The Petroleum Refinery Sector Rule: What’s all the fuss about and what are th...
Four Rules Update
1. Four Rules Update
John P. Egan
All4 Inc.
All4 Inc. Air Quality Training Seminar
Montgomery, AL
December 7, 2010
Your environmental compliance is clearly our business.
3. Four Rules Update Agenda
Regulatory background
Definition of solid waste
Commercial and industrial solid waste
incinerator (CISWI) rule
Major and area source boiler MACT rules
What next
3
4. Regulatory Background
Boiler MACT:
• CAA §112 requires MACT for source
categories
• Part 63 NESHAP, Subpart DDDDD
promulgated for major source ICI Boilers
September 2004
• Original rule compliance date September
2007
• Regulated PM (or TSM), HCl, CO, and Hg
4
5. Regulatory Background
CISWI:
• CAA §129 requires MACT type standards
for CISWI units
• Part 60 NSPS/EGs, Subparts CCCC and
DDDD promulgated for CISWI units
December 2000
• Original rule compliance date December
2005 or 3 years after SIP approval
• Regulated Cd, CO, D/F, HCl, Pb, Hg, NOX,
PM, SO2, and opacity
5
6. Regulatory Background
Definition of Solid Waste (DSW):
• Following promulgation of 2000 CISWI rule
U.S. EPA granted a petition for
reconsideration related to key definitions that
limited the universe of CISWI units
• CISWI rule defined commercial and industrial
waste as solid waste combusted in an
enclosed device…without energy recovery
• EPA accepted a voluntary remand of the
CISWI rule without vacatur
6
7. Regulatory Background
DSW (cont’d):
• September 2005 U.S. EPA issued a final
“CISWI Definitions Rule” to respond to
petition and solidify exclusion for units that
combust waste with heat recovery
• November 2005 environmental groups file
a petition for review of the CISWI
Definitions Rule
7
8. Regulatory Background
July 2007 U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
for District of Columbia remanded and
vacated the Boiler MACT and CISWI
Definitions rules
Yikes!!!
8
9. Regulatory Background
June 2010 U.S. EPA formally publishes
proposed new regulations to:
• Respond to 2000 voluntary remand of CISWI
Rule
• Respond to 2007 court ordered remand and
vacatur of Boiler MACT and CISWI
Definitions rules
• Address the 5-year §129 technology review
• Establish area source boiler MACT/GACT as
required by CAA §112
9
10. DSW Proposed Rule
New RCRA Section 40 CFR Part 241 –
“Identification of Non-Hazardous Secondary
Materials That Are Solid Wastes When Used As
Fuels or Ingredients In Combustion Units”
Purpose to clarify:
• Solid Wastes
CAA Section 129 (CISWI)
• Legitimate Fuels
CAA Section 112 (Boiler MACT)
10
14. DSW Sufficiently Processed
Remove or Destroy Contaminants
Improve Fuel Characteristics
Improve As-Fired Energy Content
Improve Ingredient Characteristics
Minimal operations like shredding do
not constitute sufficient processing
Self Implementing
14
15. DSW Legitimacy Criteria -- Fuels
Valuable commodity
Storage period
Management consistent with an analogous
fuel
Protective of the environment
Meaningful heat value (>5,000 Btu/lb)
Combustion unit recovers energy
Comparable or lower contaminant levels
15
18. CISWI Section 129 Rule Basics
All sources (size does not matter)
Standards set for opacity and nine (9)
pollutants:
• Cd, CO, PCDD/PCDF, HCl, Pb, Hg, NOX,
PM/PM2.5, and SO2
Operator training
Siting Requirements
Modification per 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart A
18
19. CISWI Applicability/Subcategories
Determined by the definition of solid
waste
Incinerators
Energy Recovery Units
Waste-Burning Kilns
Burn-Off Oven
Small Remote Incinerators
19
20. CISWI Exclusions & Exemptions
Qualifying Small Power Production
Facilities
Qualifying Cogeneration Facilities
Metals Recovery Facilities
Hazardous Waste Combustion Units
Other previous exemptions have
been removed
20
21. CISWI EG Implementation Schedule
Promulgated Rule Federal Plan
Published in Federal Compliance Date
Register
State Plans due Federal Plan Federal Plan
to EPA Proposed Promulgated
Latest Compliance
Date
Year -1 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
Proposed Rule
Published in EPA Approves Compliance Date
Federal Register State Plan (≤ 3 years from
(June 4, 2010) (moving target) EPA approval)
21
22. CISWI NSPS Implementation Schedule
Promulgated Rule
Published in Federal
Register
Year -1 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
Proposed Rule
Published in
Federal Register Compliance date
(June 4, 2010) for New Units
(6 months from
promulgation)
