INDUSTRIAL BOILER MACT RULE (Title 40 CFR 63 Subpart DDDDD)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Cathy Beahm Technical Assistance Specialist NH DES, Air Resources
Advertisements

Municipal Solid Waste Landfill NSPS/EG Requirements Illinois EPA Bureau of Air Mike Davidson 217/
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Municipal Solid Waste Landfills.
METAL COIL SURFACE COATING MACT OVERVIEW 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART SSSS May CFR PART 63, SUBPART SSSS May 2006.
METAL CAN SURFACE COATING MACT OVERVIEW 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June 2006.
METAL COIL SURFACE COATING MACT QUESTION & ANSWERS
METAL CAN SURFACE COATING MACT COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June 2006 June CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June 2006 June 2006.
METAL FURNITURE SURFACE COATING MACT COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE
METAL COIL SURFACE MACT COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART SSSS May 2006 May 2006.
METAL CAN SURFACE COATING MACT FACILITY INSPECTIONS 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June, CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June, 2006.
METAL FURNITURE SURFACE COATING MACT QUESTION & ANSWERS 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART RRRR July 2006.
IRON & STEEL FOUNDRY MACT QUESTION & ANSWERS
IRON & STEEL FOUNDRY MACT COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE
METAL CAN SURFACE COATING MACT QUESTION & ANSWERS 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June, CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June, 2006.
Impacts of the New Boiler MACT Rules Les Oakes King & Spalding.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency April 13, 2011 Final Rules to Reduce Air Toxics from Boilers.
Boiler GACT Update Georgia AWMA Conference
Harmonization of Part 60 and Part 75 CEM Requirements Robert Vollaro
Harmonization of Parts 60 and 75
EPA Proposed Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule.
EPA Proposed Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule.
RICE MACT and Oil Analysis
NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR CHROMIUM EMISSIONS FROM HARD & DECORATIVE CHROMIUM ELECTROPLATING & CHROMIUM ANODIZING TANKS.
Definition of Solid Waste Final Rule Public Meeting Charlotte Mooney Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
New Federal Regulations for Internal Combustion Engines Doug Parce.
Recent EPA Regulation Development Presented by Bill Luthans to the 56 th Meeting of the Joint Advisory Committee Meeting for the Improvement of Air Quality.
Louisiana Department of EnvironmentalQuality LDEQ CAM Plan Overview LDEQ’s 27 th Annual Conference on the Environment Cajundome Convention Center Lafayette,
MCIC Workshop 2012 Complying with NC Air Quality Regulations Boiler MACT/GACT and 112j Steve Schliesser Division of Air Quality Environmental Engineer.
Wes Thornhill, Chief Industrial Chemicals Section Air Division
State Implementation of Risk-Based MACT Exemptions Region 4 Permit Managers Meeting Rhonda B. Thompson, P.E., Director Engineering Services Division SC.
Boiler MACT and Other Air Developments 2011 Southern Section AWMA Conference Callaway Gardens, GA Boiler MACT and Other Air Developments 2011 Southern.
Division of Air Quality Update on EPA Boiler MACT Rules Steve Schliesser Environmental Engineer March 2012.
April 15, 2015 Betty Gatano, P.E. Permitting Section North Carolina Division of Air Quality, Raleigh, NC (919)
1 Year in Review: Clean Air Act Presented by: Tom Wood Stoel Rives LLP October 8, 2010 Things Are Getting Really Complicated.
EPA Regulations On Electric Utility Generating Units (EGU)
A History and Status of CEMS Applications in USEPA Regulations Dale Evarts US EPA December 16, 2002 Better Air Quality in Asian Cities 2002
Compliance Update NCMA 2015.
INDUSTRIAL BOILER MACT (40 CFR 63 Subpart DDDDD)
December 4, Utility MACT Air & Waste Management Association/EPA Information Exchange December 4, 2002 William H. Maxwell Combustion Group/ESD.
.1 Approach to Utility MATS August 22, 2012 ARIPPA Annual Tech Convention Harrisburg, PA Joel Millard Environmental Regulatory Specialist KVB-Enertec Products.
A&WMA Georgia Regulatory Update Conference Current State of the Air in GA Jac Capp, GA EPD, Branch Chief, Air Protection Branch April 16, 2013.
Air Toxics in Region 4 A&WMA Annual Conference August 6, 2008 Lee Page Air Toxics Assessment and Implementation Section EPA, Region 4 Atlanta, Georgia.
Particulate Matter Monitoring Required by the Utility MATS Eric Swisher| | ext. 17 August 22, 2012 Presented to ARIPPA.
Health Based Compliance Alternatives (HBCA) under MACT (Maximum Achieveable Control Technology): Permitting Challenges Cindy Phillips, P.E. FDEP Bureau.
Air Quality 101 Kansas Air Quality Program overview.
ONLINE GENERAL PERMITS NJDEP October 9, 2013 ACE Academy.
| Philadelphia | Atlanta | Houston | Washington DC Boiler MACT Compliance Plans: Failure to Develop Plans Is Planning to Fail Susie Bowden|
PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engine (RICE) Regulatory Update American Public Power Association June 8, 2010.
UTILITY MACT WORKING GROUP STATE AND LOCAL STAKEHOLDER RECOMMENDATIONS.
NSPS Residential Wood Heater Recommendations WESTAR Meeting Portland, OR November 18, 2009 Lisa Rector Senior Policy Analyst
Georgia’s 112(g) Experiences Eric Cornwell Acting Manager Permitting Program.
Massachusetts’ 4-Pollutant Power Plant Regulations Sharon Weber Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Air Innovations Conference - August.
The Paper and Other Web Coating (POWC) MACT – Executive Summary The executive summary is a power point presentation designed to be used for basic education.
New Source Review Rules Update Jessica Montanez U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Air Quality Policy Division.
Compliance Assurance Monitoring (CAM) November 24, 2009.
Update on Methane Regulations Affecting Landfills Pat Sullivan Senior Vice President SCS Engineers Nov. 10, 2015.
1 Emissions Measurement and Monitoring Projects Update Robin Segall Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards US Environmental Protection Agency Measurement.
1 Special Information Session on USEPA’s Carbon Rules & Clean Air Act Section 111 North Carolina Division of Air Quality Special Information Session on.
Proposed Carbon Pollution Standard For New Power Plants Presented by Kevin Culligan Office of Air Quality Planning And Standards Office of Air and Radiation.
Main flexibility tools for the adoption of high emission standards for LCPs set in the new Industrial Emissions Directive Gerard Lipinski Coordinator of.
Balancing the Three R’s: Regulations, Records, and Reports Dallas, TX ♦ May 18, 2016 Arron Heinerikson.
APPA Conference Call on EGU MACT Rule January 20, 2011.
RACT 2 – Source Testing and Monitoring Requirements Air Quality Technical Advisory Committee August 4, 2016 Harrisburg, PA Tom Wolf, GovernorPatrick McDonnell,
Introduction to the Definition of Solid Waste Final Rule
What is the Boiler NESHAP?
Georgia Update Jeff Cown Land Protection Branch
Boiler Sheltered Initiative
SDWA Collaborative Efforts Overview
Kansas Air Quality Seminar March 5, 2008
EPA/OAQPS Pollutant Emissions Measurement Update 2019
Presentation transcript:

