Proposed Rule: Air Pollution Standards of Performance For New Stationary Sources: Industrial-Commercial-Institutional Steam Generating Units

Monday,
February 28, 2005
Part II
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 60
Standards of Performance for Electric
Utility Steam Generating Units for Which
Construction Is Commenced After
September 18, 1978; Standards of
Performance for Industrial-Commercial-
Institutional Steam Generating Units; and
Standards of Performance for Small
Industrial-Commercial-Institutional Steam
Generating Units; Proposed Rule
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:36 Feb 25, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2
9706 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 38 / Monday, February 28, 2005 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION public docket and comment system, is Internet. If you submit an electronic
AGENCY EPA’s preferred method for receiving comment, EPA recommends that you
comments. Follow the on-line include your name and other contact
40 CFR Part 60 instructions for submitting comments. information in the body of your
E-mail: Send your comments via comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
[OAR–2005–0031; FRL–7873–8]
electronic mail to a-and-r- you submit. If EPA cannot read your
RIN 2060–AM80 docket@epa.gov, Attention Docket ID comment due to technical difficulties
No. OAR–2005–0031. and cannot contact you for clarification,
Standards of Performance for Electric By Facsimile: Fax your comments to EPA may not be able to consider your
Utility Steam Generating Units for (202) 566–1741, Attention Docket ID No. comment. Electronic files should avoid
Which Construction Is Commenced OAR–2005–0031. the use of special characters, any form
After September 18, 1978; Standards of Mail: Send your comments to: EPA of encryption, and be free of any defects
Performance for Industrial- Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental or viruses.
Commercial-Institutional Steam Protection Agency, Mailcode 6102T, Public Hearing: If a public hearing is
Generating Units; and Standards of 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., held, it will be held at EPA’s Campus
Performance for Small Industrial- Washington, DC 20460, Attention located at 109 T.W. Alexander Drive in
Commercial-Institutional Steam Docket ID No. OAR–2005–0031. Please Research Triangle Park, NC, or an
Generating Units include a total of two copies. The EPA alternate site nearby.
requests a separate copy also be sent to Docket: All documents in the docket
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
the contact person identified below (see are listed in the EDOCKET index at
Agency (EPA).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). In http://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although
ACTION: Proposed amendments. addition, please mail a copy of your listed in the index, some information is
SUMMARY: Pursuant to section
comments on the information collection not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other
111(b)(1)(B) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), provisions to the Office of Information information whose disclosure is
the EPA has reviewed the emission and Regulatory Affairs, Office of restricted by statute. Certain other
standards for particulate matter (PM), Management and Budget (OMB), Attn: material, such as copyrighted material,
sulfur dioxide (SO2), and nitrogen Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th St., NW., is not placed on the Internet and will be
oxides (NOX) contained in the standards Washington, DC 20503. publicly available only in hard copy
Hand Delivery: Deliver your form. Publicly available docket
of performance for electric utility steam
comments to: EPA Docket Center (EPA/ materials are available either
generating units, industrial-commercial-
DC), EPA West Building, Room B108, electronically in EDOCKET or in hard
institutional steam generating units, and
1301 Constitution Ave., NW., copy at the EPA Docket Center (EPA/
small industrial-commercial- Washington, DC, Attention Docket ID
institutional steam generating units. DC), EPA West Building, Room B102,
No. OAR–2005–0031. Such deliveries 1301 Constitution Ave., NW.,
This action presents the results of EPA’s are accepted only during the normal
review and proposes amendments to Washington, DC. The Public Reading
hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4:30 Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
standards consistent with those results. p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
Specifically, we are proposing p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays), and special legal holidays. The telephone number
amendments to the PM, SO2, and NOX arrangements should be made for
emission standards. We are also for the Public Reading Room is (202)
deliveries of boxed information. 566–1744, and the telephone number for
proposing to replace the current percent Instructions: Direct your comments to
reduction requirement for SO2 with an the EPA Docket Center is (202) 566–
Docket ID No. OAR–2005–0031. The 1742.
output-based SO2 emission limit. We are EPA’s policy is that all comments
also proposing an amendment to the PM received will be included in the public FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
emission limit. In addition to amending docket without change and may be Christian Fellner, Combustion Group,
the emissions limits, we also are made available online at http:// Emission Standards Division (C439–01),
proposing several technical www.epa.gov/edocket, including any U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, North
clarifications and corrections to existing personal information provided, unless Carolina 27711, (919) 541–4003, e-mail
provisions of the current rules. the comment includes information fellner.christian@epa.gov.
DATES: Comments on the proposed claimed to be Confidential Business SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
amendments must be received on or Information (CBI) or other information Organization of This Document. The
before April 29, 2005. whose disclosure is restricted by statute. following outline is provided to aid in
Public Hearing: If anyone contacts Do not submit information that you locating information in this preamble.
EPA by March 21, 2005, requesting to consider to be CBI or otherwise I. General Information
speak at a public hearing, EPA will hold protected through EDOCKET, A. Does this action apply to me?
a public hearing on March 30, 2005. regulations.gov, or e-mail. The EPA B. What should I consider as I prepare my
Persons interested in attending the EDOCKET and the Federal comments for EPA?
public hearing should contact Ms. II. Background Information
regulations.gov Web sites are A. What is the statutory authority for the
Eloise Shepherd at (919) 541–5578 to ‘‘anonymous access’’ systems, which proposed amendments?
verify that a hearing will be held. means EPA will not know your identity B. What is the role of the NSPS program?
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, or contact information unless you III. Summary of the Proposed Amendments
identified by Docket ID provide it in the body of your comment. A. What are the requirements for new
No. OAR–2005–0031, by one of the If you send an e-mail comment directly electric utility steam generating units (40
following methods: Federal to EPA without going through CFR part 60, subpart Da)?
B. What are the requirements for
eRulemaking Portal: http:// EDOCKET or regulations.gov, your e-
industrial-commercial-institutional
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line mail address will be automatically steam generating units (40 CFR part 60,
instructions for submitting comments. captured and included as part of the subpart Db)?
Agency Web site: http://www.epa.gov/ comment that is placed in the public C. What are the requirements for small
edocket. EDOCKET, EPA’s electronic docket and made available on the industrial-commercial-institutional
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 38 / Monday, February 28, 2005 / Proposed Rules 9707
steam generating units (40 CFR part 60, A. What are the impacts for electric utility H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that
subpart Dc)? steam generating units? Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
IV. Rationale for the Proposed Amendments B. What are the impacts for industrial, Distribution or Use
A. What is the performance of control commercial, institutional boilers? I. National Technology Transfer
technologies for steam generating units? C. Economic Impacts Advancement Act
B. Regulatory Approach VII. Request for Comments
C. How did EPA determine the amended VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. General Information
standards for electric utility steam
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
generating units (40 CFR part 60, subpart
Planning and Review
A. Does This Action Apply to Me?
Da)?
D. How did EPA determine the amended B. Paperwork Reduction Act Regulated Entities. Categories and
standards for industrial-commercial- C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
entities potentially regulated by the
institutional steam generating units (40 D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
proposed amendments are new electric
CFR part 60, subparts Db and Dc)? utility steam generating units and new,
E. What technical corrections is EPA F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
proposing? and Coordination with Indian Tribal reconstructed, and modified industrial-
V. Modification and Reconstruction Governments commercial-institutional steam
Provisions G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of generating units. The proposed
VI. Summary of Cost, Environmental, Energy, Children from Environmental Health and amendments would affect the following
and Economic Impacts Safety Risks categories of sources:
Category NAICS code SIC code Examples of potentially regulated entities
Industry ..................................................................... 221112 ............................ Fossil fuel-fired electric utility steam generating
units.
Federal Government ................................................. 22112 ............................ Fossil fuel-fired electric utility steam generating
units owned by the Federal Government.
State/local/tribal government .................................... 22112 ............................ Fossil fuel-fired electric utility steam generating
units owned by municipalities.
921150 ............................ Fossil fuel-fired electric steam generating units in
Indian Country.
Any industrial-commercial-institutional facility using 211 13 Extractors of crude petroleum and natural gas.
a boiler as defined in CFR 60.40b or CFR 60.40c.
321 24 Manufacturers of lumber and wood products.
322 26 Pulp and paper mills.
325 28 Chemical manufacturers.
324 29 Petroleum refiners and manufacturers of coal prod-
ucts.
316, 326, 339 30 Manufacturers of rubber and miscellaneous plastic
products.
331 33 Steel works, blast furnaces.
332 34 Electroplating, plating, polishing, anodizing, and
coloring.
336 37 Manufacturers of motor vehicle parts and acces-
sories.
221 49 Electric, gas, and sanitary services.
622 80 Health services.
611 82 Educational Services.
This table is not intended to be deliver information identified as CBI If you have any questions about CBI
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide only to the following address: Mr. or the procedures for claiming CBI,
for readers regarding entities likely to be Christian Fellner, c/o OAQPS Document please consult the person identified in
subjected to the proposed amendments. Control Officer (Room C404–02), U.S. the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
To determine whether your facility may EPA, Research Triangle Park, 27711, section.
be subject to the proposed amendments, Attention Docket ID No. OAR–2005– 2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments.
you should examine the applicability 0031. Clearly mark the part or all of the When submitting comments, remember
criteria in 40 CFR part 60, sections information that you claim to be CBI. to:
60.40a, 60.40b, or 60.40c. If you have For CBI information in a disk or CD a. Identify the proposed amendments
any questions regarding the ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the by docket number and other identifying
applicability of the proposed outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI information (subject heading, Federal
amendments to a particular entity, and then identify electronically within Register date and page number).
contact the person listed in the the disk or CD ROM the specific
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION information that is claimed as CBI. In b. Follow directions. The EPA may
CONTACT section. addition to one complete version of the ask you to respond to specific questions
comment that includes information or organize comments by referencing a
B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part
claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment
My Comments for EPA? or section number.
that does not contain the information
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit claimed as CBI must be submitted for c. Explain why you agree or disagree;
information that you consider to be inclusion in the public docket. suggest alternatives and substitute
confidential business information (CBI) Information marked will not be language for your requested changes.
electronically through EDocket, disclosed except in accordance with d. Describe any assumptions and
regulations.gov, or e-mail. Send or procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. provide any technical information and/
or data that you used in formulating institutional steam generating units (40 B. What Is the Role of the NSPS
your comments. CFR part 60, subpart Db), and small Program?
e. If you estimate potential costs or industrial-commercial-institutional The NSPS program is one part of the
burdens, explain how you arrived at steam generating units (40 CFR part 60, CAA’s integrated air quality
your estimate in sufficient detail to subpart Dc). management program. The primary
allow for it to be reproduced. purpose of the NSPS are to achieve
The NSPS for electric utility steam
f. Provide specific examples to long-term emissions reductions by
illustrate your concerns, and suggest generating units (40 CFR part 60,
subpart Da) were originally promulgated ensuring that the best demonstrated
alternatives. emission control technologies are
g. Explain your views as clearly as on June 11, 1979 (44 FR 33580) and
apply to units capable of firing more installed as the industrial infrastructure
possible, avoiding the use of profanity is modernized. Since 1970, the NSPS
or personal threats. than 73 megawatts (MW) (250 million
British thermal units per hour(MMBtu/ have been successful in achieving long-
h. Make sure to submit your term emissions reductions at numerous
comments by the comment period hr)) heat input of fossil fuel that
industries by assuring cost-effective
deadline identified. commenced construction,
controls are installed on new,
Docket. The docket number for the reconstruction, or modification after
reconstructed, or modified sources.
proposed amendments to the standards September 18, 1978. The NSPS also
Recently, however, with the rapid
of performance (40 CFR part 60, subpart apply to industrial-commercial- advance of control technologies, the
Da, Db, and Dc) is Docket ID No. OAR– institutional cogeneration units that sell case-by-case new source review (NSR)
2005–0031. Other dockets incorporated more than 25 MW and more than one- permitting program has required greater
by reference for the standards of third of their potential output capacity emissions reductions than required by
performance include Docket ID Nos. A– to any utility power distribution system. the NSPS, particularly for utility boilers.
79–02, A–83–27, A–86–02, and A–92– The most recent amendments to The existing and proposed market-based
71. emission standards under subpart Da, cap and trade programs require greater
Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition 40 CFR part 60, were promulgated in overall emissions reductions from the
to being available in the docket, an 1998 (63 FR 49442) resulting in new entire utility industry than the
electronic copy of the proposed NOX limitations for subpart Da, 40 CFR technology-based emission limits of the
amendments is available on the WWW part 60, units. Furthermore, in the 1998 NSPS can achieve by regulating
through the Technology Transfer amendments, we incorporated the use of individual new sources.
Network (TTN). Following signature, output-based emission limits. Utility steam generators are subject to
EPA will post a copy of the proposed the current cap and trade programs for
amendments on the TTN’s policy and The NSPS for industrial-commercial-
institutional steam generating units (40 acid rain, which imposes a national cap
guidance page for newly proposed or on annual utility SO2 emissions, and for
promulgated amendments at http:// CFR part 60, subpart Db) apply to units
for which construction, modification, or interstate transport of ozone, which
www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN imposes a regional cap on summer time
provides information and technology reconstruction commenced after June
utility NOX emissions in the eastern
exchange in various areas of air 19, 1984 that have a heat input capacity
United States. The Administration’s
pollution control. If more information greater than 29 MW (100 MMBtu/hr).
proposed Clear Skies Act would impose
regarding the TTN is needed, call the Those standards were originally
three trading programs: a national SO2
TTN Help line at (919) 541–5384. promulgated on November 25, 1986 (51
trading program tighter than the acid
FR 42768) and also have been amended rain trading program and two annual
II. Background Information
since the original promulgation to NOX trading programs (one for the
A. What Is the Statutory Authority for reflect changes in BDT for these sources. eastern United States and one for the
the Proposed Amendments? The most recent amendments to remaining part of the country).
New source performance standards emission standards under subpart Db, Alternatively, EPA’s Clean Air Interstate
(NSPS) implement CAA section 111(b), 40 CFR part 60, were promulgated in Rule (CAIR) proposes two new trading
and are issued for categories of sources 1998 (63 FR 49442) resulting in new programs for utility steam generators to
which cause, or contribute significantly NOX limitations for subpart Db, 40 CFR further control SO2 and NOX emissions
to, air pollution which may reasonably part 60, units. in the eastern United States to reduce
be anticipated to endanger public health The NSPS for small industrial- the transport of fine particulate matter
or welfare. commercial-institutional steam and ozone.
Section 111 of the CAA requires that generating units (40 CFR part 60, Under these types of cap and trade
NSPS reflect the application of the best subpart Dc) were originally promulgated programs, emissions of the regulated
system of emissions reductions which on September 12, 1990 (55 FR 37674) pollutants from all the regulated units
(taking into consideration the cost of and apply to units with a maximum are capped at a prescribed level (tons
achieving such emissions reductions, heat input capacity greater than or equal per year). Each affected unit is allocated
any non-air quality health and to 2.9 MW (10 MMBtu/hr) but less than a number of emission allowances, each
environmental impact and energy 29 MW (100 MMBtu/hr). Those of which conveys the right to emit a
requirements) the Administrator certain amount of the regulated
standards apply to units that
determines has been adequately pollutant. The total number of
commenced construction,
demonstrated. This level of control is allowances allocated for any given year
reconstruction, or modification after
commonly referred to as best equals the emissions cap for that year.
June 9, 1989. Each year, an affected unit must turn in
demonstrated technology (BDT).
The current standards for steam Section 111(b)(1)(B) of the CAA a number of allowances equal to its
generating units are contained in the requires the EPA periodically to review emissions. Allowances can be bought
NSPS for electric utility steam and revise the standards of performance, and sold. Therefore, units can comply
generating units (40 CFR part 60, as necessary, to reflect improvements in either by emitting equal to or less than
subpart Da), industrial-commercial- methods for reducing emissions. permitted by the number of allowances
they have been allocated or by obtaining sources will be the most cost-effective provisions of the existing amendments,
additional allowances. This provides choice for most new sources. If there are as explained below.
units with low cost reduction circumstances where this is not the We are proposing language to clarify
opportunities an incentive to reduce case, then overly stringent NSPS could the applicability of subparts Da, Db, and
emissions below their allocated levels limit a new source from using the most Dc of 40 CFR part 60 to combined cycle
and allows units that face high costs for cost-effective controls for meeting its power plants. Heat recovery steam
emissions reductions the opportunity to allocated portion of the emissions cap, generators that are associated with
obtain allowances. thereby raising the cost of controls combined cycle gas turbines burning
It is useful to understand the without necessarily increasing the natural gas or a fuel other than
relationship between the NSPS program environmental benefit. synthetic-coal gas would not be subject
as it applies to utility steam generators The primary environmental benefit to subparts Da, Db, or Dc, 40 CFR part
and the various cap and trade programs from the proposed amendments to the 60, if the unit meets the applicability
being implemented or under utility NSPS would come from the requirements of subpart KKKK, 40 CFR
development. First, the cap and trade reduction of direct PM emissions, part 60 (Standards of Performance for
program provides an incentive to apply because direct emissions of PM are not Stationary Combustion Turbines).
modern emission controls on new subject to a cap and trade program (nor Subpart Da, Db, or Dc of 40 CFR part 60
sources because installing controls on a has such a program been proposed). For would apply to a combined cycle gas
new unit is generally less expensive SO2 (which is subject to a national turbine that burns synthetic-coal gas
than installing similar controls on an trading program), the primary effect of (e.g., integrated coal gasification
existing unit. Minimizing emissions the proposed amendments would be to combine cycle power plants) and meets
from a new source minimizes the establish the minimum control the applicability criteria of one of the
allowances it must purchase (if no requirements for any steam generating proposed amendments, respectively.
allowances are set aside for new We are proposing amendments to the
units that are not subject to NSR. For
sources) or may even allow it to sell definitions for boiler operating day,
NOX, the same would be true nationally
allowances (if allowances are coal, coal-derived fuels, oil, and natural
if Clear Skies were to pass or would be
automatically allocated to new sources). gas. The purpose of the proposed
true in the eastern United States if CAIR amendments is to clarify definitions
Therefore, for source categories and
is promulgated. Also, replacing the across the three subparts and to
pollutants subject to a stringent
percent reduction requirement for SO2 incorporate the most current applicable
industry-wide emissions cap, a stringent
with an emission limit would American Society for Testing and
NSPS is less important because new
harmonize the NSPS with the cap and Materials (ASTM) testing method
sources already have an economic
trade programs by providing sources references. Also, we are proposing to
incentive to install state-of-the-art
more flexibility in reducing emissions clarify the definition of an ‘‘electric
controls. Second, over time, as
from new sources to meet the cap, while utility steam generating unit’’ as applied
technology improves, a cap continues to
provide an incentive to install better maintaining the same aggregate to cogeneration units.
technology, especially on new sources. emissions. We are proposing several
In contrast, NSPS that are reviewed and III. Summary of the Proposed amendments to the provisions of the
amended every 8 years are unlikely to Amendments existing rule related to the use of
keep pace with technological continuous emission monitoring
improvements. Since the normal The proposed amendments would systems (CEMS) to obtain SO2 and NOX
rulemaking process takes several years, amend the emission limits for SO2, emission data for determining
more frequent updating of NSPS are NOX, and PM from steam generating compliance with the rule requirements.
impractical. units in subpart Da, 40 CFR part 60, The proposed amendments would
Finally, for sources and pollutants (Electric Utility Steam Generating eliminate duplicative or conflicting
subject to a tight industry-wide Units), and the PM emission limit for CEMS requirements for utility steam
emissions cap, stringent NSPS would subpart Db, 40 CFR part 60, (Industrial- generating units that are subject to both
have little or no effect on overall Commercial-Institutional Steam 40 CFR part 60 and 40 CFR part 75 (acid
emissions in the geographic area Generating Units), and subpart Dc, 40 rain).
regulated by the cap. Even if there were CFR part 60, (Small Industrial-
source specific reasons which result in Commercial-Institutional Steam A. What Are the Requirements for New
it not making economic sense to install Generating Units). Only those units that Electric Utility Steam Generating Units
as effective emission controls as would begin construction, modification, or (40 CFR Part 60, Subpart Da)?
be required under a stringent NSPS, that reconstruction after February 28, 2005, The proposed PM emission limit for
unit would have to use more would be affected by the proposed electric utility steam generating units is
allowances. This would result in fewer amendments. Steam generating units 6.4 nanograms per joule (ng/J) (0.015 lb/
allowances being available for existing subject to the proposed amendments but MMBtu) heat input regardless of the
units, which would result in fewer for which construction, modification, or type of fuel burned. Compliance with
emissions from existing sources. reconstruction began on or before this emission limit would be
Therefore, for the pollutants, geographic February 28, 2005, would continue to determined using the same testing,
area, and sources regulated by cap and comply with the applicable standards monitoring, and other compliance
trade programs, tighter NSPS would not under the current NSPS. Compliance provisions for PM standards set forth in
necessarily affect total emissions. with the proposed emission limits the existing rule.
However, the stringency of the NSPS would be determined using the same The proposed SO2 emission limit for
could affect the cost of achieving these testing, monitoring, and other electric utility steam generating units is
emissions reductions. A cap and trade compliance provisions set forth in the 250 ng/J (2.0 pound per megawatt hour
program allows the market to determine existing standards. In addition to (lb/MWh)) gross energy output
the most cost-effective way to achieve amending the emission limits, we also regardless of the type of fuel burned
the overall emissions reductions goal. are proposing several technical with one exception. The proposed SO2
Installing modern controls on new clarifications and corrections to existing emission limit for electric utility steam
generating units that burn over 90 combustion controls, combustion efficiencies in excess of 99.9 percent.
percent coal refuse is 300 ng/J (2.4 lb controls, or post-combustion controls. Control of PM emissions from oil-fired
SO2/MWh) gross energy output. Under Pre-combustion controls remove steam generating units can be achieved
the existing subpart Da of 40 CFR part contaminants from the fuel before it is by using oil burner designs with
60, coal refuse is defined as waste burned, and combustion controls reduce improved atomization and fuel mixing
products of coal mining, physical coal the amount of pollutants formed during characteristics, by implementing better
cleaning, and coal preparation combustion. Post-combustion controls maintenance practices, and by using an
operations (e.g., culm, gob) containing remove pollutants formed from the flue ESP.
coal, matrix material, clay, and other gases before the gases are released to the
Electrostatic Precipitator. An ESP
organic and inorganic material. atmosphere.
Selecting control technologies to operates by imparting an electrical
Compliance with the proposed SO2
reduce emissions of PM, SO2, and NOX charge to incoming particles, and then
emission limits would be determined on
from a new steam generating unit is a attracting the particles to oppositely
a 30-day rolling average basis using a
function of the type of fuel burned in charged metal plates for collection.
CEMS to measure SO2 emissions as
discharged to the atmosphere and the unit, the size of the unit, and other Periodically, the particles collected on
following the compliance provisions in site-specific factors (e.g., type of unit, the plates are dislodged in sheets or
the existing rule for the output-based firing and loading practices used, agglomerates (by rapping the plates) and
NOX standards applicable to new regional and local air quality fall into a collection hopper. The fly ash
sources that were built after July 9, requirements). All new steam generating collected in the ESP hopper is a solid
1997. units incorporate control technologies to waste that is either recycled for
The proposed NOX emission limit for reduce NOX emissions. Natural gas is a industrial use or disposed of in a
electric utility steam generating units is gaseous fuel composed of methane and landfill.