“New Unit” Date
22
23. CISWI - What should you be doing?
Educate Participate in Potential Retrofit/ Compliance
yourself. State Plan Monitor Upgrade Testing
Consider process. Activities. Activities. Federal Plan
Commenting. Compliance Date
Promulgated Rule
Published in State Plans due Federal Plan Federal Plan
Federal Register to EPA Proposed Promulgated
Latest Compliance
Date
Year -1 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
EPA Approves Compliance Date
Develop State Plan (≤ 3 years from
Proposed Rule Compliance (moving target) EPA approval)
Published in Strategy.
Federal Register Potential AQ
Understand Construction
Final Rule. Permitting Activities.
23
24. Boiler MACT Applicability
Major Source / Area Source
Boiler or Process Heater
Not Specifically Exempt
Combust Traditional Fuels:
• Fossil Fuels
• Fossil Fuel Derivatives
• Clean Cellulosic Biomass
24
30. Boiler MACT Compliance Strategy
Major vs. Minor
Emission Averaging
Fuel Sampling
Fuel Switching
Health-Based Compliance Alternative
(HBCA)?
30
31. Boiler MACT Emission Averaging
PM, HCl, or Hg
Affected Existing Boiler and Same
Subcategory
• 10% Discount Factor
Common Stack Provisions
Emission Averaging Plan
31
32. Boiler MACT Fuel Sampling
Available for Hg & HCl
Determine “Worst-Case” Fuel Mixture
Statistical Analyses
Recordkeeping
Fuel Sampling & Analysis Plan
32
33. Boiler MACT Plans
Emission Averaging Plan
Site-Specific Test Plan
Site-Specific Monitoring Plan
Fuel Sampling & Analysis Plan
Energy Assessment
33
34. Boiler MACT Energy Assessment
Area and Major Sources
Cost-Effective Conservation Measures
What Equipment?
Energy Management Program (Major
Only)
34
35. Boiler SSM Plans & Reports
No SSM Exemptions
No SSM Plan Requirement
No Periodic SSM Plan Report
35
37. What Next?
U.S. EPA under court ordered deadline
to finalize CISWI and Boiler MACT
rules by December 16, 2010.
In response to comments on proposed
rules U.S. EPA sent out additional
ICRs.
Court deadline for final rules extended
to January 14, 2011.
37
38. Latest Info
Some roll back expected on stringency of
standards.
No word yet on final approach for defining
solid waste – clarifying boiler vs. CISWI.
U.S. EPA to provide a status report this
afternoon at AWMA info exchange.
38
Editor's Notes
JPE
JPE
JPE
JPE
JPE
JPE
The CAA states that the term solid waste shall have the same meaning as established under RCRA. U.S. EPA currently believes that if a nonhazardous material is not a ‘‘solid waste’’ under RCRA and the material is burned for fuel value, then, under the Court’s decision, the combustion source should not be regulated under Section 129 of the CAA. In U.S. EPA’s view, the key issue in responding to the Court’s decision was to establish what non-hazardous secondary materials constitute ‘‘solid waste’’ under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) – hence the DSW rule.On June 4 2010, U.S. EPA published the DSW rule. Under RCRA. The CAA defers to the meaning of “solid waste” under RCRA to define solid waste under the CAA. Many facilities that operate sources using alternative or non-traditional fuels (e.g., cement kilns) are currently subject to standards developed under Section 112 of the CAA. Such facilities that currently use an alternative or non-traditional fuel that would now be classified as solid waste in accordance with the DSW rule under RCRA Subtitle D would now be subject to regulation under Section 129 of the CAA as a CISWI unit. For example, if an existing boiler or process heater is utilizing an alternative fuel that is ultimately determined to be a RCRA Subtitle D solid waste, then that unit would become subject to an applicable Section 129 standard, in this case, the CISWI rule. By default, the DSW rule becomes the determining factor. If, through the case-by-case waste determination process, a facility can demonstrate that their alternative fuel is not a solid waste, they could avoid the CISWI rule and be subject to the applicable Boiler MACT rule. U.S. EPA has proposed revisions to the CISWI rule to accommodate the expected migration of new categories of CISWI sources combusting alternative fuels that are now solid waste.
