 2010. 

Consistent with a similar requests granted in the Proposed Revisions to the Transport 

Rule, See 76 Fed. Reg. at 63868, KCP&L requests additional allowances for these units to 

account for the necessitated non-economic generation in an amount of 15 ozone season 

NOx and 30 annual NOx. These additional allowances are material and significant to 

KCP&L operations where we have very limited alternate compliance options. 

3. Flexibility to use Group 1 SO2 allowances for Compliance in a Group 2 State 

KCP&L operates electric generating units in both Kansas and Missouri. The final rule 

designated Kansas as an SO2 Group 2 state and Missouri as an SO2 Group 1 state. 

KCP&L’s La Cygne Generating Station stack is located in Kansas approximately 2 miles 

from the Missouri border. Obviously, the air shed is the same with such close proximity. 

Consistent with the Proposed Revisions to the Transport Rule goal “to promote the 

development of allowance market liquidity as these revisions are finalized, thereby 

smoothing the transition from the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) programs to the 

Transport Rule programs in 2012”, KCP&L requests EPA finalize the revisions to allow the 

use of SO2 Group 1 allowances for compliance in SO2 Group 2 states. This should be 

allowed because Group 1 states are subject to greater SO2 reduction stringency than Group 

2 states. See 76 Fed. Reg. at 48212. At a minimum, this request should be allowed for 

5 
6 

electric generating utilities where their system spans across both Group 1 and Group 2 

states as is the case with KCP&L. 

4. Flexibility to use Future Allowances for Compliance in Earlier Years 

Similarly, consistent with the Proposed Revisions to the Transport Rule goal “to 

promote the development of allowance market liquidity as these revisions are finalized, 

thereby smoothing the transition from the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) programs to the 

Transport Rule programs in 2012”, KCP&L requests EPA finalize the revisions to allow the 

use of the next five years of allowances for compliance in an earlier year. 

KCP&L seeks this to provide for the additional flexibility to install emission controls 

that are underway but will not yet be operational in the coming years. For example, at 

KCP&L’s La Cygne Generating Station we have commenced construction of an SCR, 

scrubbers, and baghouses for compliance with the Regional Haze Rule requirements. Even 

though construction has commenced the emission controls will not be fully operational until 

2015. Currently, the La Cygne Generating Station is short about 25% of the required 

allowances for SO2, ozone season NOx, and annual NOx for 2012 and 2013. After 2015 

when the emission controls are fully operational, the Station will have excess allowances. 

EPA should provide the additional flexibility to use these future allowances for compliance 

in early years to facilitate the implementation of the CSAPR. 

Summary

 KCP&L requests that EPA analyze, respond to, and accept these comments identifying 

deficiencies in the CSAPR. At a minimum, EPA should defer the start of the first compliance 

periods until the state budgets and unit-level allocations have been revised and put in final form. 

EPA should also promptly make final its proposal to defer the effective date of the assurance 

provisions under the CSAPR until 2014, finalize revisions of CSAPR unit-level allocations for 

the specific units subject to these consent decrees, and revise the Missouri new unit set-aside to 

include KCP&L’s Iatan Unit 2. In addition, EPA should provide additional flexibility in the 

implementation of the CSAPR by allowing the use of SO2 Group 1 allowances for compliance in 

a SO2 Group 2 state and allowing the use of future allowances for compliance in early years.