130 ng/J (1.0 lb NOX/MWh) gross energy other hydrocarbons with trace amounts The effectiveness of particle capture
output regardless of the type of fuel of sulfur and no ash. Accordingly, PM in an ESP depends primarily on the
burned in the unit. Compliance with and SO2 emissions from steam electrical resistivity of the particles
this emission limit would be generating units firing natural gas are being collected. The size requirement
determined on a 30-day rolling average inherently low and generally do not for an ESP increases with increasing
basis using the testing, monitoring, and require the use of additional PM or SO2
coal ash resistivity. Resistivity of coal
other compliance provisions in the control technologies. For new steam
fly ash can be lowered by conditioning
existing rule for the output-based NOX generating units firing fuel oils, PM and
the particles upstream of the ESP with
standards applicable to new sources that SO2 controls may be required depending
on the grade and composition of the fuel sulfur trioxide, sulfuric acid, water, or
were built after July 9, 1997. sodium. In addition, collection
oil being burned in the unit. New steam
B. What Are the Requirements for generating units firing coal use PM and efficiency is not uniform for all particle
Industrial-Commercial-Institutional SO2 controls. sizes. Collection efficiencies greater
Steam Generating Units (40 CFR Part than 99.9 percent, however, are
60, Subpart Db)? 1. PM Control Technologies achievable for small particles (less than
Filterable PM emissions from a steam 0.1 micrometer (µm)) and large particles
The proposed PM emission limit for (greater than 10 µm). Collection
generating unit are predominately fly
industrial-commercial-institutional efficiencies achieved by ESP for the
ash and carbon. Carbon particles are
steam generating units is 13 ng/J (0.03 portion of particles having sizes
generated from incomplete combustion
lb/MMBtu heat input) for units that between 0.1 µm and 10 µm tend to be
of the fuel, and fly ash from burning
burn coal, oil, wood, or a mixture of fuels containing ash materials (the lower.
these fuels with other fuels. This limit mineral and other incombustible matter
would apply to units larger than 29 MW Fabric Filters. A fabric filter collects
portion of a fuel). These incombustible PM in the flue gases by passing the
(100 million British thermal units per solid materials are released during the
hour). gases through a porous fabric material.
combustion process and are entrained in The buildup of solid particles on the
C. What Are the Requirements for Small the flue gases. Distillate oils contain fabric surface forms a thin, porous layer
Industrial-Commercial-Institutional insignificant levels of ash, but residual of solids, which further acts as a
Steam Generating Units (40 CFR Part fuel oils have higher ash contents, up to filtration medium. Gases pass through
60, Subpart Dc)? 0.5 percent. While different ranks of this cake/fabric filter, and all but the
coals vary in ash content, all coals finest-sized particles are trapped on the
The proposed PM emission limit for
contain significant quantities of ash.
small industrial-commercial- cake surface. Collection efficiencies of
The percentage of ash in a given coal
institutional steam generating units is fabric filters can be as high as 99.99
can vary from less than 5 percent to
13 ng/J (0.03 lb/MMBtu heat input) for percent.
greater than 20 percent depending on
units that burn coal, oil, wood, or a A fabric filter must be designed and
the coal source and level of coal
mixture of these fuels with other fuels. operated carefully to ensure that the
cleaning.
This limit would apply to units between Control of PM emissions from steam bags inside the collector are not
8.7 MW and 29 MW (30 to 100 million generating units relies on the use of damaged or destroyed by adverse
Btu per hour). post-combustion controls to remove operating conditions. The fabric
IV. Rationale for the Proposed solid particles from the flue gases. material must be compatible with the
Amendments Electrostatic precipitators (ESP) and gas stream temperatures and chemical
fabric filters (also called baghouses) are composition. Because of the
A. What Is the Performance of Control the predominant technologies used to temperature limitations of the available
Technologies for Steam Generating control PM from coal-fired steam bag fabrics, location of a fabric filter for
Units? generating units. Either of these PM use by a coal-fired electric steam
Control technologies for steam control technologies can be designed to generating unit is restricted to locations
generating units are based on either pre- achieve overall PM collection downstream of the air heater.
2. SO2 Control Technologies The SO2 removal efficiency that a wet a portion of the solids collected in the
During combustion, sulfur FGD system can achieve for a specific spray dryer and the PM collection
compounds present in a fuel are steam generating unit is affected by the device may be recycled to the spray
predominately oxidized to gaseous SO2. sulfur content of the fuel burned, which dryer. The SO2 removal efficiencies of
A small portion of the SO2 oxidizes determines the amount of SO2 entering new lime spray dryer systems are
further to sulfur trioxide (SO3). One the wet scrubber, and site-specific generally greater than 90 percent.
scrubber design parameters including Dry Injection. For the dry injection
approach to controlling SO2 emissions
liquid-to-gas ratio, pH of the scrubbing process, dry hydrated or slaked lime (or
from steam generating units is to limit
medium, and the ratio of the alkaline another suitable sorbent) is directly
the maximum sulfur content in the fuel.
sorbent to SO2. Annual SO2 removal injected into the ductwork or boiler
This can be accomplished by burning a
efficiencies have been demonstrated upstream of a PM control device. Some
fuel that naturally contains low amounts
above 98 percent. Advanced wet systems use spray humidification
of sulfur or a fuel that has been pre-
scrubber designs include limestone followed by dry injection. The SO2 is
treated to remove sulfur from the fuel.
scrubbing with forced oxidation (LSFO) adsorbed and reacts with the powdered
A second approach is use a post- sorbent. The dry solids are entrained in
and magnesium enhanced lime
combustion control technology that the combustion gas stream, along with
scrubbing FGD systems.
removes SO2 from the flue gases. These Limestone Scrubbing with Forced fly ash, and then collected by the
technologies rely on either absorption or Oxidation. Limestone scrubbing with downstream PM control device.
adsorption processes that react SO2 with forced oxidation is a variation of the wet The dry injection process produces a
lime, limestone, or another alkaline scrubber described above and can use dry, solid by-product that is easier to
material to form an aqueous or solid either limestone or magnesium dispose. However, the SO2 removal
sulfur by-product. enhanced lime. In the LSFO process, the efficiencies for existing dry injection
Coal Pre-Treatment. Sulfur in coal calcium sulfite initially formed in the systems are lower than for the other
occurs as either inorganic sulfur or spray tower absorber is oxidized to form FGD technologies ranging from
organic sulfur that is chemically bonded gypsum (calcium sulfate) by bubbling approximately 40 to 60 percent when
with carbon. Pyrite is the most common compressed air through the sulfite using lime or limestone, and up to 90
form of inorganic sulfur. There are two slurry. The resulting gypsum by-product percent using other sorbants (e.g.,
ways to pre-treat coal before combustion has commercial value and can be sold sodium bicarbonate).
to lower sulfur emissions: Physical coal to wallboard manufacturers. Also, Fluidized-bed Combustion with
cleaning and gasification. Physical because of their larger size and Limestone. One of the appealing
cleaning removes between 20 to 90 structure, gypsum crystals settle and features of selecting a steam generating
percent of pyritic sulfur, but is not dewater better than calcium sulfite unit that uses a fluidized-bed combustor
effective at removing organic sulfur. The crystals, reducing the required size of (FBC) is the capability to control SO2
amount of pyritic sulfur varies with by-product handling equipment. The emissions during the combustion
different coal types, but it is typically high gypsum content also permits process. This is accomplished by adding
half of the total sulfur for high sulfur disposal of the dewatered waste without finely crushed limestone along with the
coals. fixation. coal (or other solid fuel) to the fluidized
Coal gasification breaks coal apart Spray Dryer Adsorption. An bed. During combustion, calcination of
into its chemical constituents (typically alternative to using wet scrubbers is to the limestone (reduction to lime by
a mixture of carbon monoxide, use spray dryer adsorber technology. A subjecting to heat) occurs
hydrogen, and other gaseous spray dryer adsorber operates by the simultaneously with the oxidation of
compounds) prior to combustion. The same principle as wet lime scrubbing, sulfur in the coal to form SO2. The SO2,
product gas is then cleaned of except that instead of a bulk liquid (as in the presence of excess oxygen, reacts
contaminants prior to combustion. in wet scrubbing) the flue gas containing with the lime particles to form calcium
Gasification reduces SO2 emissions by SO2 is contacted with fine spray sulfate. The sulfated lime particles are
over 99 percent. droplets of hydrated lime slurry in a removed with the bottom ash or
Alkali Wet Scrubbing. The SO2 in a spray dryer vessel. This vessel is located collected with the fly ash by a
flue gas can be removed by reacting the downstream of the air heater outlet downstream PM control device (for
sulfur compounds with a solution of where the gas temperatures are in the most existing FBC steam generating unit
water and an alkaline chemical to form range of 120 °C to 180 °C (250 °F to 350 applications, a fabric filter is used as the
insoluble salts that are removed in the °F). The SO2 is absorbed in the slurry PM control device). Fresh limestone is
scrubber effluent. The most commonly and reacts with the hydrated lime continuously fed to the bed to replace
used wet flue gas desulfurization (FGD) reagent to form solid calcium sulfite and the reacted limestone. The SO2 removal
systems for coal-fired steam generating calcium sulfate. The water is evaporated efficiencies for some FBC units are in
units are based on using either by the hot flue gases and forms dry, the range of approximately 80 to 98
limestone or lime as the alkaline source. solid particles containing the reacted percent.
In a wet scrubber, the flue gas enters a sulfur. Most of the SO2 removal occurs
large vessel located downstream of the in the spray dryer vessel itself, although 3. NOX Control Technologies
particle control device where it contacts some additional SO2 capture has also Nitrogen oxides are formed in a steam
the lime or limestone slurry. The been observed in downstream generating unit by the oxidation of
calcium in the slurry reacts with the particulate collection devices. This molecular nitrogen in the combustion
SO2 to form reaction products that are process produces a dry waste product, air and any nitrogen compounds
predominately calcium sulfite. Because which is mostly disposed of in a contained in the fuel. The formation of
of its high alkalinity, fly ash is landfill. NOX from nitrogen in the combustion
sometimes mixed with the limestone or The primary operating parameters air is dependent on two conditions
lime. Other alkaline solutions can be affecting SO2 removal are the calcium- occurring simultaneously in the unit’s
used for scrubbing including sodium reagent-to-sulfur stoichiometric ratio combustion zone: high temperature and
carbonate, magnesium oxide, and dual and the approach to saturation in the an excess of combustion air. Under
alkali. spray dryer. To decrease sorbent costs, these conditions, significant quantities
of NOX are formed regardless of the fuel injected above the primary combustion CAA for the NSPS program and achieve
type burned. New steam generating zone to create a fuel rich zone to reduce additional benefits of compliance
units being installed today in the United burner-generated NOX to N2 and water flexibility, increased efficiency, and the
States routinely include burners and vapor. Overfire air is added above the use of cleaner fuels.
other features designed to reduce the reburning zone to complete combustion
1. Fuel-Neutral Approach
amounts of NOX formed during of the reburning fuel. Natural gas co-
combustion. firing consists of injecting and We are proposing to amend emission
Beyond the lower levels of NOX combusting natural gas near or limits using a fuel-neutral approach in
emissions achieved using combustion concurrently with the main oil or coal most cases. This approach is currently
controls, additional NOX emission fuel. Flue gas recirculating decreases used for the NOX emission standards
control can be achieved for steam combustion temperatures by mixing flue under subparts Da and Db of 40 CFR
generating units by installing post- gases with the incoming combustion air. part 60 and encourages pollution
combustion control technologies. These For gas and oil units, flue gas prevention by recognizing the
technologies involve converting the recirculating can reduce NOX emissions environmental benefits of combustion
NOX in the flue gas to molecular by 75 percent. controls based on the use of clean fuels.
nitrogen (N2) and water using either a SCR Technology. The SCR process The fuel-neutral approach provides a
process that requires a catalyst (called uses a catalyst with ammonia (NH3) to single emission limit for steam
selective catalytic reduction (SCR)) or a reduce the nitrogen oxide (NO) and generating units based on BDT without
process that does not use a catalyst nitrogen dioxide (NO2) in the flue gas to regard to specific type of steam
(called selective noncatalytic reduction molecular nitrogen and water. Ammonia generating equipment or fuel type. This
(SNCR)). Both SCR and SNCR is diluted with air or steam, and this approach provides an incentive to
technologies have been applied widely mixture is injected into the flue gas facilities to consider fuel use, boiler
to gas-, oil-, and coal-fired steam upstream of a metal catalyst bed that type, and control technology when
generating units. typically is composed of vanadium, developing an emission control strategy.
NOX Combustion Controls. titanium, platinum, or zeolite. The SCR Therefore, owners and operators of
Combustion controls reduce NOX catalyst bed reactor is usually located affected sources are able to use the most
emission formation by controlling the between the economizer outlet and air effective combination of add-on control
peak flame temperature and excess air heater inlet, where temperatures range technologies, clean fuels, and boiler
in and around the combustion zone from 230 °C to 400 °C (450 °F to 750 °F). design to meet the emission limit. For
through staged combustion. With staged The SCR technology is capable of NOX example, an owner and operator may
combustion, the primary combustion reduction efficiencies of 90 percent or decide that the blending of a low sulfur
zone is fired with most of the air needed higher. fuel with coal or physically washing the
for complete combustion of the fuel. SNCR Technology. A SNCR process is coal in combination with dry-injection
The remaining air is introduced into the based on the same basic chemistry of technology would be a more cost-
products of the partial combustion in a reducing the NO and NO2 in the flue effective way of meeting the NSPS than
second combustion zone. Air staging gas to molecular nitrogen and water, but burning a higher sulfur coal and
lowers the peak flame temperature, does not require the use of a catalyst to installing a FGD system. Alternatively,
thereby reducing thermal NOX, and promote these reactions. Instead, the if a source does not have long-term
reduces the production of fuel NOX by reducing agent is injected into the flue access to clean fuels at a reasonable
reducing the oxygen available for gas stream at a point where the flue gas cost, then emission control technology
combination with the fuel nitrogen. temperature is within a specific is available to allow units to burn higher
Staged combustion may be achieved temperature range of 870 °C to 1,090 °C sulfur fuels and still comply with the
internally in the fuel burners using (1,600 °F to 2,000 °F). Currently, two emission limits.
specially designed burner SNCR processes are commercially To develop a fuel-neutral emission
configurations (often referred to as low- available; one uses ammonia as the limit, we analyzed emission control
NOX burners), or external to the burners reagent, and the other process uses an performance from coal-fired units to
by diverting a portion of the combustion aqueous urea solution in place of establish an emission level that
air from the burners and introducing it ammonia. The NOX reduction levels for represents BDT. The higher sulfur,
through separate ports and/or nozzles, SNCR are in the range of approximately nitrogen, and ash contents for coal
mounted above the burners (often 30 to 50 percent. compared to oil or gas makes
referred to as overfire air (OFA)). The application of BDT to coal-fired units
B. Regulatory Approach
actual NOX reduction achieved with a more complex than application to either
given NOX combustion control We have reviewed emission data and oil-or gas-fired units. Therefore,
technology varies from unit to unit. Use control technology information emission levels selected for coal-fired
of low-NOX burners can reduce NOX applicable to criteria pollutants and steam generating units using BDT would
emissions by approximately 35 to 55 have concluded that the regulation of be achievable by oil- and gas-fired
percent. Use of OFA reduces NOX NOX, PM, and SO2 emissions from these electric utility steam generating units.
emissions levels in the range of 15 to 30 sources under the NSPS is appropriate. The resulting emission levels from coal-
percent. Higher NOX emissions The proposed amendments to the NSPS fired units would apply to all boiler
reductions are achieved when reflect the BDT for these sources based types and fuel use combinations. It is
combustion control technologies are on the performance and cost of the appropriate for all fuels to have the
combined (e.g., combining OFA with emission control technologies discussed same limits to avoid discouraging the
low-NOX burners can achieve NOX above. In amending the emission limits use of cleaner fuels. The BDT analysis
emissions reductions in the range of 60 based on BDT, we have incorporated a was conducted separately for 40 CFR
percent). fuel-neutral concept and, to the extent part 60, subparts Da, Db, and Dc.
Other NOX combustion control that it is practical and reasonable,
techniques include reburning, co-firing output-based emission limits. These 2. Output-Based Emission Standards
natural gas, and flue gas recirculating. In approaches provide the level of We have established pollution
reburning, coal, oil, or natural gas is emission limitation required by the prevention as one of our highest
priorities. One of the opportunities for and requesting comments on an output- The use of output-based emission
pollution prevention is maximizing the based limit. The proposed output-based limits is less feasible for PM because
efficiency of energy generation. An emission limit for SO2 will replace both current regulations generally do not
output-based standard establishes the current percentage reduction require industrial-commercial-
emission limits in a format that requirement and input-based emission institutional steam generators to operate
incorporates the effects of unit limit. PM CEMS. Furthermore, the percent
efficiency by relating emissions to the Industrial-Commercial-Institutional removal format for SO2 contained in
amount of useful-energy generated, not Units. For subpart Db of 40 CFR part 60, subpart Db of 40 CFR part 60 is not
the amount of fuel burned. By relating we are soliciting comment on an compatible with an output-based
emission limitations to the productive optional output-based NOX emission standard.
output of the process, output-based limit for units that generate electricity. 3. Combined Heat and Power
emission limits encourage energy Units that generate electricity have the
efficiency because any increase in greatest opportunity for achieving Combined heat and power (CHP) is
overall energy efficiency results in a increases in energy efficiency. We the sequential generation of power
lower emission rate. Allowing energy would structure the output-based limit (electricity or shaft power) and thermal
efficiency as a pollution control as an option because we determined energy from a common combustion
measure provides regulated sources that for some applications of industrial, source. The application of CHP captures
with an additional compliance option commercial, and institutional boilers, and uses much of the waste heat that
that can lead to reduced compliance the monitoring, recordkeeping, and ordinarily is discarded from
costs as well as lower emissions. The reporting costs for demonstrating conventional electrical generation,
use of more efficient technologies compliance with output-based emission where two-thirds of the input energy
reduces fossil fuel use and leads to limits would be unreasonable. typically becomes waste heat (through
multi-media reductions in exhaust stacks and cooling towers). In a
Determining compliance with an
environmental impacts both on-site and CHP system, this captured energy can be
output-based emission limit requires the
off-site. On-site benefits include lower used to provide process heat and space
use of a CEMS. Specifically, emission cooling or heating. By recovering waste
emissions of all products of combustion, data must be collected in units of
including hazardous air pollutants, as heat, CHP systems achieve much higher
pounds per hour to calculate an output- fuel efficiencies than separate electric
well as reducing any solid waste and based emission rate. The CEMS
wastewater discharges. Off-site benefits and thermal generators, and emit less
currently required by subpart Db of 40 pollution. Using CHP is a method for
include the reduction of emissions and CFR part 60, do not provide that data.
non-air environmental impacts from the industry not only to decrease criteria
A CEMS also would need to collect pollutants and hazardous air pollutants,
production, processing, and continuous exhaust flow data to
transportation of fuels. but also to move forward on addressing
calculate emissions in units of pounds concerns about increasing levels of heat
While output-based emission limits
per hour. Additionally, continuous trapping gases in the atmosphere.
have been used for regulating many
industries, input-based emission limits energy monitoring devices would be Because CHP units produce both
have been the traditional method to needed to comply with an output-based electrical and thermal energy, the
regulate steam generating units. limit. Not all electric generating units proposed amendments must account for
However, this trend is changing as we subject to subpart Db of 40 CFR part 60 both types of energy in demonstrating
seek to promote pollution prevention may be designed with these monitoring compliance with an output-based
and provide more compliance flexibility systems. Due to costs, we are not emission limit. Energy output for CHP
to combustion sources. For example, in expanding the monitoring requirements units is the sum of gross electrical
1998 we amended the NSPS for electric under subpart Db of 40 CFR part 60 to output and the useful energy of the
utility steam generating units (40 CFR require the collection of exhaust flow process steam. For the output-based
part 60, subpart Da) to use output-based and electrical generation data, and we emission limits currently contained in
standards for NOX (40 CFR 63.44a, 62 are not proposing an output-based subpart Da of 40 CFR part 60, we
FR 36954, and 63 FR 49446). In this emission limit for subpart Db of 40 CFR defined the useful energy of the process
action, we are proposing output-based part 60. Instead, we are proposing that steam from CHP units as 50 percent of
emission limits for SO2 and NOX under individual facilities be given the option the thermal output. We chose the 50
subpart Da of 40 CFR part 60. The of complying with either the current percent allowance at that time because
format of the proposed output-based input-based or an equivalent output- using an allowance as if the steam
limits is mass of pollutant per megawatt based limit. would be converted to electricity (up to
hour of gross energy output. We are Output-based limits may be feasible 38 percent efficiency) would not
proposing to base the limits on gross for NOX at units that operate continuous account for the environmental benefits
energy output because of the monitoring emission flow and electrical generation of CHP applications, and allowing 100
difficulties in measuring net output. The monitoring equipment. For example, percent could potentially overstate the
current output-based emission limit for some industrial-commercial- environmental benefits of CHP
NOX in subpart Da of 40 CFR part 60 is institutional electric generating units applications. Additionally, this
based on gross energy output. The may be required to install continuous approach to CHP units was consistent
difficulties of monitoring net energy exhaust flow monitoring systems to with a Federal Energy Regulatory
output are explained in the preamble to demonstrate compliance with State Commission (FERC) regulation
the 1998 NOX amendment for subpart regulatory programs, such as NOX determining the efficiency of CHP units.
Da of 40 CFR part 60 (63 FR 49448). requirements in State implementation In the proposed amendments, we are
Electrical Generating Units. For plans. Where the required monitors are soliciting comments on the
subpart Da of 40 CFR part 60, we are in place, an output-based emission limit appropriateness of giving more than 50
proposing amendments which establish provides an incentive for increased percent credit for thermal output, and
output-based emission limits for SO2 energy efficiency and the use of highly on a different approach to account for
and NOX. For PM, we are proposing an efficient technologies like combined the thermal energy from CHP units. The
amended input-based emission limit heat and power systems (next section). proposed approach would account for
the efficiency benefits of the thermal from an input- to a thermal output- Northside facility in Florida. These
output based on the amount of avoided based emission rate by dividing the plants are designed to burn lignite,
emissions that a conventional boiler input-based emission limit by an subbituminous, and bituminous coal,
system would otherwise emit had it assumed thermal system efficiency of 80 respectively. To provide a broader set of
provided the same thermal output as the percent. We have chosen a boiler data to base the proposed amendments
CHP system. The avoided emissions thermal efficiency of 80 percent because on, we also analyzed older plants that
would be determined for each unit it is considered reasonable and takes have been retrofitted with controls.
based on individual unit operating into consideration all fuels and a variety
1. Selection of the Proposed PM
factors. The proposed compliance of design configurations used for boilers
Standard
procedures for CHP units follow this in CHP facilities. Then, the avoided
logic: emission rate is converted to units of Direct particulate matter emissions
(1) Determine the emission rate of the pounds per hour by multiplying by the from steam generating units firing coal
combustion source that provides energy recovered useful thermal output of the result from the entrainment of fly ash in
to the CHP unit (in units of pounds per CHP system. We are soliciting the flue gases and, to a lesser extent,
hour) from the continuous emission and comments both on this approach and from unburned fuel particles and
flow monitoring system; other methods of determining displaced downstream post-combustion reactions.
(2) Calculate the avoided emissions thermal emissions besides a boiler Currently, 40 CFR part 60, subpart Da,
(in units of pounds per hour) for the subject to 40 CFR part 60, subpart Db. limits PM emissions from electric utility
amount of thermal energy generated steam generating units to 0.03 lb/
C. How Did EPA Determine the MMBtu heat input regardless of the fuel
from the CHP unit; and Amended Standards for Electric Utility
(3) Subtract the avoided emissions burned in the unit.
Steam Generating Units (40 CFR Part Coal-fired electric utility steam
from the total emissions of the CHP unit 60, Subpart Da)?
and divide that value by the gross generating units meeting the current PM
electrical output of the CHP unit. New source performance standards emission limit under subpart Da, 40
This approach more accurately for electric utility steam generating units CFR part 60, predominately use either a
reflects the environmental benefits of in the proposed amendments would fabric filter or ESP to remove PM from
CHP units and accounts for site-specific apply only to affected sources that begin the flue gases. Over the years, the
differences in system design, operation, construction, modification, or performance of fabric filters and ESP
and various power-to-heat ratios (the reconstruction after February 28, 2005. installed on coal-fired steam generating
ratio of gross electrical energy As discussed earlier in this preamble, units has improved as a result of
generation to useful thermal energy the regulatory approach we are using to advanced control device designs and
develop the proposed standards is based other performance enhancements (e.g.,
generation).
If a CHP unit demonstrates on our determination of BDT for control use of new bag materials for fabric filters
of PM, SO2, and NOX from electric and use of computer modeling and
compliance with the output-based