Being regulated as CAA §129 source has similarities to being regulated as a CAA §112 source however there are quite a few differences. Read on and learn nine (9) aspects of the CAA §129 rules that differ from CAA §112.Unlike 112 MACT standards, 129 standards apply to the specific source category, regardless of the size of the unit or the facility. Numerical emission limitations are established for opacity and nine (9) pollutants including particulate matter (total and fine), sulfur dioxide, hydrogen chloride, oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide, lead, cadmium, mercury, and dioxins and dibenzofurans.The emission limits are established in a floor setting exercise based on the top performing 12% for existing sources and the best performing similar unit for new sources.Operator Training requirements, initial and continuing, are specifically defined.Siting requirements are required for new units to minimize, on a site specific basis, to the maximum extent practicable, potential risks to public health or the environment.Sources subject to §129(a) and §111 shall obtain and operate pursuant to a Title V Operating permit (regardless of prior operating permit status).NSPS and EG are to be reviewed and revised at five year intervals.“New” source requirements can be triggered by a modification as defined in 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart A.
KMG: Thanks Roy. As Roy mentioned earlier, and as Mike and John covered last week, the key linchpin applicability lies with the Definition of Solid Waste so we won’t cover that in any more detail at this point. Let’s jump right into the proposed rule and note a few differences from the 2000 CISWI rule. The initial 2000 CISWI Rule only regulated Incinerators. EPA did not subcategorize. EPA’s June 4, 2010 proposed rule regulates 5 subcategories. Let’s take a few minutes and walk through each of them.Incinerators – Incinerator means any furnace used in the process of combusting solid waste (as that term is defined by the Administrator pursuant to Subtitle D of RCRA) for the purpose of reducing the volume of the waste by removing combustible matter. Incinerator designs include single chamber, two-chamber and cyclonic burn barrels. EPA estimates that there are 28 subject existing incinerators. Where there are differences in the # of units based on EPA’s proposed approach vs. the “Alternative approach,” I’ll point them out.Energy Recovery Units Energy recovery unit means a combustion unit combusting solid waste (as that term is defined by the Administrator pursuant to Subtitle D of RCRA) for energy recovery. Energy recovery units include units that would be considered boilers and process heaters if they did not combust solid waste. EPA estimates there are 40 energy recovery units under the proposed approach. Note that under the “alternative approach” there are 430.Waste-Burning Kilns.We need to define two terms here. First let’s define kiln.Kiln means an oven or furnace, including any associated preheater or precalciner devices, used for processing a substance by burning, firing or drying. Kilns include cement kilns, that produce clinker by heating limestone and other materials for subsequent production of Portland cement and lime kilns, that produce quicklime by calcination of limestone. Nest, let’s define “waste burning” kiln.Waste-burning kiln means a kiln that is heated, in whole or in part, by combusting solid waste (as that term is defined by the Administrator pursuant to Subtitle D of RCRA). EPA estimates there are 53 of these under the proposed approach and a few more under the alternative approach.Burn-off oven means any rack reclamation unit, part reclamation unit, or drum reclamation unit. EPA estimates there are 36 of these.Small Remote IncineratorsSmall, remote incinerator means an incinerator that combusts solid waste (as that term is defined by the Administrator pursuant to Subtitle D of RCRA) and has the capacity to combust 1 ton per day or less solid waste and is more than 50 miles driving distance to the nearest municipal solid waste landfill. EPA estimates there are 19 remote incinerator.