INDUSTRIAL BOILER MACT RULE (Title 40 CFR 63 Subpart DDDDD) Annual DoD Conference Environmental Air Quality Workshop June 29, 2005

IMPORTANT DATES Proposal Date – January 13, 2003 Promulgation Date – September 13, 2004 Effective Date – November 12, 2004 Additional Comment Period Notice - June 27, 2004- August 11, 2005 Initial Notification Dates March 12, 2005 – Existing units 15 days after startup – New units Compliance Date Existing units - September 13, 2007 New units – Startup

INDUSTRIAL BOILER MACT Source categories covered: Industrial Boilers Institutional/Commercial Boilers Process Heaters Indirect-fired – combustion gases do not come in contact with process materials. Major source MACT only

SUBCATEGORIES Three main subcategories: Solid fuel units Liquid fuel units Gaseous fuel units Further subcategorized on size and use Large (> 10 MM Btu/hr heat input) Small (all firetubes and others < 10 MM Btu/hr) Limited-use (< 10% capacity factor) Total of 9 subcategories

WHAT UNITS ARE NOT COVERED? Any boiler and process heater listed as an affected source under another MACT For example, Fossil fuel-fired electric utility boilers Boilers burning municipal waste Boilers burning hazardous waste Boilers burning medical waste Black liquor recovery boilers Temporary/rental gas or liquid fuel boilers (<180 days) Hot water heaters Waste heat boilers Synthetic minors –becomes an area source

EMISSIONS LIMITS Existing Units Existing large solid fuel units PM -- 0.07 lb/million Btu, OR TSM – 0.001 lb/million Btu HCl -- 0.09 lb/million Btu (~ 90 ppm) Hg – 9 lb/trillion Btu Existing limited use solid fuel units PM -- 0.21 lb/million Btu, OR TSM – 0.004 lb/million Btu No emissions standards for: existing small solid fuel units existing liquid fuel units existing gaseous fuel units

EMISSION LIMITS and WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS New Units New solid fuel units PM -- 0.025 lb/million Btu, OR TSM 0.0003 lb/million Btu HCl -- 0.02 lb/million Btu (20 ppm) Hg -- 3 lb/trillion Btu CO -- 400 ppm @ 7% oxygen (NOT FOR SMALL UNITS) New liquid fuel units PM -- 0.03 lb/million Btu HCl -- 0.0005 lb/million Btu (large units) 0.0009 lb/million Btu (small and limited use units) CO – 400 ppm @ 3% oxygen (NOT FOR SMALL UNITS) New gaseous fuel-fired units CO – 400 ppm @ 3% oxygen (NOT FOR SMALL UNITS)