utility steam generating units. improved rapper and electrical system
emission limit, an output-based
Furthermore, we decided that the designs for ESP). We concluded that
emission rate would be calculated based
proposed standards should use a fuel- fabric filters and ESP represent BDT for
on the following equation:
neutral and an output-based emission continuous reduction of PM emissions
Echp = [Et ¥ THa]/Oe (Eq. 1) limit format, to the extent that it is from coal-fired electric utility steam
Where: practical and reasonable. generating units.
Echp = CHP emission rate (lb/MWh) To set the proposed output-based To assess performance levels
Et = total emissions (pounds per hour standards at new plants, we used achievable by fabric filters and ESP
(lb/hr)) measured output-based emissions where installed on new coal-fired electric
THa = avoided thermal emissions (lb/hr) available. When gross output utility steam generating units, we
Oe = electrical output (MW) information was unavailable, we reviewed the permits of three recent
The avoided thermal emissions (A) selected emission limits based on heat facilities covered under subparts Da of
would be calculated based on the input and used a gross electrical 40 CFR part 60. The permit limits for
following equation: efficiency to determine the output-based the Hawthorn, Red Hills, and Northside
A = [E/0.8] * Oth (Eq. 2) standard. Recent technical publications facilities are 0.018, 0.015, and 0.011 lb
assert that new supercritical plants will PM/MMBtu heat input respectively. The
Where: be able to achieve net efficiencies as Hawthorn limit includes condensible
A = avoided thermal emissions (lb/hr) high as 45 percent, and analysis of PM, and the facility is achieving
E = applicable NSPS emission limit for EPA’s Clean Air Markets Division data filterable PM control of 0.012 lb/
the displaced boiler (pound per indicates that the top 10 percent of MMBtu. The Northside facility is
million British thermal units heat utility units are presently operating at a achieving filterable PM control of 0.004
input (lb/MMBtu)) gross efficiency of 38 percent or greater. lb/MMBtu. Based on this information,
0.8 = assumed boiler efficiency (percent) However, to account for variations in we concluded that current fabric filter
Oth = thermal output (MMBtu/hr) boiler designs and to allow efficiency as and ESP control technologies being
Under this approach, the avoided a control technology, we selected 36 installed on new electric utility steam
emission rate for the displaced steam percent gross efficiency (top 25 percent generating units can achieve PM
generating capacity would be calculated of existing units) as our conversion emission levels below the level of the
using the input-based 40 CFR part 60, factor. We are soliciting comments on existing PM standard, and that
subpart Db, NSPS emission limit this approach and the appropriateness amending this PM standard for new
applicable to the steam generating unit. of the selected value. electric utility steam generating units is
This is appropriate since, in the absence Only three new coal utility units have warranted.
of the CHP facility, the thermal energy been built since the prior NSPS To select a level for the proposed PM
would be provided by a new boiler amendments in 1998. The plants are the standard, we evaluated the cost-
subject to 40 CFR part 60, subpart Db. Red Hills facility in Mississippi, the effectiveness of two limits (0.018 lb PM/
The NSPS limit would be converted Hawthorn facility in Missouri, and the MMBtu and 0.015 lb PM/MMBtu) along
with the ability of a broad range of coal rate less than 0.6 lb/MMBtu heat input, natural gas, low sulfur fuel oil, or
types and boiler configurations to then the unit is only required to achieve biomass. The majority of new electric
achieve the standard. The annual a 70 percent reduction. utility steam generating units will use
reduction and incremental cost of As discussed earlier in this preamble, pulverized coal combustion technology.
reducing PM emissions from the a number of SO2 control technologies Therefore, using the fuel-neutral
existing NSPS (0.03 lb/MMBtu) to 0.018 are currently available for use with new approach discussed earlier, we decided
lb/MMBtu is 420 tons at an average coal-fired electric utility steam to base the BDT determination for
incremental cost of $3,100/ton. The generating units. The SO2 control development of an amended SO2
annual reduction and incremental cost strategy used for a particular new standard on application of SO2 control
of reducing the PM standard from 0.018 electric utility steam generating unit technologies to pulverized coal-fired
lb/MMBtu to 0.015 lb/MMBtu is 110 project is fundamentally determined by steam generating units.
tons at an average incremental cost of the type of combustion technology that We reviewed the SO2 control
$8,400/ton. We selected a level for the is selected for the new unit. Owners and technologies currently available for
proposed standard considering the operators building a new steam application to pulverized coal-fired
above performance information, non-air generating unit using integrated electric utility steam generating units.
quality health effects, and effects on gasification combined cycle (IGCC) or We concluded that FGD is BDT for these
energy production associated with fluidized-bed combustion technology units. The type of FGD system used for
achieving these emission levels. The generally use different control strategies a given new unit depends on a number
proposed PM standard is 6.5 ng/J (0.015 than owners and operators building a of site-specific factors, including unit
lb/MMBtu heat input). Based on new steam generating unit using size, sulfur content of coal to be burned
information from the Department of pulverized coal combustion technology. in the unit, and the overall economics
Energy Cost and Quality of Fuels for Another important factor influencing of each application.
Electric Utility Plants 2001, 75 percent the selection of SO2 control technology Existing wet FGD systems used for
of existing coal utility units would be for a new unit is the sulfur content of pulverized coal-fired electric utility
able to comply with the proposed limit the coals expected to be burned. steam generating units, especially the
using either an ESP or fabric filter According to the most recent scrubber technologies installed in the
operating at a 99.8 percent collection Department of Energy data (FERC form– last 10 years, are capable of consistently
efficiency, and 95 percent would be able 423 and form EIA–423), non-refuse coal- achieving SO2 removal efficiencies of 95
to comply with either an ESP or fabric fired power plants in the United States percent and higher. Multiple plants
filter operating at a 99.9 percent had an average uncontrolled sulfur have demonstrated that this level of
collection efficiency. The remaining 5 emissions potential of 1.8 lb SO2/ control is achievable on a long-term
percent would be able to comply with MMBtu heat input in 2002. Since 1995, basis.
either a high efficiency ESP or fabric eight new coal-fired electric utility Enhanced wet FGD systems are
filter operating at a 99.95 percent steam generating units have been built capable of achieving high removal
collection efficiency or coal washing in in the United States, and these units efficiencies and can be used for units
conjunction with a less efficient PM have an average uncontrolled SO2 burning the highest sulfur content coals.
control device. We are particularly emission level of 1.6 lb SO2/MMBtu In addition, dry FGD technologies such
interested in soliciting comments heat input and a maximum of 2.1 lb as lime spray dryer (LSD) systems can
providing information to guide this SO2/MMBtu heat input. We concluded be used to achieve significant
determination. In the event data is that new electric utility steam reductions in SO2 emissions under
presented indicating a more stringent generating projects will use either IGCC certain conditions. Typically, LSD
standard is achievable, we would technology, state-of-the-art SO2 controls, systems have been used for smaller size
consider a 4.7 ng/J (0.011 lb/MMBtu or burn low- and medium-sulfur content electric utility steam generating units
heat input) standard. If data is presented coals to achieve reductions. burning lower sulfur content coals.
demonstrating that this standard will New steam generating projects that There are several LSD systems designed
pose significant technical difficulties for use IGCC technology will inherently for 90 percent or higher SO2 removal
a range of fuels, we would consider a have only trace SO2 emissions because efficiencies. Based on this information,
standard of 8.6 ng/J (0.02 lb/MMBtu over 99 percent of the sulfur associated we concluded that current FGD systems
heat input). with the coal is removed by the coal- being installed on new electric utility
gasification process. New steam steam generating units can achieve SO2
2. How Did EPA Select the Proposed generating units that use fluidized-bed emission levels below the level of the
SO2 Standard? combustion technology can control SO2 existing SO2 standard, and that
The current SO2 standard in 40 CFR during the combustion process by coal amending this SO2 standard for new
part 60, subpart Da, uses a percent washing, coal blending, adding electric utility steam generating units is
reduction format in conjunction with a limestone into the fluidized-bed, and warranted.
maximum emission limit but provides installing polishing scrubbers. However, To assess the SO2 control performance
an allowance for a lower percent to date, application of fluidized-bed level of utility units, we reviewed new
reduction requirement if a target combustion technology has been limited and retrofitted facilities with SO2
emission limit is demonstrated. to the lower end of the steam generating controls. Since 1995, the Harrison coal-
Effectively, these standards require a unit sizes expected for new electric fired power plant in West Virginia has
new coal-fired steam generating unit to utility projects (the largest FBC unit used a FGD system based on wet
achieve a 90 percent reduction of the built to date is 350 MW). For SO2 scrubbing technology that has achieved
potential combustion concentration of controls applied to steam generating annual SO2 emissions of approximately
SO2 (i.e., the theoretical amount of SO2 units using pulverized coal combustion 1 lb/MWh gross output from an
that would be emitted in the absence of technology, control strategies involve uncontrolled level of 5.4 lb/MMBtu heat
using any emission control systems), the burning of low sulfur coals, coal input. Based on hourly acid rain data
and meet an emission limit of 1.2 lb washing, coal blending, the use of post- from 1997 to 2000, the highest 30-day
SO2/MMBtu heat input. However, if a combustion controls to remove SO2 average from the three stacks ranged
unit can demonstrate an SO2 emission from the flue gases, and co-firing with between 1.3 to 1.5 lb SO2/MWh gross
output. The Conemaugh facility in spontaneous combustion, and low soil selected based on the performance data
Pennsylvania has maintained 30-day fertility. Advancements in fluidized-bed of SCR control technology in
average emissions under 1.4 lb SO2/ combustion technology allow reclaimed combination with combustion controls
MWh gross output over the same period coal refuse to be burned in power plants on coal-fired steam generating units.
using coal with uncontrolled emissions and cogeneration facilities. Facilities The existing NSPS is 200 ng/J of gross
of 3.4 lb SO2/MMBtu heat input. Based that burn coal refuse provide special output (1.6 lb/MWh) for new units and
on the performance of the Harrison multimedia environmental benefits by 65 ng/J of heat input (0.15 lb/MMBtu)
facility, we are selecting a single limit combining the production of energy for reconstructed units (63 FR 49444).
for all fuels of 0.21 lb SO2/MMBtu heat with the clean up of coal refuse piles We reviewed the NOX control
input as the basis for the proposed and by reclaiming land for productive technologies currently available for
standard. We realize many new units use. Consequently, because of the application to electric utility steam
will operate below this value, but the unique environmental benefits that coal generating units, and concluded that
proposed limit would allow the highest refuse-fired power plants provide, these SCR remains BDT for continuous
sulfur coals (uncontrolled emissions of units warrant special consideration so reduction of NOX emissions from these
7 lb SO2/MMBtu) to meet the limit using as to prevent the amended NSPS from sources. However, since the time we
similar technology as the Harrison discouraging the construction of future selected the current NOX emission
facility. Using a gross electrical coal refuse-fired power plants in the limits, the number of electric utility
generating efficiency of 36 percent, the United States. steam generating units in the United
proposed standard is 250 ng/J (2.0 lb/ We reviewed emissions data and title States using SCR control technology has
MWh) of SO2. Based on the third quarter V permit information for the existing substantially increased. In 2002, more
2004 emissions data from EPA’s Clean coal refuse-fired power plants currently than 50 electric utility steam generating
Air Markets Division, eleven percent of operating in the United States. Based on units were operating SCR controls, with
existing coal units are presently our review, we concluded that the PM additional facilities installing or
operating at or below this limit. We are and NOX emission levels for these planning to install the technology. In
soliciting comments on the proposed facilities were comparable to the addition, at units operating SCR
limit and are considering the range of emission levels from other coal-fired controls, the installation of NOX CEMS
120 to 250 ng/J (0.9 to 2.0 lb/MWh) for electric utility power plants using allows the collection of long-term data
the final rule. similar control technology. Thus, coal on SCR control performance. As a
Of the coals used in existing electric refuse-fired electric utility steam result, we now have access to
utility plants, 70 percent could comply generating units can achieve the same significantly more data on the
with the proposed standard using spray PM and NOX emission standards being performance of SCR control technology
dryers. Eighty nine percent could meet proposed for bituminous, than was available to us in 1998.
the standard with conventional wet FGD subbituminous, and lignite coals. The design NOX reduction efficiencies
technology, and ninety nine percent However, there is a possibility that coal of the SCR controls in use on specific
with enhanced wet scrubbing. Only one refuse from some piles will have sulfur electric utility steam generating units
percent of existing coal utilities use coal contents at such high levels that they vary depending on site-specific
with uncontrolled SO2 emissions greater present potential economic and conditions (e.g., retrofit to existing units
than 7 lb/MMBtu. If a utility were to technical difficulties in achieving the versus new unit applications, facility’s
elect to use a fuel with uncontrolled SO2 same SO2 standard that we are air permit requirements, other NOX
emissions above 7 lb/MMBtu heat input, proposing for higher quality coals. combustion controls used), but
technology is available that would allow Therefore, so as not to preclude the operating data indicate that NOX
the unit to meet the proposed standard. development of these projects, we are emission reduction levels of 90 percent
Options include physical coal washing, proposing a separate SO2 emission limit or more can consistently be achieved for
blending with low sulfur fuels, that we concluded is achievable for the coal-fired electric utility steam
combining SO2 control technologies like full range of coal refuse piles remaining generating units.
those applied at the JEA Northside in the United States. The proposed Two units built after the 1998 NOX
facility, super-critical high-efficiency standard is 0.25 lb SO2/MMBtu heat NSPS amendments for utility units are
boilers, combined heat and power, and input for facilities that burn over 90 the JEA Northside facility in Florida and
gasification. In addition, emerging SO2 percent coal refuse. Using the same the Hawthorn facility in Missouri. Both
control technologies will allow the baseline efficiency of 36 percent, the are operating within their permit limits
direct use of any fuel in a conventional proposed standard is 300 ng/J (2.4 lb/ of 0.09 lb NOX/MMBtu heat input and
coal plant without fuel blending or MWh) of SO2 for units that burn coal 0.08 lb NOX/MMBtu heat input,
pretreatment. Therefore, regardless of refuse. We are requesting comment on respectively. These values are below the
the sulfur content of the bituminous, the proposed limit and are considering current standard of 1.6 lb/MWh, which
subbituminous, or lignite coal burned the range of 180 to 360 ng/J (1.4 to 2.8 is based on 0.15 lb NOX/MMBtu heat
by a new electric utility steam lb/MWh) for the final rule. input. Based on the incorporation of
generating unit, SO2 emission control combustion control technologies into
3. How Did EPA Select the Proposed new electric utility steam generating
technologies are available that would
NOX Standard? unit designs and the demonstrated SCR
allow the unit owner or operator to
comply with the proposed SO2 standard In 1998, we amended the NOX performance for recently built units, we
at a reasonable cost. emission limits for new electric utility concluded that amending this NOX
Coal refuse (also called waste coal) is steam generating units built or standard for new electric utility steam
a combustible material containing a reconstructed after July 9, 1997 (63 FR generating units is warranted.
significant amount of coal that is 49444, September 9, 1998). At that time, While the WA Parish coal facility in
reclaimed from refuse piles remaining at we concluded that SCR represented Texas has demonstrated control of
the sites of past or abandoned coal BDT for continuous reduction of NOX approximately 0.04 lb NOX/MMBtu heat
mining operations. Coal refuse piles are emissions from electric utility steam input, we are proposing a level of 0.11
an environmental concern because of generating units. The level of the lb/MMBtu heat input as the basis for the
acid seepage and leachate production, amended NOX emission limit was proposed standard. This emission limit
allows for the possibility of using commercial, and institutional boilers metals emission limit, or by
fluidized beds and advanced- with heat input capacities of 30 MMBtu/ demonstrating the metal hazardous air
combustion controls as an alternative to hr to 100 MMBtu/hr range from 0.051 pollutant (HAP) content in the fuel is
SNCR or SCR. Advanced combustion lb/MMBtu heat input to 0.3 lb/MMBtu below the metals emission limit. A
controls reduce compliance costs, heat input, depending on the type and review of the data gathered for the
parasitic energy requirements, and amount of fuels burned. industrial, commercial, institutional
ammonia emissions. We converted this We are proposing a PM limit of 0.03 boiler and process heater NESHAP
value to the corresponding value in lb/MMBtu heat input for units that burn shows that some wood-fired units are
units of lb/MWh using an overall coal, oil, wood or a mixture of these expected to be able to use the alternative
efficiency factor of 36 percent. fuels with other fuels and have a heat compliance options, because wood has
Therefore, we are proposing for the NOX input capacity greater than 30 MMBtu/ a low HAP-to-PM ratio. Therefore, the
standard a level of 130 ng/J (1.0 lb/ hr. The emission limit is based on the primary impact of the proposed NSPS
MWh) gross electricity output as use of fabric filters or high efficiency would be to require wood-fired boilers
determined on a 30-day rolling average. ESP, which represents BDT. Fabric to install more efficient controls than
Based on third quarter 2004 emissions filters have been shown to achieve would be needed to demonstrate
data from EPA’s Clean Air Markets greater than 99 percent reduction in PM compliance with the industrial,
Division, approximately 14 percent of emissions and may achieve as high as commercial, institutional boiler and
existing units are achieving this limit. 99.99 percent reduction for some units. process heater NESHAP. For wood-fired
We are soliciting comments on this To determine the appropriate limit, boilers, there is a significant flamability
approach and are particularly interested we reviewed boiler permit limits and risk with fabric filter bags due to
in additional data on the achievable emission information gathered for particulate loading. Therefore, we
NOX levels of fluidized beds without industrial, commercial, and institutional analyzed the cost and emissions
additional NOX controls and pulverized boilers. Based on this information, we reductions achieved using a high-
coal units with advanced combustion concluded that new boilers can achieve efficiency ESP to meet the NSPS limits.
controls. The range of values we are an emission limit of 0.03 lb/MMBtu heat Emission test information from
presently considering for the final rule input using a fabric filter or high- industrial, commercial, institutional
is 60 to 170 ng/J (0.47 to 1.3 lb/MWh). efficiency ESP. An emission limit of boilers and utility boilers shows that
0.03 lb/MMBtu heat input is achievable ESP can achieve the same emissions
D. How Did EPA Determine the by all industrial, commercial, and reductions as fabric filters for these
Amended Standards for Industrial- institutional boilers considering the units.
Commercial-Institutional Steam wide variety of fuels fired and the range We are projecting that 13 wood-fired
Generating Units (40 CFR Part 60, of operating conditions under which units with heat inputs larger than 100
Subparts Db and Dc)? those boilers are run. MMBtu/hr will be constructed over the
New source performance standards The proposed NSPS emission limits next 5 years. Annual PM emissions
for industrial-commercial-institutional would not pose significant new costs. would be reduced by 888 tons per year
steam generating units in the proposed New industrial-commercial-institutional (tpy), from 1,300 tpy, based on the
amendments would apply only to steam generating units that are major current subpart Db, 40 CFR part 60,
affected sources that begin construction, sources of hazardous air pollutants will emission limits, to 412 tpy with the
modification, or reconstruction after be covered also by the National proposed PM emission limit. The
February 28, 2005. In this action, we are Emission Standards for Hazardous Air incremental annualized cost of
proposing an amended emission limit Pollutants (NESHAP) for industrial, installing and operating an ESP on
for PM under 40 CFR part 60, subparts commercial, institutional boilers and wood-fired units would be about $2,300
Db and Dc, and no change to the process heaters (40 CFR part 63, subpart per ton of PM removed.
emission limits for SO2 and NOX. DDDDD). The industrial, commercial, For the 30 to 100 million Btu/hr size
However, we are requesting public institutional boiler and process heater range, we project that four wood-fired
comments on the concept of adopting a NESHAP require all boilers with a heat units will be constructed over the next
single, fuel-neutral emission limit for input greater than 10 MMBtu/hr and 5 years. For these units, annual PM
SO2 to replace the current 90 percent firing solid fuels to meet either a PM emissions would be reduced by 43 tpy,
reduction requirement in the final rule. limit of 0.025 lb/MMBtu heat input or from about 62 tpy, under the current
We are also requesting comment on the a total selected metals limit of 0.0003 lb/ subpart Dc, 40 CFR part 60, emission
possibility of lowering the SO2 emission MMBtu heat input. Liquid-fired units limits, to 19 tpy with the proposed PM
limits in 40 CFR part 60, subpart Dc, for with heat inputs greater than 10 emission limit. The incremental
units with heat input capacities of 10 MMBtu/hr must meet a PM limit of 0.03 annualized cost of installing and
MMBtu/hr to 75 MMBtu/hr and lb/MMBtu heat input. Accordingly, for operating an ESP on a wood-fired unit
developing NOX emission limits for most boilers the proposed NSPS would would be $3,200 per ton of PM
units subject to 40 CFR part 60, subpart not impose any additional costs because removed.
Dc. these units are already required to
comply with equivalent or more 2. How Did EPA Select the Proposed
1. How Did EPA Select the Proposed PM stringent emission limits in the SO2 Emission Limit?
Limit? industrial, commercial, institutional The existing SO2 standard for coal-
The current PM standards under 40 boiler and process heater NESHAP. and oil-fired units larger than 75
CFR part 60, subpart Db, for industrial, However, the industrial, commercial, MMBtu/hr is 90 percent reduction of
commercial, and institutional boilers institutional boiler and process heater potential SO2 emissions and a
greater than 100 MMBtu/hr heat input NESHAP also allow several compliance maximum emission limit of 1.2 lb/
range from 0.051 lb/MMBtu heat input alternatives that would allow some MMBtu heat input for coal and 0.8 lb/
to 0.2 lb/MMBtu heat input, depending sources to comply without installing a MMBtu heat input for oil. These limits
on the type and amount of fuels burned. fabric filter. These alternatives include are based on the use of FGD systems or
The current PM standards under 40 CFR demonstrating that emissions are below lime spray dryers. The percent
part 60, subpart Dc, for industrial, a risk threshold, meeting an alternative reduction requirement does not apply to
units burning fuel oil that have an SO2 requirement for units larger than 75 Dc, 40 CFR part 60, units (table 1 of this
emission potential of 0.5 lb/MMBtu heat MMBtu/hr (the size range currently preamble). The incremental cost-
input or less. Fluidized bed boilers required to meet a 90 percent effectiveness would range from about
burning refuse coal are subject to an 80 reduction). Option 2 was to amend $3,000 to more than $8,000 per ton
percent reduction requirement. For subpart Dc, 40 CFR part 60, to require removed. This cost range represents the
small boilers (less than 75 MMBtu/hr) a 90 percent reduction for units smaller cost of applying injection technologies
the existing NSPS are based on low than 75 MMBtu/hr. on units of 50 MMBtu/hr and 25
sulfur fuels (1.2 lb SO2/MMBtu heat Option 1 would achieve a 5th year MMBtu/hr, respectively. The relatively
input). emission reduction of 1,400 tons SO2 high incremental cost would occur
Based on our review, we are per year (50 percent reduction from the because this option would achieve a
proposing to retain the current SO2 current NSPS) at an incremental cost of relatively small additional emissions
standard for industrial, commercial, and about $4,000 per ton removed (table 1 reductions compared to the current
institutional boilers. In determining of this preamble). The costs range from NSPS. Under the current NSPS, units
BDT, we reviewed the performance of $605 per ton removed for some units are achieving compliance using low
available control technologies and the larger than 250 MMBtu/hr to $12,000 sulfur coals with an emission potential
permits issued for new coal-fired per ton for some units between 100 and of 1.2 lb SO2/MMBtu heat input. If the
industrial, commercial, and institutional 250 MMBtu/hr. The relatively high NSPS were changed to require a 90
boilers constructed since the incremental cost would occur because percent reduction, we project that many
publication of 40 CFR part 60, subparts meeting the 95 percent limit would new units would select higher sulfur
Db and Dc. Based on a review of the require a technology switch to more coals because of the reduced fuel cost.
information in the Reasonably Available expensive wet FGD systems for many For those units that select a higher
Control Technology/Best Available new units. Most new units currently sulfur coal, a 90 percent reduction in
Control Technology/Lowest Achievable achieve 90 percent reduction using potential SO2 emission would result in
Emission Rate (RACT/BACT/LAER) either sorbent injection or spray dryers. less than a 90 percent reduction in
Clearinghouse, all NSPS units smaller Under Option 1, these units would emissions compared to the current
than 75 MMBtu/hr were issued permits switch to wet FGD systems, because NSPS.
to use low sulfur coal. For units greater spray dryers and injection technology Considering these potential impacts,
than 75 MMBtu/hr, the technology used have not been demonstrated to achieve we determined that the current NSPS
was either lime spray dryers, duct a 95 percent SO2 emission reduction. continues to reflect BDT for 40 CFR part
injection, or fluidized-bed boilers with The annualized cost of wet FGD is 60, subparts Db and Dc, industrial,
limestone injection. These technologies higher than for these technologies. The commercial, and institutional boilers.
have been demonstrated to achieve a 90 cost of wet FGD is about 20 percent The current performance levels can be
percent reduction in SO2. No industrial- higher for large coal-fired units and met by using low sulfur fuels for smaller
commercial-institutional units were about 50 percent higher for coal-fired units and cost-effective control
found to use wet FGD systems. units between 100 and 250 million Btu/ technologies for larger units. Requiring
To determine BDT, we evaluated two hour. additional control technology would
options. Option 1 was to amend Option 2 would achieve a 5th year impose unacceptable compliance costs
subparts Db and Dc, 40 CFR part 60, to emission reduction of 111 tons SO2 per that are not warranted for the emissions
adopt a 95 percent reduction year (68 percent reduction) for subpart reductions that would be achieved.
TABLE 1.—NATIONAL 5TH YEAR IMPACTS OF SO2 CONTROLS ON INDUSTRIAL BOILERS 2004$
Incremental cost-effectiveness
Unit size Emission Annualized ($/ton)
Option range reduction cost
(MMBtu/hr) (tpy) (million $) Overall Range
95 percent 1 .......................................................................... 75–250 232 1.68 7,220 6,320–12,060