KMG:Before we get into the meat and bones of the proposed rule, we need to address exclusions and exemptions.In the 2000 CISWI rule, there were 15 types of units that were exempted from regulation under CISWI. EPA is proposing to remove some of the exemptions contained in the 2000 CISWI rule and are maintaining the statutory exemptions and the exemptions for units included in the scope of other CAA Section 129 standards. Qualifying small power producers and qualifying cogeneration units are not CISWI units as they are expressly exempted from the definition of a solid waste incinerator in the CAA, Section 129. Small power producers are defined as units that produce <80 MW at the site and use solely biomass, waste, renewable resources, geothermal resources, or any combination thereof. Wastes include anthracite refuse containing <6,000 Btu per pound heat content, bituminous coal refuse containing <9,500 Btu per pound heat content, used tires, plastic materials, and petroleum coke. Qualifying cogeneration units are facilities that produce electric energy and steam or heat which is used for industrial, commercial, heating, or cooling purposes. A qualifying cogen must meet minimum useful thermal energy output requirements based on the type of unit.Metals recovery facilities, such as primary or secondary smelters, which combust waste for the primary purpose of recovering metals are also excluded as are Hazardous Waste Combustion units that are permitted under the Solid Waste Disposal Act.EPA is proposing to remove other exemptions, including the 2000 CISWI exemption for units that burn greater than 30 percent MSW with a capacity to burn less than 35 tons per day of MSW or refuse derived fuel.EPA proposed to no longer exclude combustion units that recover energy for a useful purpose (e.g. units that would be boilers if they did not burn solid waste) and EPA removes exemptions for:Ag waste incineratorsCyclonic barrel burnersCement KilnsBurn-off ovens &Chemical recovery unitsLab analysis units
KMG:We just completed talking about timing of the rule but there are other timing and schedule considerations that we need to discuss. Let’s start with the emission guidelines.As we’ve mentioned before, June 4th was the official proposal date in the FR. EPA is under a court ordered deadline to promulgate the final rule by December 16, 2010. The date that the final rule is promulgated in the FR is key! For simple math let’s assume a January 1, 2011 promulgation date. The state plans that we’ve been speaking of are due to EPA 1 year from the date the final rule is promulgated in the FR. At this point, the EPA regional offices, with assistance from headquarters, review the state plans. EPA estimates that it takes about 6 months for approval of a state plan, if it’s in “good” shape. Note on the figure that we show an approximate date when EPA approves the state plan, about half way into year 2. It’s important to note that states have some flexibility with the compliance date for existing sources. …existing CISWI need to demonstrate compliance with the amended standards as expeditiously as practicable after approval of a state plan, but no later than three years from the date of approval of a state plan. Some states my be more aggressive with their compliance date so it’s something worth keeping an eye on when the time comes.Now let’s talk about the Federal Plan. EPA proposes a Federal Plan under 40 CFR Part 62. The Federal Plan will apply to any existing sources in either (1) states that decide not to revise their state plan and request delegation of the Federal Plan or (2) states in which a state plan has been submitted by not approved for some reason or another (i.e., EPA is behind schedule, all the required components of the plan are not present ,etc.). EPA typically proposes the Federal Plan in year 2 or 3. Similar to other proposed rules, there is a comment period and then EPA finalizes the Federal Plan. The compliance date for the Federal Plan is 5 years from the promulgation of the EG in the Federal Register. Let’s transition to the NSPS implementation schedule and then I want to go back and to the concept of the EG implementation schedule and talk in more detail about the specific things you should be considering.
KMG:You’ll notice as we look at this slide which illustrates the NSPS Implementation schedule, there are not as many details. CISWI units that commence construction after June 4, 2010 or that are reconstructed or modified six months or more after the date ofpromulgation of any revised standards would have to meet the revised “more stringent” NSPS emission limits being added to the subpart CCCC NSPS within six months after the promulgation date of the amendments or upon startup, whichever is later.
KMG:We just outlined the Emission Guideline Implementation process. Perhaps you took a deep breath and thought, I have years before I really need to consider compliance with the revised standards? While at face value that sounds like a reasonable approach, there really is a lot of work for you to do. Let’s walk through the activities that should be on your radar.First. As we’ve been talking about in this webinar series, consider commenting and taking part in the public process afforded to you. As we mentioned before comments are due July 17, 2010 unless EPA extends the deadline. Next, when the rule becomes final, understand what your compliance obligations are and start to develop a compliance strategy. At the state level, make contact with your State Plan contact. Understand their process – when will the plan be draft? Are there any elements of the state plan that will be more stringent than the EG? What is their planned timeline (i.e., will they be proposing to allow the full 3 years for compliance or will they be proposing a shorter timeframe)? And if so, perhaps meeting with the state agency is a good idea.As you’ve developed your strategy it will become clear what APC retrofits and monitoring changes need to be made. These activities very well may trigger air quality construction permitting. Note that in these cases, you’ll want to leave a good year for development of the application, submittal to the state agency, receipt of the draft permit, commenting on the draft permit and finally receipt of the final permit. Recall that for these states you will need to have your permit in had prior to “Commencing construction”. Next let’s consider retrofit and monitoring upgrades. Depending on the extent of the retrofits, you’ll need to factor in quite a bit of time for the retrofit activities, including ordering equipment, arranging for downtime (particularly if you need to arrange for alternative disposal options) and installing new or modifying APC equipment, and troubleshooting APC and monitoring equipment upon startup.Once the retrofit activities are complete, compliance testing must be performed. Compliance testing activities include selecting the developing the test protocol, submitting to and getting approval from the state agency, notifying the state agency prior to the test, testing, reviewing the draft test report and submitting the final test report to the state agency and EPA.All of these activities must be completed prior to the final compliance date. Note that in the instance of a state not developing a state Plan or a state falling behind in the development of a plan or EPA falling behind in their approval of a state plan, the Federal Plan applies and the final compliance date is at year 5.
Introduction:As John mentioned, there is vast array of units affected by the Proposed Major Source and Area Source Boiler MACT meaning that there is a lot of diversity on this webinar.So to discuss at the Major Source and Area Source today,I will be focusing on the Major Source and Dave will be chiming in as it applies to the Area Source. There is a lot of overlap between the two (2) rules and value in understanding how both were drafted.Cover a lot ground with the numerous emission standards, compliance options, and monitoring approaches.Not going to get into the numbers more so the process for complying, as well as items that you may want to consider commenting.Three (3) parts of the rule to review (due to inconsistencies)PreambleRule itselfTables in the back of the rule Tried to sort through inconsistencies in presentation and hope that these inconsistencies are address by EPA prior to publishing the draft rules.Major SourceA major source of HAP emissions is any stationary source or group of stationary sources located within a contiguous area and under common control that emits or has the potential to emit considering controls 10 tons per year or more of any HAP or 25 tons per year or more of any combination of HAP.Boiler or Process HeaterBoiler are an enclosed device using controlled flame combustion and having the primary purpose of recovering thermal energy in the form of steam or hot water.Process heaters are units in which the combustion gases do not come into contact with the process material or gases in the combustion chamber (e.g., indirect fired).ExemptionsEGURecovery BoilersTemporary BoilersMACT RegulatedCombust Traditional Fuels under the Proposed BoilerMACTAs John mentioned EPA’s action address four (4) regulationsMajor Source Boiler MACTArea Source Boiler MACTCommercial/Industrial Solid Waste Incinerators (CISWI)Added a new part to Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) that dealt with use of solid waste as fuel or ingredient in combustion units The proposed definition of SW underRCRAwould significantly narrow what are considered traditional fuels.We will get into littlemore on that later.DMC Area Sources No TV Permit.Could affect hotels, churches, any installation with a boiler > 10MMBtu. Exempt < 10 MMBtu gas-fired area source only.
What is regulated?Boiler MACT regulates HAP. The five (5) categories of HAPS regulated are:Mercury (Hg)Separated from Metallic HAP due to chemical characteristics and control technology.Non-Mercury Metallic HAP Non-Mercury Metallic HAP are particulate bound. If you control PM you control Non-Mercury Metallic HAP EPA did not include the ability to measure TSM directly as in the vacated Boiler MACT EPA chose PM instead of measuring specific metallic HAP since different fuels do not emit the same type metallic HAP but emit PM that included metallic HAP.Compliance options such as either TSM or PM and fuel samplingNon-Metallic Inorganic HAPPrimary Non-Metallic Inorganic HAP emitted are acid gases (i.e., Cl2, HF, HCN) with HCl being the highest. All acids gases have similar control technologies.Non-Dioxin Organic HAPMethod of control (i.e., good combustion or oxidation catalyst) is the same. THC also considered more CEMS installed and data available for CO.Dioxins/Furans (D/F) CO not a surrogate since it can be formed outside the combustion unit.