>250 1,163 1.56 1,340 610–1,960
90 percent 2 3 ........................................................................ <75 111 0.48 4,280 2,970–8,890
1 Baseline emissions and emissions reductions used on Option 1 for units greater than 75 MMBtu/hr assume 90 percent SO reduction using a
2
mix of medium sulfur content bituminous coal (2.38 lb SO2/MMBtu) and subituminous coal (1.41 lb SO2/MMBtu).
2 Baseline emissions for units less than 75 MMBtu/hr assume bituminous coal with a 1.2 lb SO /MMBtu emission potential.
2
3 Emissions reductions were calculated for Option 2 assuming a fuel switch to a 2 to 1 ratio of medium sulfur coal (1.41 lb/MMBtu) to high sul-
fur coal (6.81 lb/MMBtu).
3. How Did EPA Select the Proposed burn more than 30 percent natural gas new industrial-commercial-institutional
NOX Emission Limit? or distillate oil are required to meet a steam generating units. Based on
limit of 0.1 lb NOX/MMBtu heat input. available performance data and cost
The current NSPS for NOX apply to There are currently no NOX emission considerations, the Administrator has
fossil fuel-fired industrial-commercial- limits for new industrial-commercial- concluded that application of SCR with
institutional steam generating units institutional steam generating units less combustion controls represents the BDT
greater than 100 MMBtu/hr. The NOX than 100 MMBtu/hr. (taking into account costs, non-air
emission limit is 0.2 lb NOX/MMBtu The current emission limits for fossil quality health and environmental
heat input for units burning coal, oil, or fuel-fired units are based on the impacts, and energy requirements) for
natural gas. Units burning 90 percent or application of SCR in combination with coal- and residual oil-fired units.
more non-fossil fuel are not required to combustion controls (i.e., low-NOX We, therefore, are proposing to retain
meet a NOX emission limit (51 FR burners). We are not aware of a more the current emission limits for subpart
42768). Low heat release rate units that effective NOX control technology for Db, 40 CFR part 60, units. In the 1998
amendments, we presented information environmental impacts, and energy are continuously meeting the NOX
that showed that SCR can reduce NOX requirements). We are requesting emission limits. It is unclear that these
emissions from coal-fired utility units to comments and supporting emissions measures would result in a significant
0.15 lb/MMBtu heat input. However, an data on the ability of SCR to achieve emissions reductions. We, therefore,
emission limit of 0.2 lb/MMBtu heat lower emission limits on fossil fuel-fired concluded that the cost of a CEMS to
input was chosen for industrial- industrial-commercial-institutional monitor low-NOX burners is not
commercial-institutional units based on steam generators and the cost of reasonable for units smaller than 100
the cost associated with applying flue achieving any lower emission limits. MMBtu/hr given that little or no
gas treatment to the wide range of boiler We are proposing no NOX emission emissions reductions is likely.
types used in industrial-commercial- limits for units with heat input
capacities of 100 MMBtu/hr or less We also considered the impact of
institutional applications. Since the adopting a 0.2 lb/MMBtu heat input
1998 proposal, only eight coal-fired (subpart Dc, 40 CFR part 60, units).
Information in the RACT/BACT/LAER emission limit based on the use of SCR
units subject to subpart Db, 40 CFR part on coal-fired units (table 2 of this
Clearinghouse shows that in the last 14
60, have been permitted. Therefore, only preamble). This option would reduce
years only one coal-fired unit and 16
limited information is available on the NOX emissions from subpart Dc of 40
solid fuel-fired units with heat inputs
performance of SCR on new coal-fired CFR part 60 units by 250 tpy, or about
less than 100 MMBtu/hr have been
industrial-commercial-institutional permitted. Over this same period, 204 a 10 percent reduction. Given that
units today. No new performance units firing natural gas were permitted. baseline NOX emissions from gas-fired
information or emissions data have been This trend is expected to continue. units are less than 0.2 lb/million Btu,
gathered since the 1998 amendments to Consequently, new units under 100 this limit would have no effect on
indicate that lower limits are MMBtu/hr are expected to be emissions for the largest projected
consistently achievable across the full predominantly natural gas-or oil-fired. subset of units operating between 10
range of boiler types that may be One possible control option is to and 100 million Btu/hr. Gas-fired units,
constructed in the future. In addition, adopt an emission limit based on the however, would incur some costs due to
we re-evaluated the costs of SCR. Recent performance of low-NOX burners. This monitoring and reporting requirements.
cost information indicates that the cost option would have almost no impact on Incremental control costs would range
of operating SCR technology at lower emissions, because most new industrial, from $3,000 to $17,000 per ton removed.
levels than the current standard has not commercial, and institutional boilers Based on these costs, and the factors
decreased significantly since 1998. We today are equipped with low-NOX discussed above, we are proposing not
concluded, therefore, that the current burners. The primary impact would be to adopt NOX emission limits for
emission limits for fossil fuel-fired units to require the installation of a CEMS industrial-commercial-institutional
constitute BDT (taking into account and impose recordkeeping and reporting units smaller than 100 MMBtu/hr heat
costs, nonair quality health and requirements to demonstrate that units input.
TABLE 2.—NATIONAL 5TH YEAR IMPACTS OF NOX CONTROL OPTION FOR INDUSTRIAL UNITS SUBJECT TO 40 CFR PART
60, SUBPART DC 2004$
Emission Incr.
Size range Number of Annual cost
Fuel reduction cost effect.
(MMBtu/hr) units (million$)
(tpy) ($/ton)
30–100 .............................................. Gas ................................................... 61 0 2.42 ........................