DMC
CategoriesCoal - 10% heat input from coal on annual basis (calendar year? monthly rolling average?) Biomass - ≥ 10% heat input from biomass and < 10% heat input from coal on annual basis Liquid - ≥ 10% heat input from liquid and < 10% heat input from solid fuel (biomass AND coal?) on annual basis Gaseous - combusts gaseous fuel and < 10% liquid OR solid heat input on annual basis (includes metal process furnaces) Subcategories Pulverized coal units Coal stokers Coal fluidized bed Biomass stokers Biomass fluidized bed Biomass Suspension burners/ Dutch Ovens Biomass fuel cells Liquid combustors Natural gas/refinery gas Other gasMetal process furnace Boiler <10 MMBtu tune-up every two (2) years
Coal means all solid fuels classifiable as anthracite,bituminous, sub-bituminous, or lignite by the American Societyfor Testing and Materials in ASTM D388–991.1 , “StandardSpecification for Classification of Coals by Rank1 ”(incorporated by reference, see §63.14(b)), coal refuse, andpetroleum coke. Synthetic fuels derived from coal for thepurpose of creating useful heat including but not limited to,solvent-refined coal, coal-oil mixtures, and coal-watermixtures, for the purposes of this subpart. Coal derived gasesare excluded from this definition.Biomass fuel means but is not limited to, wood residue, andwood products (e.g., trees, tree stumps, tree limbs, bark,lumber, sawdust, sanderdust, chips, scraps, slabs, millings, andshavings); animal manure, including litter and other beddingmaterials; vegetative agricultural and silvicultural materials,such as logging residues (slash), nut and grain hulls and chaff(e.g., almond, walnut, peanut, rice, and wheat), bagasse,orchard prunings, corn stalks, coffee bean hulls and grounds.This definition of biomass fuel is not intended to suggest thatthese materials are or not solid waste.Liquid fuel includes, but is not limited to, distillateoil, residual oil, on-spec used oil, and biodiesel.Gaseous fuel includes, but is not limited to, natural gas,process gas, landfill gas, coal derived gas, refinery gas, andbiogas. Blast furnace gas is exempted from this definition.Syn Gas
Although we mentioned that we are not going to be focused on the numbers especially with all of the different Boiler MACT emissions standards depending on fuel fired and design type of your boiler. We wanted to give a quick comparison between the some of the Proposed Boiler MACT and Vacated Boiler MACT emission standards.You can find the emission limits for your boiler or process heater in Tables 1 & 2 of the Proposed Boiler MACT.As you can see, for a new oil and coal boiler the emissions standards are considerably lower in the Proposed Boiler MACT. Now look, we choose this example to be as dramatic as possible however across the board the emission standards in the Proposed Boiler MACT are considerably lower than the Vacated Boiler MACT.You can bet that these emission limits will be subject to a lot of comments when the draft rule is published.Similar to the hospital, medical, and infectious waste incineration (HMIWI) NSPS and emission guidelines proposed in 2009. Effective commenting on the draft rule and independent statistical analyses of how EPA determined the emission limits, resulted in revised emission limits that were higher and more representative of data set used.Although you may have never heard of the HMIWI rule (because it affects less than 100 facilities nationwide), the commenter's included trade organizations from (paper) AF&PA, (Boiler Owners) CIBO, & (Cement Association) PCA due to the methodology that EPA was using and the precedence it could set.These comments focused specifically on the statistical approach that EPA utilized as well as the accuracy of the test data used to develop the emission standards.For those of you who were fortunate enough to be part of EPA’s Information Collection Request (ICR) that required emissions data to be collected for the purposes of developing the MACT Standards, you got the opportunity to submit the test results using EPA’s Electronic Reporting Tool.How many of you want back to check the data after EPA imported it to their database. We have for the clients we submitted the data for, and found that changes in the data specifically the emission rates required correction.Also, there is still activity from industry around the creation of a “super” facility for the HMIWI. EPA evaluated data and established the emission limits on a pollutant-by-pollutant basis. Thus, not one of the top performing units evaluated, would not meet the emission standards established for all pollutants.
Up till now we talked about:Applicability (Who Affected?)Regulated PollutantsEmission Limits (or at least where you can find them)Now, how are you going to demonstrate compliance? What are the compliance options available under the proposed rule? And what compliance options are no longer available?The list of available compliance strategies shown here is and is not complete. When I say that what I mean is the propose rule has only been available for review for a few weeks. Industry is just starting to absorb the rule and starting to become creative with their compliance strategy. Especially considering all of the possible scenarios within the available compliance strategies listed.Now is the perfect time to start evaluating your compliance strategy while the rule has not yet been published. This would allow you to:Seek clarification on specific provisions through comment ORComment on something that maybe in a the way of your compliance strategy and try to justify it’s removal or rewording.The compliance options that you may want to consider are:Become a Minor Source for those who would not have issue with limiting you facility to less than 10 tpy of a single HAP or 25 tpy of combined HAPs.Utilize emission averaging. Which allows you to “bubble” affected existing sources in the same subcategory to take advantage of lower emitting units by averaging emissions from two (2) or more units.You maybe able to demonstrate compliance using fuel sampling. If the regulated pollutant (specifically HCl and Hg) are not present in the fuel (or in concentrations lower than emission standards) than emission testing can be eliminated.You may want to switch fuels to burn more of one fuel or less of another to have similar subcategories so you can take advantage of the emission average provision. Maybe you stop burning a fuel altogether if it could be solid waste.Maybe (and it is a big maybe) you can utilize the Health-Based Compliance Alternative if it becomes available in the final rule.Before we talk a little more about the specifics of the some of the compliance strategies, Dave is going to fill us in on what the Health-Based Compliance Alternative is and the status Health-Based Compliance Alternative in the proposed BoilerMACT.
Some particulars to the compliance options available under the proposed rule,PM, HCl, or Hg Allows you to take advantage of “over control” of an existing units in the same categories. Affected Existing Boiler No new boilersSame Subcategory FuelDesign10% Discount Factor Common Stack ProvisionsAffected unit and non affected unitSingle stack same as single boiler8.Demonstrate Compliance Monthly Emission Averaging Plan
Recordkeeping – Daily fuels records for each type of fuel combusted to demonstrate that all fuel types and mixtures would result in lower emissions.
Site-Specific Test Plan – Test Protocol
DMC
One thing notably missing from the plan requiremntsSSM ExemptionsCourts concluded that the CAA did not intend for SSM exemptions; thus the emission standards apply at all times.EPA did not establish different standards for startup and shutdown and notes in preamble that theProposed emission standards have daily or monthly averages.Boiler (especially solid fuel-fired) do not startup or shutdown that often (more than once per day).CEMS data used to develop standards include periods of startup and shutdown (CO only).EPA did not establish different standards for malfunctions and notes in preamble thatMalfunctions are not a distinct operating mode; therefore emission do not be included in the proposed emission standards.Malfunctions are not part of “best performing” source since the goal of best performing sources are to avoid malfunctions and are not considered in the proposed emission standards.SSM Plan RequirementRequirement in Table 10 for §63.6(e)(3) indicates non-applicability.The way SSM worked.Now EPA will base enforcement on theWas it really a malfunction (i.e., sudden, infrequent, not reasonably preventable)Facility’s good faith effort to minimize emissions during malfunctionsReview of corrective/preventative maintenance activitiesSSM Plans (just the malfunctions) may be more important now to define corrective actions and ensure recordkeeping for possible enforcement.Decision may have to be made to curtail operations or cease operation until a malfunction is corrected.ReportingImmediate SSM Plan Reports (if you do not follow your plan) are required in Table 9. (OVERSIGHT).
Determine the worst case fuel for HCl and Hg.Evaluate your control devices.Conducted stack testing during these conditions for HCl and/or Hg.Limits set for Cl- and Hg content.Testing must be conducted at the maximum normal operating load while burning the type of fuel or mixture of fuels that has the highest content of chlorine and mercury, and you must demonstrate initial compliance and establish your operating limits based on these tests. These requirements could result in the need to conduct more than one performance test.HCl (M26 or 26A)Hg (M29 (40 CFR 61 M101A) or Ontario-Hydro (ASTM D6784-02))PM (M5 of 17)D/F (M23)