Coal .................................................. 1 34 0.20 5,830
Liquid ................................................ 8 126 0.38 3,040
Wood ................................................ 4 52 0.90 17,320
10–30 ................................................ Gas ................................................... 20 0 0.79 ........................
Liquid ................................................ 3 21 .14 6,850
Wood ................................................ 2 20 0.18 9,160
Total ........................................... ........................................................... 99 253 5.02 ........................

* Liquid and gas units can meet the 0.2 lb/MMBtu limit with a Low-NOX Burner (LNB). Coal and wood units require an SCR to meet the 0.2
limit.
E. What Technical Corrections Is EPA Heat Recovery Steam Generators as part of the combustion turbine NSPS.
Proposing? Heat recovery steam generating units In recognition of this, 40 CFR 60.40a(b)
are used to recover energy from the and 40 CFR 60.40b(i) provide that when
We are proposing several technical the emission limits for heat recovery
corrections to the current subparts Da, exhaust of combustion turbines.
Some heat recovery steam generators steam generators are incorporated into
Db, and Dc of 40 CFR part 60 40 CFR part 60, subpart GG, these units
use duct burners or other types of
requirements in the proposed would be subject to 40 CFR part 60,
supplemental heat supply to increase
amendments. The amendments are the amount of steam production. subpart GG, and 40 CFR part 60,
being proposed to clarify the intent of Depending on the heat input capacity of subparts Da and Db, would no longer
the current requirements, correct the supplemental heat in a heat recovery apply. This language was inadvertently
inaccuracies, and correct oversights in generator, these units may meet the left out of 40 CFR part 60, subpart Dc.
previous versions that were applicability requirements of 40 CFR In a separate action, we are proposing to
promulgated. part 60, subparts Da, Db, and Dc. amend the NSPS for combustion
However, we recognized that these units turbines that would be codified as
would be more appropriately regulated subpart KKKK of 40 CFR part 60 instead
of amending subpart GG of 40 CFR part We are also proposing to amend the ‘‘other needed changes to the
60. The proposed subpart will include definition of boiler operating day for regulations,’’ at places where the 40 CFR
requirements for heat recovery steam new utility units to be consistent with part 60 and 40 CFR part 75 monitoring
generators. Therefore, we are proposing the existing definition for industrial and reporting requirements overlap.
to amend subparts Da, Db, and Dc of 40 units. The proposed limits reflect the EPA received several sets of
CFR part 60 to require heat recovery amended procedure utility units would comments in response to the August 24,
steam generators to comply with either use to calculate 30-day averages. Our 2001, Federal Register action. After
subpart GG of 40 CFR part 60 or subpart preliminary analysis of the hourly CEM careful consideration of these
KKKK of 40 CFR part 60 as applicable. data from the Harrison facility indicates comments, the Agency proposed
The proposed rule language states that that the standards would be substantive amendments to 40 CFR part
‘‘* * * Heat recovery steam generators approximately 3 percent lower if the 60, subpart GG, on April 14, 2003 (68
that are associated with combustion existing definition of boiler-operating FR 18003), incorporating many
turbines and meet the applicability day is maintained. The amended suggestions provided by the
requirements of subpart KKKK of 40 definition also more accurately reflects commenters. The amendments to 40
CFR part 60 of this part are not subject environmental performance since less CFR part 60, subpart GG, were
to this subpart. If the heat recovery data is excluded from the calculation. promulgated on July 8, 2004 (69 FR
steam generator is subject to this Harmonization of 40 CFR Part 60 and 40 41346). The final amendments, which
subpart, only emissions resulting from CFR Part 75 Monitoring Requirements differed little from the proposal,
combustion of fuels in the steam- harmonized the 40 CFR part 60, subpart
generating unit are subject to this As a continuation and expansion of GG, and 40 CFR part 75 regulations in
subpart. (The combustion turbine the ‘‘turbine initiative’’ begun by EPA in a number of key areas. For example:
emissions are subject to 40 CFR part 60, 2001, we are proposing to harmonize (1) Amended 40 CFR part 60, subpart
subpart GG, or 40 CFR part 60, subpart portions of the 40 CFR part 60 GG, allows the use of a certified 40 CFR
KKKK, as applicable, of this part.)’’ continuous emission monitoring
part 75 NOX monitoring system to
regulations with similar provisions in
NOX Monitoring Requirements for Units demonstrate continuous compliance
40 CFR part 75.
Without NOX Emission Limits Background. In the late 1990’s, the with the NOX emission limit in 40 CFR
electric utility industry began planning 60.332;
During the 1998 amendments to 40 and constructing numerous combustion (2) If a fuel is documented to be
CFR part 60, subpart Db, we amended turbine projects, to meet the rising natural gas according to the criteria in
the monitoring requirements of 40 CFR demand for electrical generating appendix D, 40 CFR part 75, then the 40
60.48b(b) to allow units that are subject capacity in the United States. CFR part 60, subpart GG, requirement to
to 40 CFR part 75 (acid rain regulations) Essentially all of these new turbines are monitor the sulfur content of the fuel is
to demonstrate compliance with the subject to both 40 CFR part 60, subpart waived; and
NSPS by using CEMS that meet the GG, of the NSPS regulations (40 CFR (3) A 40 CFR part 60, subpart GG,
requirements of part 75. In making these 60.330 through 60.335) and the Acid turbine that combusts fuel oil may use
amendments, we made a drafting error Rain regulations (40 CFR part 72 the oil sampling and analytical methods
by inadvertently excluding a phrase through 40 CFR part 78). In an August in appendix D, 40 CFR part 75 to
from the original NSPS language. The 24, 2001 Federal Register action (66 FR demonstrate compliance with the 40
amended 1998 language could be 44622), EPA estimated that as a result of CFR part 60, subpart GG, sulfur-in-fuel
interpreted to require the use of NOX the new turbine projects, the number of limit.
CEMs for units that are not subject to combustion turbines in the Acid Rain The July 8, 2004 revisions to 40 CFR
the NOX emission limits of 40 CFR part Program would increase from 400 to part 60, subpart GG, significantly
60, subpart Db. The intended language more than 1,000 within a few years. simplify compliance with the 40 CFR
of 40 CFR 60.48b(b) was, ‘‘* * *, the The compliance requirements for part 60 and 40 CFR part 75 regulations,
owner or operator of an affected facility combustion turbines under the NSPS where both sets of rules apply to the
subject to the nitrogen oxides standards and the Acid Rain Program intersect in same combustion turbine. However, the
of 60.44b shall comply with either a number of key places. For instance, area of overlap between 40 CFR part 60
* * * *’’ (emphasis added to the under both programs, the owner or and 40 CFR part 75 extends beyond
missing phrase). We did not intend for operator of an affected combustion combustion turbines. Many electric
units without a NOX emission limit to turbine is accountable for the SO2 and utility and industrial boilers regulated
install CEMS for NOX. In the proposed NOX emissions from the unit. In cases under 40 CFR part 60, subparts D, Da,
amendments, we are adding the such as this, where two Federal Db and Dc, are also subject to 40 CFR
inadvertently removed phrase. regulations affect the same unit for the part 75. Therefore, a more
Definition of Coal same pollutant(s), it is always desirable comprehensive approach to 40 CFR part
to simplify compliance, to the extent 60 versus 40 CFR part 75 compliance is
We are proposing to amend the possible. In view of this, in the needed. A number of stakeholders
definition of coal in 40 CFR part 60, previously-cited August 24, 2001 pointed this out in their comments on
subpart Dc, to reflect the most recent Federal Register action, EPA requested the August 24, 2001, Federal Register
testing methods published by the comments from stakeholders on ways to action. In particular, the commenters
ASTM. streamline and harmonize the 40 CFR requested that EPA address the
part 60 and 40 CFR part 75 regulations, following problematic areas in the 40
Definitions for 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart
in order to facilitate compliance for CFR part 60 and 40 CFR part 75
Da
sources that are subject to both sets of continuous emission monitoring
We are proposing to add definitions of rules. EPA’s initiative was directed provisions:
coal, bitimunous coal, petroleum, and principally at 40 CFR part 60, subpart (1) Inconsistent definitions of
natural gas to 40 CFR part 60, subpart GG, combustion turbines that are also in operating hours;
Da, to clarify applicability and make the the Acid Rain Program. However, the (2) Inconsistent CEMS data validation
rules more uniform. Agency also asked for comments on criteria;
(3) Duplicative quality-assurance (QA) one with less than 60 minutes of unit part 60 does not require adjustment of
test requirements. For instance, many operation. To calculate an hourly the emissions data for bias. And for
sources with gas monitors are required emissions average for a full operating certain partial operating hours, data that
to perform both 40 CFR part 75 linearity hour, at least one valid data point would is reported as quality-assured under 40
checks and 40 CFR part 60 cylinder gas be required in each of the four 15- CFR part 75 is excluded from the 40
audits; minute quadrants of the hour. For a CFR part 60 emission calculations (e.g.,
(4) Lack of alternative calibration partial operating hour, at least one valid see 40 CFR 60.47b(d)). However, these
error and relative accuracy data point would be required in each differences between the 40 CFR part 60
specifications in 40 CFR part 60 for low- 15-minute quadrant in which the unit and 40 CFR part 75 programs are
emitting sources; operates; relatively minor, and in no way detract
(5) Inconsistent span and range (2) Second, for hours in which from the benefits of having a unified
requirements for gas analyzers; and required QA or maintenance activities approach to reducing the CEMS data to
(6) For infrequently-operated units, are performed, 40 CFR 60.13(h) would hourly averages.
the difficulty of performing the 40 CFR be amended to allow the hourly As noted above, EPA is proposing to
part 60 calibration drift test over 7 averages to be calculated from a
consecutive calendar days. remove the provisions in 40 CFR
minimum of two data points (if the unit 60.47a(g) of subpart Da and in 40 CFR
Today’s proposed amendments would operates in two or more of the 15-
address the chief concerns expressed by 60.47b(d) and 40 CFR 60.48b(d) of
minute quadrants) or one data point (if subpart Db, which require only two
the stakeholders in their comments on the unit operates in only one quadrant
the August 24, 2001, Federal Register valid data points to calculate hourly SO2
of the hour);
action, by amending a number of key and NOX emission averages. The reason
(3) Third, 40 CFR 60.13(h) would be
sections in 40 CFR part 60. The amended to require all valid data points for this is that these rule texts do not
proposed amendments are discussed in to be used in the calculation of each properly communicate the Agency’s
detail in the paragraphs below. hourly average; original intent. The idea of basing an
Operating Hours and CEMS Data (4) Fourth, 40 CFR 60.13(h) would hourly average on two data points was
Validation. For all CEMS except opacity require invalidation of any hour in first presented in the preamble for
monitors, 40 CFR 60.13(h) in the which a calibration error test is failed, subpart Da, 40 CFR part 60 (44 FR
General Provisions of the NSPS requires unless in that same hour, a subsequent 33581, June 11, 1979). In that preamble,
a minimum of four equally-spaced data calibration error test is passed and EPA clearly stated that whenever
points to calculate an hourly emissions sufficient data are captured after the required QA activities such as daily
average. However, the underlying passed calibration to validate the hour; calibration error checks are performed,
assumption in the proposed rule text is (5) Fifth, 40 CFR 60.13(h) would be the Agency would allow the hourly
that the unit operates for the whole amended to make it clear that hourly average (assuming it was a full operating
hour, and no guidelines are given for averages are not to be calculated for hour) to be based on a minimum of two
validating partial operating hours. certain partial operating hours, where data points instead of the usual four
Section 60.13(h) also appears to conflict specified in an applicable NSPS subpart points required by 40 CFR 60.13(h).
with 40 CFR 60.47a(g), subpart Da, and (e.g., hours with <30 minutes of unit This relaxation in the data capture
40 CFR 60.47b(d) and 40 CFR 60.48b(d), operation are to be excluded from the requirement for certain operating hours
subpart Db, which require only two calculations under 40 CFR 60.47b(d)); was made with the realization that for
valid data points to calculate hourly SO2 and many CEMS, calibration checks can take
and NOX emission averages. Further, all (6) Sixth, 40 CFR part 60.47a(g), 40 up to 30 minutes, preventing any
four of these sections (i.e., 40 CFR CFR part 60.47b(d) and 40 CFR part emissions data from being collected.
60.13(h), 40 CFR 60.47a(g), 40 CFR 60.48b(d) would be amended by However, it was never the Agency’s
60.47b(d) and 40 CFR 60.48b(d)) are removing the provisions that allow intent to replace the four-point data
inconsistent with 40 CFR 75.10(d)(1) hourly averages to be calculated from capture requirement of 40 CFR 60.13(h)
and with 40 CFR 60.334(b)(2) of the only two data points. Rather, these with a less stringent two-point
recently-amended 40 CFR part 60, sections would specify that hourly requirement. The authors of the original
subpart GG, which require you to obtain averages must be calculated according 40 CFR part 75 rule understood this,
at least one valid data point in each 15- to amended 40 CFR 60.13(h). and cited the subpart Da, 40 CFR part
minute quadrant of the hour in which These proposed revisions would 60, preamble as the basis for CFR
the unit operates, except for hours in provide a single, consistent method of 75.10(d)(1) (56 FR 63067–68, December
which required QA and maintenance calculating hourly emission averages 3, 1991). In 40 CFR 75.10(d)(1), at least
activities are performed for these hours, from CEMS data for sources that are one valid data point is required to be
you may calculate the hourly averages subject to both 40 CFR part 60 and 40 obtained in each 15-minute quadrant of
from a minimum of two data points (one CFR part 75. Thus, the same basic set of the hour in which the unit operates,
in each of two 15-minute quadrants). CEM data could be used for both 40 CFR except that two data points, separated
Today’s proposed amendments would part 60 and 40 CFR part 75 compliance, by at least 15 minutes may be used to
make the CEMS data validation although certain differences between the calculate an hourly average if required
requirements of 40 CFR 60.13(h), 40 two programs would still remain. For QA tests or maintenance activities are
CFR 60.47a(g), 40 CFR 60.47b(d) and 40 instance, 40 CFR part 75 requires performed during that hour. More
CFR 60.48b(d) consistent with 40 CFR substitute data to be reported for each recently, these same minimum data
75.10(d)(1) and 40 CFR 60.334(b)(2), as hour in which sufficient quality-assured capture requirements have been
follows: data is not obtained to validate the hour, incorporated into 40 CFR 60.334(b)(2) of
(1) First, a clear distinction would be whereas 40 CFR part 60 requires these subpart GG. In view of these
made in 40 CFR 60.13(h) between full hours to be reported as monitor down considerations, it is appropriate to
and partial operating hours. A full time. Also, 40 CFR part 75 requires a remove the two-point minimum data
operating hour would be a clock hour in bias adjustment factor (BAF) to be capture provisions from 40 CFR
which the unit operates for 60 minutes, applied to SO2 and NOX data when a 60.47a(g), 40 CFR 60.47b(d) and 40 CFR
and a partial operating hour would be CEMS fails a bias test, whereas 40 CFR 60.48b(d), and simply to require that the
SO2 and NOX emission averages be in section 2.2.4 of appendix B, 40 CFR Allowing sources to perform the 40
calculated according to amended 40 part 75 would apply. CFR part 75 QA in lieu of (rather than
CFR 60.13(h). Proposed section 5.4 of appendix F, in addition to) appendix F, 40 CFR part
CEMS Certification and Quality- 40 CFR part 60 also would allow 60, is actually consistent with section
Assurance. Today’s proposed sources to perform the on-going quality- 1.1 of appendix F, 40 CFR part 60,
amendments would add two sections to assurance relative accuracy test audit which encourages sources to ‘‘develop
appendix F, 40 CFR part 60, pertaining (RATA) of their NOX-diluent and SO2- and implement a more extensive QA
to the on-going quality-assurance diluent monitoring systems according to program or continue such programs
requirements for CEMS. These proposed section 2.3 of appendix B, 40 CFR part where they already exist.’’ It also
amendments would apply to sources 75. If a source elected to use this option, harmonizes with 40 CFR 60.47a(c)(2) of
that are subject to the QA requirements then: (1) The RATA frequency would be subpart Da, 40 CFR 60.48b(b)(2) of
of both appendix F, 40 CFR part 60 and as specified in section 2.3.1 of appendix subpart Db, and 40 CFR 60.334(b)(3)(iii)
appendix B, 40 CFR part 75 and would B, 40 CFR part 75; (2) the applicable of subpart GG, which allows certified 40
serve a three-fold purpose: (1) To relative accuracy specification in Figure CFR part 75 NOX monitoring systems to
eliminate duplicative QA test 2 of appendix B, 40 CFR part 75 would be used to demonstrate compliance with
requirements; (2) to allow a single set of have to be met; (3) the data validation the applicable NOX emission limits.
data validation criteria to be applied to criteria in section 2.3.2 of appendix B, However, despite these clear statements
the CEMS data; and (3) to allow certain 40 CFR part 75 would be applied in lieu in the amendments, today’s proposed
alternative 40 CFR part 75 performance of the excessive audit inaccuracy amendments to appendix F, 40 CFR part
specifications for low-emitting sources criteria in section 5.2 of appendix F, 40 60 are needed to eliminate any doubt
to be used for 40 CFR part 60 CFR part 60; and (4) the grace period that meeting the quality-assurance
compliance. Today’s proposed provisions in section 2.3.3 of appendix testing requirements of appendix B, 40
amendments also would amend section B, 40 CFR part 75 would apply. CFR part 75, fully satisfies the
8.3.1 of performance specification 2 These proposed amendments to requirements of appendix F, 40 CFR
(PS–2) in appendix B, 40 CFR part 60, appendix F, 40 CFR part 60 would part 60. Many operating permits have
to allow the 7-day calibration drift test greatly simplify compliance without required sources to implement both
to be performed on 7 consecutive unit sacrificing data quality. Currently, appendix B, 40 CFR part 75, and
operating days, rather than 7 sources that are required to perform appendix F, 40 CFR part 60, QA
consecutive calendar days. periodic QA testing under both procedures for their CEMS. This has
EPA proposes to add new sections 4.5 appendix F, 40 CFR part 60, and proved to be burdensome, not only
and 5.4 to appendix F, 40 CFR part 60. appendix B, 40 CFR part 75, have two because of the previously-mentioned
Under proposed section 4.5, sources reference frames for CEMS data differences in the specifications and
would be allowed to implement the validation. Neither the CEMS data validation criteria between the two
daily calibration error and calibration performance specifications nor the out- appendices, but also because 40 CFR
adjustment procedures in sections 2.1.1 of-control criteria are the same in the part 60 cylinder gas audits and 40 CFR
and 2.1.3 of appendix B, 40 CFR part 75, two appendices. Generally speaking, the part 75 linearity checks are so similar in
instead of (rather than in addition to) 40 CFR part 75 specifications and data nature (i.e., they are essentially two tests
the calibration drift (CD) assessment validation criteria are more stringent of the same type). Since the linearity
procedures in section 4.1 of appendix F, than those of 40 CFR part 60. For check is far more stringent than the
40 CFR part 60. Sources electing to use example, when daily calibrations are CGA, many sources have questioned
this option would be required to follow performed, appendix F, 40 CFR part 60, why CGA are necessary if quarterly
the data validation and out-of-control allows the calibration drift of an SO2 or linearity checks are being performed.
provisions in sections 2.1.4 and 2.1.5 of NOX monitor to exceed 5 percent of Today’s proposed amendments would
appendix B, 40 CFR part 75 instead of span for 5 consecutive days before the effectively eliminate this duplicative
the excessive CD and out-of-control monitor is declared out-of-control. QA test requirement.
criteria in section 4.3 of appendix F, 40 Under appendix B, 40 CFR part 75, EPA is also proposing to amend
CFR part 60. however, a monitor is considered out-of- section 8.3.1 of PS–2 in appendix B, 40
Proposed section 5.4 of appendix F, control whenever the results of a daily CFR part 60, to allow the 7-day
40 CFR part 60 would allow sources to calibration check exceed 5 percent of calibration drift test, which is performed
perform the quarterly linearity checks span. For a 40 CFR part 75 linearity for the initial certification of a CEMS, to
described in section 2.2.1 of appendix check, three calibration gases are used be performed on 7 consecutive unit
B, 40 CFR part 75, instead of (rather (as opposed to two gases for a part 60 operating days, rather than 7
than in addition to) performing the cylinder gas audit (CGA)), and the consecutive calendar days. The intent of
cylinder gas audits described in section linearity error (LE) specification (i.e., LE the proposed amendment is to provide
5.1.2 of appendix F, 40 CFR part 60. If ≤5 percent of the reference gas regulatory relief to infrequently-
a source elected to use this option, then: concentration) is much more stringent operated units. Many new sources
(1) The linearity checks would be than the CGA acceptance criterion of 15 (particularly gas turbines) seldom, if
performed at the frequency prescribed percent. For RATA, the principal 40 ever, operate for 7 consecutive days,
in section 2.2.1 of appendix B, 40 CFR CFR part 75 relative accuracy making the 7-day drift test difficult to
part 75; (2) the linearity error specification is 10 percent, whereas the perform. Allowing the test to be
specifications in section 3.2 of appendix appendix F, 40 CFR part 60, performed on 7 consecutive operating
A, 40 CFR part 75 would have to be met; specification is 20 percent. Thus, it is days should make the test much easier
(3) the data validation criteria in section safe to say that the data from a CEMS to complete within the time allotted for
2.2.3 of appendix B, 40 CFR part 75 that meets the quality-assurance initial certification. The proposed
would be applied in lieu of the requirements of appendix B, 40 CFR amendment is consistent with section
excessive audit inaccuracy criteria in part 75 may be used with confidence for 6.3.1 in appendix A, 40 CFR part 75,
section 5.2 of appendix F, 40 CFR part the purposes of 40 CFR part 60 and with 40 CFR 60.334(b)(1) of subpart
60; and (4) the grace period provisions compliance. GG.
CEM Span Values. Today’s proposed operator installs low-NOX burners to an electric utility steam generating unit
amendments would amend several meet the NOX emission limit under 40 under subpart Da, 40 CFR part 60, is to
sections of subparts D, Da, Db, and Dc, CFR part 76, and the actual NOX consider net sales and not gross sales to
40 CFR part 60, pertaining to CEM span readings are consistently between 150 the grid. Therefore, we are proposing to
values. The span values for SO2 and and 200 ppm. Subpart Da, 40 CFR part amend the definition to change ‘‘electric
NOX monitors under subparts D, Da, Db 60, would require a span value of 1000 output’’ to ‘‘net electric output’’ and to
and Dc, 40 CFR part 60, are fuel-specific ppm for this unit, but this span would define net electric output as ‘‘gross
and are rather prescriptive. For be too high for 40 CFR part 75, since the electric sales to the electric distribution
example, subparts D, Da and Db, 40 CFR NOX data would be consistently on the system minus purchased power on a 30-
part 60, all require a NOX span value of lower 20 percent of the measurement day rolling average.’’
1000 part per million (ppm) for coal scale. Also, by using a span value of
V. Modification and Reconstruction
combustion and 500 ppm for oil and gas 1000 ppm, the ‘‘control limits’’ on daily
Provisions
combustion. Subpart D, 40 CFR part 60 calibration error tests would be ±5
requires a 1500 ppm SO2 span value for percent of span, or ±50 ppm. Thus, Existing steam generating units that
coal combustion, and subparts Da, Db when measuring a true NOX are modified or reconstructed would be
and Dc, 40 CFR part 60, all require the concentration of 150 ppm, the NOX subject to today’s proposed
span value of the SO2 monitor installed monitor could be off by as much as 50 amendments. Analysis of acid rain and
on the control device outlet to be 50 ppm (i.e., by 33 percent) and the ozone season data for existing sources
percent of the maximum estimated monitor would still be considered to be indicates that reconstructed and
hourly potential SO2 emissions for the ‘‘in-control.’’ modified units should be able to achieve
type of fuel combusted. In view of this, it is evident that some the proposed standards.
Under 40 CFR part 75, SO2 and NOX of the differences between the 40 CFR A modification is any physical or
span values are determined in quite a part 60 and 40 CFR part 75 span operational change to an existing facility
different manner. Sources are required provisions are not easily reconcilable, which results in an increase in the
to determine the maximum potential and this raises certain legal and facility’s emission rate (40 CFR 60.14).
concentration (MPC) of SO2 or NOX and compliance issues. For instance, in the Changes to an existing facility that do
then to set the span value between 1.00 example cited above, if the owner or not result in an increase in the emission
and 1.25 times the MPC, and select a operator elects to use a 500 ppm NOX rate, either because the nature of the
full-scale measurement range so that the span value to meet the requirements of change has no effect on emission or
majority of the data recorded by the part 75, it is not clear whether he would because additional control technology is
monitor will be between 20 and 80 still be required to maintain a 1,000 employed to offset an increase in the
percent of full-scale. The full-scale ppm span value to satisfy subpart Da, 40 emission rate, are not considered
range must be greater than or equal to CFR part 60. To address these issues, modifications. In addition, certain
the span value. EPA is proposing to amend several changes have been exempted under the
Under 40 CFR part 75, units are sections of subparts D, Da, Db and Dc, General Provisions (40 CFR 60.14).
allowed to determine the MPC values in 40 CFR part 60, pertaining to the These exemptions include an increase
a number of different ways, e.g., using determination of SO2 and NOX span in the hours of operation, addition or
a fuel-specific default value, emission values. The affected sections are 40 CFR replacement of equipment for emission
test data, historical CEM data, etc. Units 60.45(c)(3) and (4) of subpart D, 40 CFR control (as long as the replacement does
with add-on SO2 or NOX emission 60.47a(i)(3), (4), and (5) of subpart Da, not increase the emission rate), and use
controls are further required to 40 CFR 60.47b(e)(3), 40 CFR 60.48b(e)(2) of an alternative fuel if the existing
determine the maximum expected and (3) of subpart Db, and 40 CFR facility was designed to accommodate it.
concentration (MEC), which is the 60.46c(c)(3) and (c)(4) of subpart Dc. Rebuilt steam generating units, as
highest concentration expected with the The proposed amendments would allow defined in section 63.2, would become
emission controls operating normally. If SO2 and NOX span values determined in subject to the proposed amendments
the MEC is less than 20 percent of the accordance with section 2 of appendix under the reconstruction provisions,
high scale range, then a second (low- A, 40 CFR part 75, to be used in lieu of regardless of changes in emission rate.
scale) measurement range is required. the span values prescribed by 40 CFR Reconstruction means the replacement
The span value is an important part 60. of components of an affected facility
concept in 40 CFR part 60 and 40 CFR such that; (1) the fixed capital cost of
part 75, for two reasons. First, the Electric Utility Steam Generating Unit
the new components exceeds 50 percent
concentrations of the calibration gases A CHP unit that meets the definition of the cost of an entirely new steam
used for daily calibrations, cylinder gas of an electric utility steam generating generating unit of comparable design,
audits, and linearity checks are unit is subject to 40 CFR part 60, and (2) it is technologically and
expressed as percentages of the span subpart Da. Under 40 CFR part 60, economically feasible to meet the
value (e.g., under 40 CFR part 75, a subpart Da, an electric utility steam applicable standard (40 CFR 60.15).
‘‘mid’’ level gas is 50 to 60 percent of generating unit means ‘‘* * * any steam
span). Second, the maximum allowable electric generating unit that is VI. Summary of Cost, Environmental,
calibration error (CE) for daily constructed for the purpose of Energy, and Economic Impacts
calibration checks of SO2 and NOX supplying more than one-third of its In setting the standards, the CAA
monitors is expressed as a percentage of potential electric output capacity and requires us to consider alternative
the span value (i.e., CE ≤5 percent of more than 25 MW electric output to any emission control approaches, taking into
span). In view of this, it is essential that utility power distribution system for account the estimated costs and
the span values be properly-sized, in sale.’’ We recognize that under certain benefits, as well as the energy, solid
order to ensure the accuracy of the CEM utility rate structures, it is more waste and other effects. The EPA
measurements. For example, suppose economical for CHP facilities to sell all requests comment on whether it has
that a coal-fired unit is subject to both electric output to the grid and then identified the appropriate alternatives
subpart Da, 40 CFR part 60, and the meter back electric power for non-utility and whether the proposed standards
Acid Rain Program. The owner or plant use. The intent of the definition of adequately take into consideration the
incremental effects in terms of emission units will be built during the next 5 pollutants and geographic regions
reductions, energy and other effects of years. regulated by cap and trade programs,
these alternatives. The EPA will For the industrial-commercial- most new units would install controls as
consider the available information in institutional sector, we project that 87 tight or tighter than the proposed
developing the final rule. new steam generating units larger than amendments. Therefore, the proposed
The costs, environmental, energy, and 100 million Btu per hour will be built amendments would not significantly
economic impacts are expressed as and 99 new steam generating units impact allowance prices or costs for
incremental differences between the between 10 and 100 million Btu per existing utility sources.
impacts of utility and industrial- hour will built over the next 5 years. Of
The primary environmental impacts
commercial-institutional steam these 186 projected new units, we
resulting from the proposed
generating units complying with the estimate 8 new coal units, 133 natural
amendments to subpart Da of 40 CFR
proposed amendments and the current gas units, 21 biomass units, 22 liquid
fuel units, and 2 non-fossil solid fuel part 60 for electric utility steam
NSPS emission limits (i.e., baseline). generating units are further reductions
The impacts are presented for new units. Of the biomass units, only 17 are
wood-fired and would be impacted by in the amounts of PM, SO2, and NOX
steam generating units constructed over that would be emitted from new units
the next 5 years. the proposed amendments.
The combined impact of the proposed subject to subpart Da of 40 CFR part 60.
For the electric utility sector, The amendments (compared to the existing Achieving these additional emissions
Energy Information Administration NSPS) is to reduce SO2 emissions by reductions would increase the costs of
forecasts 1,300 MW of new coal-fired about 8,400 tpy, NOX emissions by installing and operating controls by
electric utility steam generating units about 1,400 tpy, and PM emissions by approximately 4 percent on a steam
will be built during the next 5 years. We about 1,500 tpy. The annualized cost of generating unit subject to the proposed
used permit data and engineering achieving these reductions in new standards above those costs for the unit
judgement to determine that the source emissions is about $6.5 million. to comply with the applicable existing
distribution of these new units by type The cost and environmental impacts for standards under subpart Da of 40 CFR
of coal burned would be as follows: two each proposed amendment are part 60. In general, the same types of the
bituminous coal-fired units, two summarized below. PM, SO2, and NOX controls would be
subbituminous coal-fired units, and one installed on a given unit to comply with
coal refuse-fired unit. All new natural A. What Are the Impacts for Electric either of the applicable existing or
gas-fired electric utility generating units Utility Steam Generating Units? proposed standards. However, there
built in the foreseeable future will most As discussed earlier, cap and trade would be an increase in the capital and
likely be combined cycle units or programs and new source review often annual costs for these controls to
combustion turbine peaking units and, result in new utility units installing achieve the higher performance levels
thus not subject to subpart Da, 40 CFR controls beyond what is required by the needed for the proposed standards due
part 60, but instead subject to the NSPS existing NSPS. Since only the existing to design modifications and operating
for combustion turbines under 40 CFR NSPS set specific limits, we are using changes to the controls. The estimated
part 60, subpart GG, or subpart KKKK of those standards as the baseline to be nationwide 5-year incremental
40 CFR part 60. Furthermore, because of conservative in our estimating of costs. emissions reductions and cost impacts
fuel supply availability and cost Actual costs (and benefits) of the for the proposed standards beyond those
considerations, we assumed that no new proposed amendments could be less estimated for the regulatory baseline are
oil-fired electric utility steam generating than stated in our analysis. Also, for summarized in Table 3 of this preamble.
TABLE 3.—NATIONAL EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS AND COST IMPACTS FOR ELECTRIC UTILITY STEAM GENERATING UNITS
SUBJECT TO AMENDED STANDARDS UNDER SUBPART DA OF 40 CFR PART 60
[5th Year after proposal]
Annual Total capital Annualized cost

Pollutant emissions re- investment cost ($ million/yr)
ductions (tpy) ($ million/yr)
PM .......................................................................................................................................... 530 $10.4 $2.2

SO2 ........................................................................................................................................ 8,400 $0.9 $0.7
NOX ........................................................................................................................................ 1,400 $4.9 $1.5
1. PM Impacts performance level needed to comply The nationwide increases in total

The impact of new source review is with the proposed PM standard. capital investment costs and the annual
not included in our baseline so actual Estimated baseline PM emissions operating costs of the control equipment
costs (and benefits) of the proposed from the projected new electric utility required to meet the proposed PM
amendments could be less than stated in steam generating units are standards over the baseline costs are
our analysis. The regulatory baseline for approximately 960 megagrams per year estimated to be $10.4 million and $2.2
PM emissions is defined to be million per year, respectively.
(Mg/yr) (1,100 tpy). The proposed
installation of fabric filters on all new standards are projected to reduce PM Compliance with the proposed PM
units (i.e., electric utility companies emissions by 480 Mg/yr (530 tpy). This standard would increase the quantity of
would install fabric filters to comply represents an approximate 50 percent fly ash collected by the fabric filters
with the PM standard under the existing reduction in the growth of PM over the baseline levels. Depending on
NSPS). Design modifications and emissions from new units that would be the practices used at a given power
operating changes to the fabric filters subject to the proposed standards. plant site, this would increase the
would be required to achieve the higher amount of fly ash the utility company
can recycle as a by-product (e.g., sell as site, the resulting scrubber sludge may overstate the actual costs to meet
raw material for concrete or roadway fill (mostly calcium sulfite hemihydrate and the proposed NOX standard because of
material) or increase the amount of fly gypsum) is disposed of in a landfill or the assumption used for the analysis
ash the company must dispose of as a is recovered as a salable by-product that the CFB units burning lignite or
solid waste either on-site or off-site. No (e.g., sold to a wallboard manufacturer). coal refuse can meet the existing NOX
significant energy impacts, as measured For those units using a dry scrubber or standard in subpart Da of 40 CFR part
relative to the regulatory baseline, are a CFB with limestone addition, the dry 60 without the need to install flue gas
expected as a result of the proposed PM reaction solids are entrained in the flue controls for NOX emissions. Thus, the
standard. gases, along with fly ash, and then estimated costs include the full costs of
collected by the downstream particulate installing SNCR systems on the CFB
2. SO2 Impacts control device. Compliance with the units to meet the proposed NOX
The impacts of new source review applicable proposed SO2 standard standard. Also, data for some western
and the acid rain trading program are would increase the quantity of solid subbituminous coals suggests that the
not included in our baseline so actual materials collected by the particulate NOX emission levels from burning these
costs (and benefits) of the proposed control devices over the baseline levels. coals will be lower than the baseline
amendments could be less than stated in No significant energy impacts, as NOX emission levels used for the cost
our analysis. The regulatory baseline for measured relative to the regulatory analysis.
SO2 emissions is defined to be the baseline, are expected as a result of the Using nitrogen-based reagents
installation of one of three SO2 control proposed SO2 standard. requires operators of SCR and SNCR
configurations, depending on the type of systems to closely monitor and control
coal burned. New units burning 3. NOX Impacts
the rate of reagent injection regardless of
bituminous coal were assumed to use The impact of new source review is
the level of an applicable emission
pulverized coal-fired boilers equipped not included in our baseline so actual
standard. If injection rates are too high,
with limestone wet scrubbers with costs (and benefits) of the proposed
emissions of ammonia from a steam
forced oxidation. New units burning amendments could be less than stated in
generating unit using SCR or SNCR may
low sulfur, subbituminous coal were our analysis. The regulatory baseline for
be in the range of 10 to 50 ppm. No
assumed to use either spray dryers or NOX emissions is defined to be
significant energy impacts, as measured
LSFO depending on the boiler size. New installation of SCR controls on all new
relative to the regulatory baseline, are
units burning lignite or coal refuse were pulverized coal-fired units burning
expected as a result of the proposed
assumed to use circulating fluidized-bed bituminous or subbituminous coal, and
NOX standard.
(CFB) boilers with limestone addition. no additional NOX controls on the CFB
Design modifications and operating units burning lignite or coal refuse. B. What Are the Impacts for Industrial,
changes to these baseline controls Design modifications and operating Commercial, Institutional Boilers?
would be required to achieve the higher changes to the SCR systems would be
required to achieve the higher The nationwide increase in
performance level needed to comply
performance level needed to comply annualized costs for new industrial-
with the proposed SO2 standards.
Estimated baseline SO2 emissions with the proposed NOX standard. commercial-institutional steam
from the projected new electric utility Installation and use of SNCR systems on generating units greater than 100
steam generating units are the CFB units burning lignite or coal MMBtu/hr heat input is about $2.1
approximately 14,000 Mg/yr (16,000 refuse is assumed to be needed to million in the 5th year following
tpy). The proposed standards are comply with the proposed NOX proposal (table 4 of this preamble). This
projected to reduce SO2 emissions by standard. cost reflects the cost for wood-fired and
7,600 Mg/yr (8,400 tpy). This represents Estimated baseline NOX emissions wood and other fuel co-fired units to
an approximate 48 percent reduction in from the projected new electric utility comply with the proposed PM limit.
the growth of SO2 emissions from new steam generating units are The cost-effectiveness for affected
units that would be subject to the approximately 4,700 Mg/yr (5,200 tpy). boilers under the proposed PM standard
proposed standards. The proposed limit The proposed standards are projected to was $2,400 per ton removed. The
is approximately 65 percent lower than reduce NOX emissions by 1,200 Mg/yr proposed standard would impose no
the existing limit, but many of the (1,400 tpy). This represents an additional costs on fossil fuel-fired
baseline units are over complying by approximate 26 percent reduction in the boilers.
using low sulfur coals. growth of NOX emissions from new The nationwide increase in
The nationwide increases in total units that would be subject to the annualized costs for new industrial-
capital investment cost and the annual proposed standards. The proposed limit commercial-institutional units operating
operating cost of the control equipment is approximately 38 percent lower than between 30 and 100 MMBtu/hr is about
required to meet the proposed standards the existing limit, but CFB baseline $140,000 in the 5th year following
over the baseline costs are estimated to units are over complying with the proposal. This cost reflects the control
be $0.9 million and $0.7 million per existing limit. and monitoring cost for wood units to
year, respectively. The nationwide increases in total comply with the proposed PM limit.
For steam generating units using capital investment costs and the annual The range in cost-effectiveness for
LSFO, compliance with the proposed operating costs of the control equipment affected boilers under the proposed PM
SO2 standard would increase the required to meet the proposed standards standard for subpart Dc of 40 CFR part
quantity of scrubber sludge over the over the baseline costs are estimated to 60 was about $3,200 per ton for high
baseline levels. Depending on the be $4.9 million and $1.5 million per moisture wood units to about $3,500 per
practices used at a given power plant year, respectively. These cost estimates ton for dry wood-fired units.
TABLE 4.—NATIONAL COST AND EMISSION IMPACTS FOR INDUSTRIAL STEAM GENERATING UNITS
[5-Year impacts]
Incremental cost-effectiveness
Emission Annualized
Number of ($/ton)
Subpart reduction cost
units (tpy) (million $) Overall Range
Db ......................................................................................... 13 888 2.11 2,372 2,352–2,577

Dc ......................................................................................... 4 43 0.14 3,227 3,142–3,479
The range represents the difference in cost-effectiveness between wet and dry wood fuels.
The primary environmental impact instances where all electricity is $33,000 for new industrial-commercial-
resulting from the proposed PM generated off-site versus on-site. institutional units greater than 100
standards is a reduction in the amount There would be no significant impacts MMBtu/hr and $1,600 for new
of PM emitted from new steam on the discharges to surface waters as a industrial-commercial-institutional
generating units. The estimated result of the proposed amendments to sources operating between 30 and 100
emissions reductions in the 5th year the PM standard. Fabric filter and ESP MMBtu/hr.
following proposal is about 840 Mg/yr technologies do not demand water The proposed amendments require
(930 tpy) for subparts Db and Dc of 40 resources to control PM. additional energy to operate fans on ESP
CFR part 60 units combined (about a 70 Solid waste impacts result from controls. The estimated additional
percent reduction for wood-fired units). disposal of the PM collected in the energy requirements are 4.1 million
Secondary emission impacts would fabric filter or ESP control device. The kilowatt hours (kWh) for new industrial-
occur as a result of the additional estimated solid waste impacts are 1,400 commercial-institutional units greater
electricity required to operate PM Mg/yr (1,500 tpy) for new industrial- than 100 MMBtu/hr and 0.2 million
controls. A range of secondary air commercial-institutional units at the kWh for new units between 30 and 100
impacts for five criteria pollutants is end of the 5th year following proposal. MMBtu/hr. This additional energy
shown in table 5 of this preamble. The The estimated costs of handling the requirement is estimated at about 0.1
range of impacts represents the additional solid waste generated are percent of the boiler output.
TABLE 5.—ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF INDUSTRIAL UNITS

[5-Year impacts]
Secondary air impacts

(tpy) Solid waste Energy
Subpart (tpy) (kWh/yr)
SO2 NOX CO PM VOC
Db ................................................................................................. 0–83 12–50 0–34 1–33 0–2 1,482 4,063,397

Dc ................................................................................................. 0–3 0–2 0–1 0–1 0 69 167,860
A range of secondary air impacts represent emissions from electricity generated on-site vs. off-site. On-site generation assumed the use of
wood fuel, and off-site generation assumed the use of coal for electricity generation.
C. Economic Impacts Source Performance Standard (NSPS). the amendments as proposed, and
For more information on these impacts, output of these types of manufacturing
Utilities. The analysis shows minimal please refer to the economic impact industries would remain the same.
changes in prices and output for the analysis in the public docket. Therefore, it is likely that there is no
industries affected by the final rule. The Industrial, Institutional, and adverse impact expected to occur for
price increase for baseload electricity is Commercial Boilers. Based on economic those industries that produce output
0.23 percent and the reduction in impact analysis, the amendments are affected by the proposed amendments,
domestic production is 0.05 percent. expected to have a negligible impact on such as lumber and wood products and
The analysis also shows the impact on the prices and production quantities for paper and allied products
the distribution of electricity supply. both the industry as a whole and the 17 manufacturing. For further information,
First, the construction of the five units affected entities. The economic impact please refer to the economic impact
with add-on controls may be delayed; analysis shows that there would be less analysis in the public docket.
hence the engineering cost analysis of than 0.01 percent expected price
controls are not incurred by society. increase for output in the 17 affected VII. Request for Comments
Therefore the social costs of the entities as a result of the amendments We request comments on all aspects
proposed standard are approximately for wood-fueled industrial boilers, of the proposed amendments. All
$0.7 million and reflect costs associated subparts Db and Dc of 40 CFR part 60. significant comments received will be
with existing units bringing higher-cost The estimated change in production of considered in the development and
capacity online and consumers’ welfare affected output is also negligible with selection of the final amendments. We
losses associated with the price less than a 0.01 percent change specifically solicit comments on
increases and quantity decreases in the expected. In addition, impacts to additional amendments that are under
electricity market. However, this affected industries show that prices of consideration. These potential
estimate of social costs does not account lumber and wood products, as well as amendments are described below.
for the benefits of emissions reductions paper and allied products, would not Industrial Boiler SO2 Standard. We
associated with this proposed New change as a result of implementation of are requesting additional information on
the ability of industrial boilers fueled by an emission potential of 3.0 lb SO2/ based emissions data and a baseline
inherently low sulfur fuels to achieve a MMBtu heat input. energy generating efficiency.
90 percent reduction. Preliminary We request comments on the To develop the emission limit, we
information indicates that industrial advantages and disadvantages of would use a baseline gross electrical
boilers using fuels with inherently low amending the current 40 CFR part 60, generating efficiency of 32 percent, or a
SO2 emissions encounter technical subpart Db and Dc, standards to an SO2 corresponding heat rate of 10.667
difficulties achieving 90 percent sulfur emission limitation only and the likely MMBtu/MWh. Most existing electric
removal. With this issue in mind, we are cost and emissions reductions impacts. utility steam generating units achieve an
considering replacing the SO2 percent We also solicit data on the sulfur overall efficiency of 29 to 38 percent,
reduction requirement in subparts Db content of coals used by industrial with newer units trending to the upper
and Dc of 40 CFR part 60 with a single, boilers and future market projections. end of that range. However, given the
fuel-neutral emission limit in the final If we adopt an emission limit format, diverse use of industrial-commercial-
rule. Also, we would like comments on we solicit comments on whether the institutional steam generating unit
whether this change, if it is made, emission limit should be expressed in applications, and since these units are
should be available for existing units or an input-based or output-based format. primarily designed for providing
only apply to new units. In the 1998 NSPS amendments, we process steam and not optimized for
The emission limit could be concluded that an output-based format electrical production, we decided that
expressed in either an output-based or provided only limited opportunity for applying an efficiency of 38 percent
input-based format. Either format would promoting energy efficiency at subpart (i.e., at the high end of the efficiency
not create disincentives for the use of Db, 40 CFR part 60, units. In addition, range) would be unreasonable. The
inherently low sulfur fuels. In addition, we concluded that an output-based output-based emission limit was,
using an emission limit format format could impose additional therefore, calculated by multiplying the
exclusively may have benefits for hardware and software costs because
input-based emission limit by the heat
industrial boilers in terms of instrumentation to measure energy
rate corresponding to a 32 percent gross
compliance flexibility. Our initial output generally did not exist at
electrical generating efficiency. Given a
analysis indicates that FGD systems can industrial-commercial-institutional
NOX emission limit of 86 ng/J (0.2 lb/
economically reduce SO2 emissions facilities. In the case that we decide to
MMBtu heat input) for fossil fuel-fired
from industrial, commercial, and replace the percent reduction
units, we are proposing a corresponding
institutional coal-fired boilers to 100 ng/ requirement for 40 CFR part 60, subpart
output-based emission limit of 270 ng/
J (0.24 lb/MMBtu heat input) heat input Db, and 40 CFR part 60, subpart Dc,
J (2.1 lb/MWh). If you choose to comply
or less. The corresponding optional units, we solicit comments on the
with the optional output-based emission
output-based emission limit would be benefits and costs of adopting an
output-based emission limit either as limit for your unit, then you must
320 ng/J (2.6 lb SO2 per MWh) of gross
the sole emission limit or as an optional demonstrate compliance based on a 30-
electrical output.
If we adopt a 0.24 lb SO2/MMBtu heat emission limit. day rolling average. This averaging
input emission limit, as we are An alternate approach we are period is consistent with the input-
considering doing, the impacts depend considering and would like comment on based emission limit requirements, and
on the mix of coals that are burned in is maintaining the percent reduction it provides a sufficient averaging period
new industrial boilers. For units requirement and establishing an to account for any variability in unit
burning coal with an emission potential alternate emission limit. Under this operating efficiency.
greater than 2.4 lb SO2/MMBtu heat approach, all units would comply with Applicability of the Industrial-
input, control costs would be higher and either an emissions limit of 0.2 lb SO2/ Commercial-Institutional Boiler PM
emissions lower than under the current MMBtu or a 95 percent reduction. We standard. The existing emission limits
NSPS because more than a 90 percent would like comments both on this for PM in 40 CFR part 60, subpart Db,
reduction in emissions would be approach and appropriate limits. and 40 CFR part 60, subpart Dc, apply
required. For units burning coal with an only to coal, oil, and wood-fired units.
Selection of Optional Output-Based We are considering and requesting
emission potential less than 2.4 lb SO2/
NOX Emission Limit for 40 CFR Part 60, comment on extending the applicability
MMBtu heat input, control costs would
Subpart Db, Units That Generate of the proposed NSPS to cover all solid
be reduced and allowable emissions
Electricity fuel-fired fuels in the final rule. A
would be somewhat higher than the
current NSPS. Industrial boilers using For industrial-commercial- review of the BACT/LAER database
coal with an emission potential of 2.4 lb institutional units that generate revealed that since 1991, construction
SO2/MMBtu heat input would electricity, we are considering an permits have been issued for seven units
experience no difference in required optional output-based emission limit in burning bagasse, two units burning hull
control, but compliance costs would be units of pounds of pollutant per MWh fuel, and nine units burning non-fossil
lower because the testing and of gross energy output. Ideally, the fuel (e.g., wastewater sludge and tire-
monitoring costs of complying with an output-based emission limit would be derived fuel). Emissions data indicate
emission limitation would be less than based on emissions data and energy that these fuels are capable of meeting
for a percent reduction standard, which output data that were measured the same emission limits as coal-fired
requires testing at the inlet and outlet of simultaneously. However, output-based units. We solicit comment on the cost,
the control device. emission data are not readily available environmental, and economic
Preliminary analysis shows that a 0.24 for industrial steam generating units. implications of extending the
lb/MMBtu standard would reduce Most emission test data today are applicability of the proposed PM
emissions by 40 tpy with a small net reported based on energy input, emission limits for 40 CFR part 60,
cost savings. This analysis is based on consistent with current State and subpart Db, and 40 CFR part 60, subpart
the projection of six new coal-fired units Federal compliance reporting Dc, to all solid fuels. Assuming use of
with an SO2 emission potential of 2.4 lb requirements. In the absence of a mechanical collector as the basis for
SO2/MMBtu heat input or less, and one measured output-based data, we would baseline controls, preliminary analysis
new boiler co-firing coal and wood with develop the emission limit using input- indicates that PM emissions could be
reduced by 134 tpy at an incremental procedure 2 in appendix F to 40 CFR output-based emission limit to a net
cost of about $1,700 per ton removed. part 60 for evaluating the effectiveness output-based emission limit. Therefore,
Reporting Requirements for 40 CFR of quality control and quality assurance we are requesting comments on
Part 60, Subpart Dc. Natural gas-fired procedures and the quality of data publishing both a gross output-based
units and low sulfur oil-fired units fall produced by the PM CEMS. emission limit and an optional net
under the applicability of 40 CFR part Based on our analysis of available output-based emission limit under 40
60, subpart Dc, due to the heat input data, there is no technical reason that CFR 60, subpart Da.
capacity of the unit, but have no PM CEMS cannot be installed and Renewable Energy. We are
applicable emission limits. However, operate reliably on electric utility steam considering adopting a rule provision to
subpart Dc of 40 CFR part 60 requires generating units. Thus, the availability recognize the environmental benefits
daily fuel usage recordkeeping for of PM CEMS makes establishing an and encourage the installation of non-
natural gas and low sulfur oil under output-based PM emission limit under combustion based renewable electricity
section 60.48c(g) to ensure that no other 40 CFR part 60, subpart Da, a realistic generation technologies. We are
fuels are being burned in combination option. We are requesting comment on requesting comments on allowing an
with them. Since no emission limits the application of PM CEMS to electric affected facility that generates electricity
apply to these units, we are considering utility steam generating units, and the and installs a renewable generation
amending the reporting requirements in use of data from such systems for technology (e.g., solar, wind,
40 CFR 60.48c(g) of subpart Dc for units compliance determinations under 40 geothermal, low-impact (small) hydro)
permitted to fire only natural gas or low CFR part 60, subpart Da. to add the electric output from the
sulfur oil from daily to monthly. This For an output-based PM standard, we renewable energy facility to the output
reduction in burden is consistent with would convert the proposed PM of the affected facility when calculating
recordkeeping alternatives approved by emission limit of 0.015 lb/MMBtu heat compliance with output-based emission
EPA and will reduce the reporting input to the corresponding value in limits. To be eligible, the renewable
burden for those facilities that currently units of lb/MWh using an overall generation would have to be constructed
report fuel usage on a daily basis. electrical generating efficiency of 36 during the same time period as the
Output-based PM Emission Limit for percent. The resulting PM emission affected facility and be located on a
40 CFR Part 60, Subpart Da. The limit would be 18 ng/J (0.14 lb/MWh) contiguous property. This provision
proposed amendments to 40 CFR part gross electricity output as determined could increase compliance flexibility,
60, subpart Da, for electric utility steam on a 30-day rolling average basis. The decrease costs, and contribute to
generating units would establish output- unit owner or operator would not be multimedia-pollutant reduction. We are
based emission limits for SO2 and NOX. required to conduct the periodic requesting comment on including such
Although we prefer to use output-based performance tests required for a provision in 40 CFR 60, subpart Da
formats for all of the emission limits demonstrating compliance with the and Db, and on what forms of renewable
applicable to an electric utility steam input-based emission limit. In lieu of energy would quality.
generating unit subject to the proposed these performance testing requirements, Definition of Boiler-Operating Day.
standards, the proposed emission limit under the proposed amendments the We are considering amending the
for PM retains the heat input format owner or operator would be required to definition of boiler-operating day for
while we continue to evaluate PM install and operate a PM CEMS and existing utility units to be consistent
CEMS. We are considering converting demonstrate compliance with the with the proposed definition for new
the proposed PM emission limit to an alternative PM standard following the units. This would allow 30-day rolling
output-based format and requiring PM same procedures used to demonstrate average emission rates to be calculated
CEMS for the final rule. compliance with the SO2 and NOX consistently across sources. We are
For more than two decades, CEMS standards.
soliciting comments on if this is
have been used in Europe to monitor Net Output. The proposed output-
appropriate for existing sources.
PM emissions from a variety of based emission limits for utility boilers
CEM Availability. In recognition that
industrial sources, including electric are based on gross energy output. To
40 CFR part 75 requirements are more
utility steam generating units. In the provide a greater incentive for energy
stringent than the NSPS and provide
United States, however, PM CEMS efficiency, we would prefer to base
incentives to keep monitors as close to
presently are not routinely used to output-based emission limits on net-
100 percent as possible, we are
monitor emissions from coal-fired energy output. But, as explained earlier,
electric utility steam generating units. we are proposing to use gross energy intending to increase NSPS CEM
However, several electric utility output because a net output approach availability. We would like comment on
companies in the United States have could result in monitoring difficulties increasing CEM availability from 70
now installed or are planning to install and unreasonable monitoring costs, percent to 95 percent under 40 CFR part
PM CEMS on electric utility steam particularly at facilities with both 60, subpart Da for both existing and new
generating units. affected and unaffected units. In units. Data from EPA’s Clean Air
In recognition of the fact that PM general, about 6 to 10 percent of station Markets Divisions indicates that in 2003
CEMS are commercially available, we power is used internally by parasitic average NOX hourly CEM availability
have developed and promulgated PS loads, but these parasitic loads vary on was 96 percent and average SO2 hourly
and QA procedures for PM CEMS (69 a source-by-source basis. At some CEM availability was 99 percent.
FR 1786, January 12, 2004). Performance facilities, the use of a net output-based VIII. Statutory and Executive Order
specifications for PM CEMS are emission limit might be more Reviews
established under PS–11 in appendix B advantageous. We are considering,
to 40 CFR part 60 for evaluating the therefore, including an optional net A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
acceptability of a PM CEMS used for output-based emission limit wherever Planning and Review
determining compliance with the the proposed amendments have an Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
emission standards on a continuous output-based limit. We would develop 51735, October 4, 1993), we must
basis. Additional quality assurance the limit using a 32 to 34 percent net determine whether the regulatory action
procedures are established under output efficiency to convert the gross is ‘‘significant’’ and, therefore, subject to
review by OMB and the requirements of 40 CFR part 60, subpart Db, 2060–0202 is 4 million kilowatt-hours of
the Executive Order. The Executive (ICR 1564.06) for 40 CFR part 60, production or less; (2) a small
Order defines ‘‘significant regulatory subpart Dc. governmental jurisdiction that is a
action’’ as one that is likely to result in Copies of the information collection government of a city, county, town,
a action that may: request document(s) may be obtained school district or special district with a
(1) Have an annual effect on the from Susan Auby by mail at U.S. EPA, population of less than 50,000; and (3)
economy of $100 million or more or Office of Environmental Information, a small organization that is any not-for-
adversely affect in a material way the Collection Strategies Division (2822T), profit enterprise that is independently
economy, a sector of the economy, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., owned and operated and is not
productivity, competition, jobs, the Washington, DC 20460, by e-mail at dominant in its field.
environment, public health or safety, or auby.susan@epa.gov, or by calling (202)
State, local, or tribal governments or 566–1672. A copy may also be After considering the economic
communities; downloaded off the Internet at http:// impacts of today’s proposed
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or www.epa.gov/icr. amendments on small entities, we
otherwise interfere with an action taken Burden means the total time, effort, or conclude that this action will not have
or planned by another agency; financial resources expended by persons a significant economic impact on a
(3) Materially alter the budgetary to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose substantial number of small entities. We
impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or provide information to or for a have determined for electric utility
or loan programs, or the rights and Federal agency. This includes the time steam generating units, that based on
obligations of recipients thereof; or needed to review instructions; develop, the existing inventory for the
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues acquire, install, and utilize technology corresponding NAICS code and
arising out of legal mandates, the and systems for the purposes of presuming the percentage of entities
President’s priorities, or the principles collecting, validating, and verifying that are small in that inventory,
set forth in the Executive Order. information, processing and estimated to be 3 percent, is
Pursuant to the terms of Executive maintaining information, and disclosing representative of the percentage of small
Order 12866, it has been determined and providing information; adjust the entities owning new utility boilers in
that the proposed amendments are a existing ways to comply with any the 5th year after promulgation, that at
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ because previously applicable instructions and most, one entity out of five new entities
they raise novel legal or policy issues requirements; train personnel to be able in the industry may be small entities
within the meaning of paragraph (4) to respond to a collection of and thus affected by the proposed
above. Consequently, the proposed information; search data sources; amendments. We have determined for
amendments were submitted to OMB for complete and review the collection of industrial-commercial steam generating
review under Executive Order 12866. information; and transmit or otherwise units, based on the existing industrial
Any written comments from OMB and disclose the information. boilers inventory for the corresponding
written EPA responses are available in An agency may not conduct or NAICS codes and presuming the
the docket (see ADDRESSES section of sponsor, and a person is not required to percentage of small entities in that
this preamble). respond to a collection of information inventory is representative of the
B. Paperwork Reduction Act unless it displays a currently valid OMB percentage of small entities owning new
control number. The OMB control wood-fueled industrial boilers in the 5th
The proposed action does not impose numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40
an information collection burden under year after promulgation, that between
CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. two and three entities out of 17 in the
the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. C. Regulatory Flexibility Act industry with NAICS code 321 and 322
The proposed amendments result in no The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) may be small entities, and thus affected
changes to the information collection generally requires an agency to prepare by the proposed amendments. Based on
requirements of the existing standards a regulatory flexibility analysis of any the boiler size definitions for the
of performance and would have no rule subject to notice and comment affected industries (subpart Db of 40
impact on the information collection rulemaking requirements under the CFR part 60: greater than or equal to 100
estimate of project cost and hour burden Administrative Procedures Act or any MMBtu/hr; subpart Dc of 40 CFR part
made and approved by OMB during the other statute unless the agency certifies 60: 10–100 MMBtu/hr), EPA determined
development of the existing standards of that the rule will not have a significant that the firms being affected were likely
performance. Therefore, the information economic impact on a substantial to fall under the subpart Dc of 40 CFR
collection requests have not been number of small entities. Small entities part 60 boiler category. These two or
amended. The OMB has previously include small businesses, small three affected small entities are
approved the information collection organizations, and small governmental estimated to have annual compliance
requirements contained in the existing jurisdictions. costs between $70 and $105 thousand
standards of performance (40 CFR part For purposes of assessing the impacts which represents less than 5 percent of
60, subparts Da, Db, and Dc) under the of the proposed amendments on small the total compliance cost for all affected
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A wood-fired industrial boilers. Based on
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., at the time small business according to Small the average employment per facility
the standards were promulgated on June Business Administration size standards data from the U.S. Census Bureau, for
11, 1979 (40 CFR part 60, subpart Da, 44 by the North American Industry the corresponding NAICS codes under
FR 33580), November 25, 1986 (40 CFR Classification System (NAICS) category the subpart Db of 40 CFR part 60 and
part 60, subpart Db, 51 FR 42768), and of the owning entity. The range of small subpart Dc of 40 CFR part 60 categories,
September 12, 1990 (40 CFR part 60, business size standards for the 17 the compliance cost of these facilities is
subpart Dc, 55 FR 37674). The OMB affected industries ranges from 500 to expected to be less than 1 percent of
assigned OMB control numbers 2060– 750 employees, except for electric their estimated sales. For more
0023 (ICR 1053.07) for 40 CFR part 60, utility steam generating units. In the information on the results of the
subpart Da, 2060–0072 (ICR 1088.10) for case of utility boilers the size standard analysis of small entity impacts, please
refer to the economic impact analysis in We determined that the proposed F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
the docket. amendments do not contain a Federal and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Although the proposed NSPS would mandate that may result in expenditures Governments
not have a significant economic impact of $100 million or more for State, local, Executive Order 13175, (65 FR 67249,
on a substantial number of small and tribal governments, in the aggregate, November 9, 2000), requires us to
entities, EPA nonetheless has tried to or the private sector in any 1 year. Thus, develop an accountable process to
reduce the impact of the proposed the proposed amendments are not ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by
amendments on small entities. In the subject to the requirements of section tribal officials in the development of
proposed amendments, the Agency is 202 and 205 of the UMRA. In addition, regulatory policies that have tribal
applying the minimum level of control we determined that the proposed implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have Tribal
and the minimum level of monitoring, amendments contain no regulatory implications’’ is defined in the
recordkeeping, and reporting to affected requirements that might significantly or Executive Order to include regulations
sources allowed by the CAA. This uniquely affect small governments that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on
provision should reduce the size of because the burden is small and the relationship between the Federal
small entity impacts. We continue to be regulation does not unfairly apply to government and the Indian tribes, or on
interested in the potential impacts of the small governments. Therefore, the the distribution of power and
proposed amendments on small entities proposed amendments are not subject to responsibilities between the Federal
and welcome comments on issues the requirements of section 203 of the government and Indian tribes.’’
related to such impacts. UMRA. The proposed amendments do not
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175. They will not
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, have substantial direct effects on tribal
Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995, Public
August 10, 1999), requires EPA to governments, on the relationship
Law 104–4, establishes requirements for
develop an accountable process to between the Federal government and
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
their regulatory actions on State, local,
State and local officials in the power and responsibilities between the
and tribal governments and the private
development of regulatory policies that Federal government and Indian tribes,
sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA,
have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies as specified in Executive Order 13175.
we generally must prepare a written
that have federalism implications’’ is Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
statement, including a cost-benefit
defined in the Executive Order to apply to the proposed amendments.
analysis, for proposed and final actions
include regulations that have
with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
result in expenditures by State, local, ‘‘substantial direct effects on the States, Children From Environmental Health
and tribal governments, in the aggregate, on the relationship between the national and Safety Risks
or by the private sector, of $100 million government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
or more in any 1 year. Before April 23, 1997), applies to any action
promulgating an EPA action for which responsibilities among the various
levels of government.’’ that: (1) Is determined to be
a written statement is needed, section ‘‘economically significant’’ as defined
205 of the UMRA generally requires us Under section 6 of Executive Order
13132, we may not issue a regulation under Executive Order 12866, and (2)
to identify and consider a reasonable concerns an environmental health or
number of regulatory alternatives and that imposes substantial direct
compliance costs, and that is not safety risk that we have reason to
adopt the least costly, most cost- believe may have a disproportionate
effective, or least burdensome required by statute, unless the Federal
government provides the funds effect on children. If the regulatory
alternative that achieves the objectives action meets both criteria, we must
of the action. The provisions of section necessary to pay the direct compliance
evaluate the environmental health or
205 do not apply when they are costs incurred by State and local
safety effects of the planned action on
inconsistent with applicable law. governments, or we consult with State
children, and explain why the planned
Moreover, section 205 allows us to and local officials early in the process
regulation is preferable to other
adopt an alternative other than the least of developing the proposed action. Also,
potentially effective and reasonably
costly, most cost-effective, or least we may not issue a regulation that has
feasible alternatives we considered.
burdensome alternative if we publish federalism implications and that We interpret Executive Order 13045
with the final action an explanation preempts State law, unless we consult as applying only to those regulatory
why that alternative was not adopted. with State and local officials early in the actions that are based on health or safety
Before we establish any regulatory process of developing the proposed risks, such that the analysis required
requirements that may significantly or action. under section 5–501 of the Executive
uniquely affect small governments, The proposed amendments do not Order has the potential to influence the
including tribal governments, we must have federalism implications. They will regulation. The proposed amendments
develop a small government agency not have substantial direct effects on the are not subject to Executive Order 13045
plan under section 203 of the UMRA. States, on the relationship between the because they are based on technology
The plan must provide for notifying national government and the States, or performance and not on health and
potentially affected small governments, on the distribution of power and safety risks. Also, the proposed
enabling officials of affected small responsibilities among the various amendments are not ‘‘economically
governments to have meaningful and levels of government, as specified in significant.’’
timely input in the development of our Executive Order 13132. The proposed
regulatory proposals with significant amendments will not impose substantial H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Federal intergovernmental mandates, direct compliance costs on State or local Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
and informing, educating, and advising governments, it will not preempt State Distribution or Use
small governments on compliance with law. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355,
the regulatory requirements. not apply to the proposed amendments. May 22, 2001) provides that agencies
shall prepare and submit to the Dated: February 9, 2005. the passed calibration to meet the
Administrator of the Office of Stephen L. Johnson, requirements of paragraph (h)(2)(iii) of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Acting Administrator. this section.
OMB, a Statement of Energy Effects for For the reasons cited in the preamble, (v) For each full or partial operating
certain actions identified as ‘‘significant title 40, chapter I, part 60 of the Code hour, all valid data points shall be used
energy actions.’’ Section 4(b) of of Federal Regulations is proposed to be to calculate the hourly average.
Executive Order 13211 defines amended as follows: (vi) Data recorded during periods of
‘‘significant energy actions’’ as ‘‘* * * continuous monitoring system
any action by an agency (normally PART 60—[AMENDED] breakdown, repair, calibration checks,
published in the Federal Register) that and zero and span adjustments shall not
promulgates or is expected to lead to the 1. The authority citation for part 60
continues to read as follows: be included in the data averages
promulgation of a final action or computed under this paragraph.
regulation, including notices of inquiry, Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq. (vii) Notwithstanding the
advance notices of proposed requirements of paragraph (h)(2)(vi) of
rulemaking, and notices of proposed Subpart A—[Amended]
this section, owners and operators
rulemaking: (1)(i) That is a significant 2. Section 60.13 is amended by complying with the requirements of
regulatory action under Executive Order revising paragraph (h), to read as § 60.7(f)(1) or (2) must include any data
12866 or any successor order, and (ii) is follows: recorded during periods of monitor
likely to have a significant adverse effect breakdown or malfunction in the data
on the supply, distribution, or use of § 60.13 Monitoring requirements
averages.
energy; or (2) that is designated by the * * * * * (viii) When specified in an applicable
Administrator of the Office of (h)(1) Owners or operators of all subpart, hourly averages for certain
Information and Regulatory Affairs as a continuous monitoring systems for partial operating hours shall not be
significant energy action. * * *’’ measurement of opacity shall reduce all computed or included in the emission
This action is not a ‘‘significant data to 6-minute averages and for averages (e.g. § 60.47b(d)).
energy action,’’ as defined in Executive continuous monitoring systems other
Order 13211, because it is not likely to than opacity to 1-hour averages for time (ix) Either arithmetic or integrated
have a significant adverse effect on the periods as defined in § 60.2. Six-minute averaging of all data may be used to
supply, distribution, or energy use. opacity averages shall be calculated calculate the hourly averages. The data
Further, we concluded that this action from 36 or more data points equally may be recorded in reduced or
is not likely to have any adverse energy spaced over each 6-minute period. nonreduced form (e.g., ppm pollutant
effects. (2) For continuous monitoring and percent O2 or ng/J of pollutant).
systems other than opacity, 1-hour (3) All excess emissions shall be
I. National Technology Transfer converted into units of the standard
averages shall be computed as follows:
Advancement Act (i) For a full operating hour (60 using the applicable conversion
Section 12(d) of the National minutes of unit operation), at least four procedures specified in the applicable
Technology Transfer and Advancement valid data points are required to subpart. After conversion into units of
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104– calculate the hourly average, i.e., one the standard, the data may be rounded
113, section 12(d)(15 U.S.C. 272 note) data point in each of the 15-minute to the same number of significant digits
directs us to use voluntary consensus quadrants of the hour. used in the applicable subpart to specify
standards in our regulatory activities (ii) For a partial operating hour (less the emission limit (e.g., rounded to the
unless to do so would be inconsistent than 60 minutes of unit operation), at nearest 1 percent opacity).
with applicable law or otherwise least one valid data point in each 15- * * * * *
impractical. Voluntary consensus minute quadrant of the hour in which
standards are technical standards (e.g., the unit operates is required to calculate Subpart D—[Amended]
material specifications, test methods, the hourly average.
sampling procedures, business (iii) Notwithstanding the 3. Section 60.45 is amended by
practices) developed or adopted by one requirements of paragraphs (h)(2)(i) and revising paragraph (c)(3) to read as
or more voluntary consensus bodies. (h)(2)(ii) of this section, for any follows:
The NTTAA directs us to provide operating hour in which required § 60.45 Emission and fuel monitoring
Congress, through OMB, explanations maintenance or quality-assurance
* * * * *
when we decide not use available and activities are performed:
(A) If the unit operates in two or more (c) * * *
applicable voluntary consensus
standards. quadrants of the hour, a minimum of (3) For affected facilities burning
This action does not involve any new two valid data points, separated by at fossil fuel(s), the span values for a
technical standards or the incorporation least 15 minutes, is required to calculate continuous monitoring system
by reference of existing technical the hourly average; or measuring the opacity of emissions shall
standards. Therefore, the consideration (B) If the unit operates in only one be 80, 90, or 100 percent. For a
of voluntary consensus standards is not quadrant of the hour, at least one valid continuous monitoring system
relevant to this action. data point is required to calculate the measuring sulfur oxides or nitrogen
hourly average. oxides, the span value shall be
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60 (iv) If a daily calibration error check determined using one of the following
Environmental protection, is failed during any operating hour, all procedures:
Administrative practice and procedure, data for that hour shall be invalidated, (i)For affected facilities that are not
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental unless a subsequent calibration error subject to part 75 of this chapter, SO2
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping test is passed in the same hour and and NOX span values determined as
requirements. sufficient valid data are recorded after follows:
[In parts per million]
Span value for Span value for

Fossil fuel sulfur dioxide nitrogen oxides
Gas .......................................................................................................................................................... (1) 500

Liquid ....................................................................................................................................................... 1,000 500
Solid ......................................................................................................................................................... 1,500 1,000
Combinations ........................................................................................................................................... 1,000+1,500z 500(x+y)+1,000z
1 Not applicable.
Where: Bituminous coal means coal that is system minus purchased power on a 30-
x = the fraction of total heat input classified as bituminous according to day rolling average. Also, any steam
derived from gaseous fossil fuel, the American Society of Testing and supplied to a steam distribution system
and Materials (ASTM) Standard for the purpose of providing steam to a
y = the fraction of total heat input Specification for Classification of Coals steam-electric generator that would
derived from liquid fossil fuel, and by Rank D38877, 90, 91, 95, or 98a produce electrical energy for sale is
z = the fraction of total heat input (incorporated by reference—see § 60.17). considered in determining the electrical
derived from solid fossil fuel. * * * * * energy output capacity of the affected
(ii) For affected facilities that are also Boiler operating day for units facility.
subject to part 75 of this chapter, SO2 constructed, reconstructed, or modified * * * * *
and NOX span values determined on or before February 28, 2005, means Natural gas means a naturally
according to section 2 in appendix A to a 24-hour period during which fossil occurring mixture of hydrocarbon and
part 75 of this chapter may be used for fuel is combusted in a steam generating nonhydrocarbon gases found in geologic
the purposes of this subpart. unit for the entire 24 hours. For units formations beneath the earth’s surface,
constructed, reconstructed, or modified of which the principal constituent is
Subpart Da—[Amended] after February 28, 2005, boiler operating methane; or liquid petroleum gas, as
day means a 24-hour period between 12 defined by the American Society for
4. Section 60.40a is amended by midnight and the following midnight Testing and Materials in ASTM D1835–
revising paragraph (b) to read as follows: during which any fuel is combusted at 82, 86, 87, 91, or 97, ‘‘Standard
§ 60.40a Applicability and designation of any time in the steam generating unit. Specification for Liquid Petroleum
affected facility. It is not necessary for fuel to be Gases’’ (Incorporated by reference—see
* * * * * combusted the entire 24-hour period. § 60.17).
(b) Heat recovery steam generators * * * * * * * * * *
that are associated with combined cycle Coal means all solid fuels classified as Petroleum means crude oil or
gas turbines burning fuels other than anthracite, bituminous, subbituminous, petroleum or a liquid fuel derived from
synthetic-coal gas and that meet the or lignite by the American Society of crude oil or petroleum, including
applicability requirements of subpart Testing and Materials in ASTM D388– distillate and residual oil.
KKKK of this part are not subject to this 77, 90, 91, 95, or 98a, Standard * * * * *
subpart. This subpart will continue to Specification for Classification of Coals 6. Section 60.42a is amended by
apply to all other electric utility by Rank (incorporated by reference—see revising the introductory text in
combined cycle gas turbines that are § 60.17), coal refuse, and petroleum paragraph (a) and adding paragraph (c)
capable of combusting more than 73 coke. Synthetic fuels derived from coal to read as follows:
MW (250 MMBtu/hour) heat input of for the purpose of creating useful heat,
fossil fuel in the heat recovery steam including but not limited to solvent- § 60.42a Standard for particulate matter.
generator. If the heat recovery steam refined coal, gasified coal, coal-oil (a) On and after the date on which the
generator is subject to this subpart and mixtures, and coal-water mixtures are performance test required to be
the combined cycle gas turbine burn included in this definition for the conducted under § 60.8 is completed, no
fuels other than synthetic-coal gas, only purposes of this subpart. owner or operator subject to the
emissions resulting from combustion of * * * * * provisions of this subpart shall cause to
fuels in the steam generating unit are Cogeneration means a facility that be discharged into the atmosphere from
subject to this subpart. (The combustion simultaneously produces both electrical any affected facility for which
turbine emissions are subject to subpart (or mechanical) and useful thermal construction, reconstruction, or
GG or KKKK, as applicable, of this part). energy from the same primary energy modification commenced before or on
* * * * * source. February 28, 2005, any gases that
5. Section 60.41a is amended by * * * * * contain particulate matter in excess of:
revising the definitions of ‘‘boiler Electric utility steam generating unit * * * * *
operating day’’ and ‘‘electric utility means any steam electric generating (c) On and after the date on which the
steam generating unit,’’ and by adding unit that is constructed for the purpose performance test required to be
in alphabetical order the definitions of of supplying more than one-third of its conducted under § 60.8 is completed, no
‘‘bituminous coal,’’ ‘‘coal,’’ potential electric output capacity and owner or operator subject to the
‘‘cogeneration,’’ ‘‘natural gas,’’ and more than 25 MW net-electrical output provisions of this subpart shall cause to
‘‘petroleum’’ to read as follows: to any utility power distribution system be discharged into the atmosphere from
for sale. For the purpose of this subpart, any affected facility for which
§ 60.41a Definitions. net-electric output is the gross electric construction, reconstruction, or
* * * * * sales to the utility power distribution modification commenced after February
28, 2005, any gases that contain contain sulfur dioxide in excess of 300 hourly gross energy output, measured
particulate matter in excess of 6.4 ng/J ng/J (2.4 lb/MWh) gross energy output, according to the provisions of
(0.015 lb/MMBtu) heat input derived based on a 30-day rolling average. § 60.47a(k).
from the combustion of solid, liquid, or 8. Section 60.44a is amended by * * * * *
gaseous fuel. revising paragraph (d) and adding (l) Compliance provisions for sources
7. Section 60.43a is amended by paragraph (e) to read as follows: subject to § 60.43a(i) or (j). The owner or
revising the introductory text in operator of an affected facility subject to
§ 60.44a Standard for nitrogen oxides.
paragraphs (a) and (b) and adding § 60.44a(i) or (j) shall calculate SO2
paragraphs (i) and (j) to read as follows: * * * * * emissions by multiplying the average
(d)(1) On and after the date on which
hourly SO2 output concentration,
§ 60.43a Standard for sulfur dioxide. the initial performance test required to
measured according to the provisions of
(a) On and after the date on which the be conducted under § 60.8 is completed,
§ 60.47a(b), by the average hourly flow
initial performance test required to be no new source owner or operator subject
rate, measured according to the
conducted under § 60.8 is completed, no to the provisions of this subpart shall
provisions of § 60.47a(l), and divided by
owner or operator subject to the cause to be discharged into the
the average hourly gross energy output,
provisions of this subpart shall cause to atmosphere from any affected facility for
measured according to the provisions of
be discharged into the atmosphere from which construction commenced after
§ 60.47a(k).
any affected facility which combusts July 9, 1997 but before or on February
10. Section 60.47a is amended by:
solid fuel or solid-derived fuel and for 28, 2005, any gases that contain nitrogen
a. Revising paragraph (b)(2);
which construction, reconstruction, or oxides (expressed as NO2) in excess of
b. Adding paragraph (b)(4);
modification commenced before or on 200 ng/J (1.6 lb/MWh) gross energy c. Revising paragraph (g); and
February 28, 2005, except as provided output, based on a 30-day rolling d. Adding new sentences at the end
under paragraphs (c), (d), (f) or (h) of average, except as provided under each of the following paragraphs: (i)(3),
this section, any gases that contain § 60.46a(k)(1). (i)(4), and (i)(5) to read as follows:
sulfur dioxide in excess of: (2) On and after the date on which the
* * * * * initial performance test required to be § 60.47a Emission monitoring.
(b) On and after the date on which the conducted under § 60.8 is completed, no * * * * *
initial performance test required to be existing source owner or operator (b) * * *
conducted under § 60.8 is completed, no subject to the provisions of this subpart (1) * * *
owner or operator subject to the shall cause to be discharged into the (2) For a facility that qualifies under
provisions of this subpart shall cause to atmosphere from any affected facility for the provisions of § 60.43a(d), (i), or (j),
be discharged into the atmosphere from which reconstruction commenced after sulfur dioxide emissions are only
any affected facility which combusts July 9, 1997 but before or on February monitored as discharged to the
liquid or gaseous fuels (except for liquid 28, 2005, any gases that contain nitrogen atmosphere.
or gaseous fuels derived from solid fuels oxides (expressed as NO2) in excess of (3) * * *
and as provided under paragraphs (e) or 65 ng/J (0.15 lb/MMBtu) heat input, (4) If the owner or operator has
(h) of this section) and for which based on a 30-day rolling average. installed a sulfur dioxide emission rate
(e) On and after the date on which the continuous emission monitoring system
construction, reconstruction, or
initial performance test required to be (CEMS) to meet the requirements of part
modification commenced before or on
conducted under § 60.8 is completed, no 75 of this chapter and is continuing to
February 28, 2005, any gases that
new source owner or operator subject to meet the ongoing requirements of part
contain sulfur dioxide in excess of:
the provisions of this subpart shall 75 of this chapter, that CEMS may be
* * * * * cause to be discharged into the
(i) On and after the date on which the used to meet the requirements of this
atmosphere from any affected facility for section, except that the owner or
performance test required to be which construction, reconstruction, or
conducted under § 60.8 is completed, no operator shall also meet the
modification commenced after February requirements of § 60.49a. Data reported
owner or operator subject to the 28, 2005, any gases that contain nitrogen
provisions of this subpart shall cause to to meet the requirements of § 60.49a
oxides (expressed as NO2) in excess of shall not include data substituted using
be discharged into the atmosphere from 130 ng/J (1.0 lb/MWh) gross energy
any affected facility for which the missing data procedures in subpart
output, based on a 30-day rolling D of part 75 of this chapter, nor shall the
construction, reconstruction, or average, except as provided under
modification commenced after February data have been bias adjusted according
§ 60.46a(k)(1). to the procedures of part 75 of this
28, 2005, any gases that contain sulfur 9. Section 60.46a is amended by
dioxide in excess of 250 ng/J (2.0 lb/ chapter.
revising paragraph (i) and adding
MWh) gross energy output, based on a paragraph (l) to read as follows: * * * * *
30-day rolling average, except as (g) The 1-hour averages required
provided under paragraph (j) of this § 60.46a Compliance provisions. under § 60.13(h) are expressed in ng/J
section. * * * * * (lb/million Btu) heat input and used to
(j) On and after the date on which the (i) Compliance provisions for sources calculate the average emission rates
performance test required to be subject to § 60.44a(d)(1) or (e). The under § 60.46a. The 1-hour averages are
conducted under § 60.8 is completed, no owner or operator of an affected facility calculated using the data points
owner or operator subject to the subject to § 60.44a(d)(1) or (e) shall required under § 60.13(h)(2).
provisions of this subpart shall cause to calculate NOX emissions by multiplying * * * * *
be discharged into the atmosphere from the average hourly NOX output (i) * * *
any affected facility that burns over 90 concentration, measured according to (3) For affected facilities burning only
percent (by heat input) coal refuse and the provisions of § 60.47a(c), by the fossil fuel, the span value for
for which construction, reconstruction, average hourly flow rate, measured continuous monitoring system for
or modification commenced after according to the provisions of measuring opacity is between 60 and 80
February 28, 2005, any gases that § 60.47a(l), and dividing by the average percent. For a continuous monitoring
system measuring nitrogen oxides, the 12. Section 60.41b is amended by 15. Section 60.48b is amended by
span value shall be determined using adding the definition of ‘‘cogeneration’’ revising paragraphs (b) introductory
one of the following procedures: in alphabetical order to read as follows: text, (d), and (e)(2), and adding a new
(i) For affected facilities that are not sentence at the end of paragraph (e)(3)
§ 60.41b Definitions. to read as follows:
subject to part 75 of this chapter, NOX
span values determined as follows: * * * * *
Cogeneration means a facility that § 60.48b Emission monitoring for
simultaneously produces both electrical particulate matter and nitrogen oxides.
Span value for
Fossil fuel nitrogen oxides (or mechanical) and useful thermal * * * * *
(ppm) energy from the same primary energy (b) Except as provided under
source. paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of this
Gas ............................... 500
Liquid ............................ 500 * * * * * section, the owner or operator of an
Solid .............................. 1,000 13. Section 60.43b is amended by affected facility subject to a nitrogen
Combination .................. 500 (x+y)+1,000z adding paragraph (h) to read as follows: oxides standard under 60.44b shall
comply with either paragraphs (b)(1) or
§ 60.43b Standard for particulate matter.
Where: (b)(2) of this section.
* * * * *
x is the fraction of total heat input (h) On or after the date on which the * * * * *
derived from gaseous fossil fuel, initial performance test is completed or (d) The 1-hour average nitrogen
y is the fraction of total heat input is required to be completed under 60.8, oxides emission rates measured by the
derived from liquid fossil fuel, and whichever date comes first, no owner or continuous nitrogen oxides monitor
z is the fraction of total heat input operator of an affected facility that required by paragraph (b) of this section
derived from solid fossil fuel. commenced construction, and required under § 60.13(h) shall be
(ii) For affected facilities that are also reconstruction, or modification after expressed in ng/J or lb/million Btu heat
subject to part 75 of this chapter, NOX February 28, 2005, and that combusts input and shall be used to calculate the
span values determined according to coal, oil, wood, a mixture of these fuels, average emission rates under § 60.44b.
section 2 in appendix A to part 75 of or a mixture of these fuels with any The 1-hour averages shall be calculated
this chapter may be used for the other fuels shall cause to be discharged using the data points required under
purposes of this subpart. into the atmosphere from that affected § 60.13(h)(2).
(4) * * * NOX span values that are facility any gases that contain (e) * * *
computed under part 75 of this chapter particulate matter emissions in excess of (2) For affected facilities combusting
and used for the purposes of this 13 ng/J (0.03 lb/million Btu) heat input. coal, oil, or natural gas, the span value
subpart shall be rounded off according Affected facilities subject to this for nitrogen oxides shall be determined
to section 2 in appendix A to part 75 of paragraph are also subject to paragraphs using one of the following procedures:
this chapter. (f) and (g) of this section.
(5) * * * Alternatively, if the affected 14. Section 60.47b is amended by (i) For affected facilities that are not
facility is also subject to part 75 of this revising paragraph (d) and adding a new subject to part 75 of this chapter, NOX
chapter, SO2 span values determined sentence at the end of paragraph (e)(3) span values determined as follows:
according to section 2 in appendix A to to read as follows:
Span value for
part 75 of this chapter may be used for Fossil fuel nitrogen oxides
§ 60.47b Emission monitoring for sulfur
the purposes of this subpart. dioxide (ppm)
* * * * * * * * * * Natural gas ................... 500
Subpart Db—[Amended] (d) The 1-hour average sulfur dioxide Oil ................................. 500
emission rates measured by the CEMS Coal .............................. 1,000
11. Section 60.40b is amended by required by paragraph (a) of this section Mixture .......................... 500(x+y)+1,000z
revising paragraph (i) to read: and required under § 60.13(h) is
expressed in ng/J or lb/million Btu heat where:
§ 60.40b Applicability and delegation of input and is used to calculate the
authority.
average emission rates under § 60.42(b). x is the fraction of total heat input
* * * * * Each 1-hour average sulfur dioxide derived from natural gas,
(i) Heat recovery steam generators that emission rate must be based on 30 or y is the fraction of total heat input
are associated with combined cycle gas more minutes of steam generating unit derived from oil, and
turbines and that meet the applicability operation. The hourly averages shall be z is the fraction of total heat input
requirements of subpart KKKK of this calculated according to § 60.13(h)(2). derived from coal.
part are not subject to this subpart. This Hourly sulfur dioxide emission rates
subpart will continue to apply to all are not calculated if the affected facility (ii) For affected facilities that are also
other heat recovery steam generators is operated less than 30 minutes in a subject to part 75 of this chapter, NOX
that are capable of combusting more given clock hour and are not counted span values determined according to
than 29 MW (100 million Btu/hour) heat toward determination of a steam section 2 in appendix A to part 75 of
input of fossil fuel. If the heat recovery generating unit operating day. this chapter may be used for the
steam generator is subject to this (e) * * * purposes of this subpart.
subpart, only emissions resulting from (3) * * * Alternatively, if the affected (3) * * * NOX span values that are
combustion of fuels in the steam facility is also subject to part 75 of this computed under part 75 of this chapter
generating unit are subject to this chapter, SO2 span values determined and used for the purposes of this
subpart. (The gas turbine emissions are according to section 2 in appendix A to subpart shall be rounded off according
subject to subpart GG or KKKK, as part 75 of this chapter may be used for to section 2 in appendix A to part 75 of
applicable, of this part). the purposes of this subpart. this chapter.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Subpart Dc—[Amended] into the atmosphere from that affected appendix B to part 75 of this chapter, instead
facility any gases that contain of the CD assessment procedures in section
16. Section 60.40c is amended by particulate matter emissions in excess of 4.1 of this appendix. If this option is selected,
adding paragraph (e) to read as follows: 13 ng/J (0.03 lb/million Btu) heat input. the data validation and out-of-control
provisions in sections 2.1.4 and 2.1.5 of
§ 60.40c Applicability and delegation of Affected facilities subject to this
appendix B to part 75 of this chapter shall
authority. paragraph, are also subject to the be followed instead of the excessive CD and
* * * * * requirements of paragraphs (c) and (d) out-of-control criteria in section 4.3 of this
(e) Heat recovery steam generators of this section. appendix.
that are associated with combined cycle 19. Section 60.46c is amended by
* * * * *
gas turbines and meet the applicability adding a new sentence at the end of 5.4 Alternative Data Accuracy
requirements of subpart KKKK of this paragraphs (c)(3) and (c)(4) to read as Assessment. If an affected facility is also
part are not subject to this subpart. This follows: subject to the monitoring and reporting
subpart will continue to apply to all * * * * * requirements of part 75 of this chapter, and
other heat recovery steam generators (c) * * * if emissions data are reported on a year-
that are capable of combusting more (3) * * * Alternatively, if the affected round basis under § 75.64 or § 75.74(b) of this
than or equal to 2.9 MW (10 million facility is also subject to part 75 of this chapter, the owner or operator may
Btu/hour) heat input of fossil fuel but chapter, SO2 span values determined implement the following alternative data
less than or equal to 29 MW (100 according to section 2 in appendix A to accuracy assessment procedures:
million Btu/hr) heat input of fossil fuel. 5.4.1 Linearity Checks. Instead of
part 75 of this chapter may be used for
performing the cylinder gas audits described
If the heat recovery steam generator is the purposes of this subpart. in section 5.1.2 of this appendix, the owner
subject to this subpart, only emissions (4) * * * Alternatively, for affected or operator may perform quarterly linearity
resulting from combustion of fuels in facilities that are also subject to part 75 checks of the SO2, NOX, CO2 and O2 monitors
the steam generating unit are subject to of this chapter, SO2 span values required by this part, in accordance with
this subpart. (The gas turbine emissions determined according to section 2 in section 2.2.1 of appendix B to part 75 of this
are subject to subpart GG or KKKK, as appendix A to part 75 of this chapter chapter. If this option is selected:
applicable, of this part). may be used for the purposes of this 5.4.1.1 The frequency of the linearity
17. Section 60.41c is amended by subpart. checks shall be as specified in section 2.2.1
revising the definition of coal to read as * * * * * of appendix B to part 75 of this chapter; and
follows: 5.4.1.2 The applicable linearity
Appendix B—[Amended] specifications in section 3.2 of appendix A to
§ 60.41c Definitions. part 75 of this chapter shall be met; and
Coal means all solid fuels classified as 20. Appendix B to part 60 is amended 5.4.1.3 The data validation and out-of-
anthracite, bituminous, subbituminous, by adding a new sentence at the end of control criteria in section 2.2.3 of appendix
or lignite by the American Society of section 8.3.1 in Performance B to part 75 of this chapter shall be followed
Testing and Materials in ASTM D388– Specification 2, to read as follows: instead of the excessive audit inaccuracy and
77, 90, 91, 95, or 98a, Standard Appendix B to Part 60—Performance out-of-control criteria in section 5.2 of this
appendix; and
Specification for Classification of Coals Specifications
5.4.1.4 The grace period provisions in
by Rank (IBR—see § 60.17), coal refuse, * * * * * section 2.2.4 of appendix B to part 75 of this
and petroleum coke. Coal-derived Performance Specification 2—Specifications chapter shall apply.
synthetic fuels derived from coal for the and Test Procedures for SO2 and NOX 5.4.2 Relative Accuracy Test Audits.
purposes of creating useful heat, Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems in Instead of following the procedures in
including but not limited to solvent Stationary Sources section 5.1.1 of this appendix, the owner or
refined coal, gasified coal, coal-oil * * * * * operator may perform RATA of the NOX-
mixtures, and coal-water mixtures, are 8.3.1 * * * Alternatively, the CD test may diluent or SO2-diluent CEMS required by this
also included in this definition for the be conducted over 7 consecutive unit part (or both), in accordance with section 2.3
purposes of this subpart. operating days, rather than 7 consecutive of appendix B to part 75 of this chapter. If
calendar days. this option is selected for a particular CEMS:
* * * * * 5.4.2.1 The frequency of the RATA shall
18. Section 60.43c is amended by * * * * * be as specified in section 2.3.1 of appendix
adding paragraph (e) to read as follows: B to part 75; and
Appendix F—[Amended]
5.4.2.2 The applicable relative accuracy
§ 60.43c Standard for particulate matter. 21. Appendix F to part 60 is amended specifications shown in Figure 2 in appendix
* * * * * by adding sections 4.5 and 5.4, to read B to part 75 of this chapter shall be met; and
(e) On or after the date on which the as follows: 5.4.2.3 The data validation and out-of-
initial performance test is completed or control criteria in section 2.3.2 of appendix
is required to be completed under Appendix F to Part 60—Quality Assurance
B to part 75 of this chapter shall be followed
Procedures
§ 60.8, whichever date comes first, no instead of the excessive audit inaccuracy and
owner or operator of an affected facility * * * * * out-of-control criteria in section 5.2 of this
that commenced construction, 4.5 Alternative CD Assessment. For an appendix; and
affected facility that is also subject to the 5.4.2.4 The grace period provisions in
reconstruction, or modification after monitoring and reporting requirements of section 2.3.3 of appendix B to part 75 of this
February 28, 2005, and that combusts part 75 of this chapter, the owner or operator chapter shall apply.
coal, oil, wood, a mixture of these fuels, may implement the daily calibration error
or a mixture of these fuels with any test and calibration adjustment procedures [FR Doc. 05–2996 Filed 2–25–05; 8:45 am]
other fuels shall cause to be discharged described in sections 2.1.1 and 2.1.3 of BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

Proposed Rule: Air Pollution Standards of Performance For New Stationary Sources: Industrial-Commercial-Institutional Steam Generating Units

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Proposed Rule: Air Pollution Standards of Performance For New Stationary Sources: Industrial-Commercial-Institutional Steam Generating Units

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Monday,

February 28, 2005

Category NAICS code SIC code Examples of potentially regulated entities

95 percent 1 .......................................................................... 75–250 232 1.68 7,220 6,320–12,060

30–100 .............................................. Gas ................................................... 61 0 2.42 ........................

Total ........................................... ........................................................... 99 253 5.02 ........................

Annual Total capital Annualized cost

PM .......................................................................................................................................... 530 $10.4 $2.2

1. PM Impacts performance level needed to comply The nationwide increases in total

Db ......................................................................................... 13 888 2.11 2,372 2,352–2,577

TABLE 5.—ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF INDUSTRIAL UNITS

Secondary air impacts

Db ................................................................................................. 0–83 12–50 0–34 1–33 0–2 1,482 4,063,397

[In parts per million]

Span value for Span value for

Gas .......................................................................................................................................................... (1) 500

Вам также может понравиться