CONTROL TECHNOLOGY BASIS Existing Solid Fuel Boilers Large Units - Baghouse (PM/metals/Hg)/ Scrubber (HCl) Limited-Use Units – ESP (PM/metals) New Units Based on NSPS and State Regulations Baghouse/ Scrubber / CO Limit

COMPLIANCE OPTIONS Conduct stack emission tests Conduct fuel analysis Emissions averaging (large solid fuel units only) Health-based compliance alternatives for HCl and TSM

COMPLIANCE TESTING Performance tests (stacks tests) Fuel analyses OR Annual performance tests Based on average of 3 test runs OR Fuel analyses Initial and every 5 years Each new fuel type Based 90% confidence level of minimum 3 fuel samples

COMPLIANCE MONITORING Continuous compliance based on monitoring and maintaining operating limits Operating limits For PM, TSM and mercury limits Opacity (for dry systems) Existing units – 20% opacity (6 minute average) New units – 10% opacity (1 hour block average) Control device parameters (for wet systems) Established during initial compliance test Fuel (type or mixture) When compliance based on fuel analysis For HCl Scrubber parameters (pH, pressure drop, liquid flow, sorbent injection rate)

COMPLIANCE MONITORING (cont.) Opacity (by COM) – dry control systems Fuel (monthly records) Scrubber parameters CO (new units only) CEM for large units > 100 million Btu/hr Annual CO tests for other new units Exempt data from <50% load and based on 30-day average.

What Subcategories Have Limited Requirements? Subject to ONLY Initial Notification Existing large and limited use gaseous fuel units Existing large and limited use liquid fuel units New small liquid fuel units that do not burn residual oil NOT subject to Initial Notification or any other requirements in General Provisions Existing small solid fuel units Existing small liquid fuel units Existing small gaseous fuel units New small gaseous fuel units

Additional Compliance Provisions Emission Averaging Only existing large solid fuel units Initial compliance based on maximum capacity Continuous compliance on a 12-month rolling average basis Each monthly calculation based on monthly fuel use and previous compliance test results for each boiler Must submit emission averaging plan Must maintain, at a minimum, the emission controls employed on the effective date

Additional Compliance Provisions Health-based HCl compliance alternative Alternative to complying with HCl MACT limit Must include appropriate units covered by subpart DDDDD Those that emit HCl and/or Cl2 Must conduct HCl and chlorine emission tests or fuel analyses When conducting fuel analysis must assume any chlorine is emitted as CL2 Must calculate total maximum hourly mass HCl-equivalent emission rate Compliance determine by using: Lookup table Average stack height of appropriate subpart DDDDD units Minimum distance of any appropriate subpart DDDDD unit to property boundary Site-specific compliance demonstration Hazard Index (HI) can not exceed 1.0

Additional Compliance Provisions Health-based TSM compliance alternative As alternative to complying with TSM limit based on 8 metals, may demonstrate compliance with TSM limit based on 7 metals by excluding manganese Must include appropriate units covered by subpart DDDDD Must conduct manganese emission tests or fuel analyses Must calculate the total maximum hourly mass manganese emission rate Eligible for demonstrating compliance based on 7 metals excluding manganese by using: Lookup table Average stack height of appropriate subpart DDDDD units Minimum distance to property boundary Site-specific compliance demonstration Hazard Quotient (HQ) can not exceed 1.0

Additional Details of Health-Based Compliance Alternatives Demonstrations filed with permitting authority and EPA along with certification of authenticity and accuracy No review or approval required; EPA, permitting authority may audit a percentage Facility must apply for Title V permit modification to include parameters that defined the source (fuel type, control devices, stack parameters) Facilities must submit demos within 2 years, one year prior to compliance date

Petitions For Reconsideration Three petitions for reconsideration were received General Electric Company Joint petition NRDC EIP (Environmental Integrity Project) EIP Two petitions for judicial review Jointly filed by NRDC, Sierra Club, and EIP Issues same as in reconsideration petition American Public Power-Ohio (and 6 municipalities) EPA exceeded its authority in imposing standards on small municipal utility boilers

GE Petition Issue Requests clarification that the rule allows for testing at the common stack rather than each duct to the stack No opportunity to provide comments since the proposed rule did not contain regulatory text for the emissions averaging provision Common stack testing is handled on a case-by-case basis by OECA/Regions OECA’s general policy is that each duct to a common stack must be tested

NRDC – EIP Petition Seeking reconsideration on: Lack of standards for all HAP emitted on all subcategories Health-based compliance alternatives CAA does not authorize plant-by-plant risk-based exemptions Basis for development of health-based compliance alternatives Procedures for demonstrating compliance (Appendix A)

Recent Federal Register Notice FR June 27, 2005, Vol. 70, Num. 122, pg 36907-36915 Request for comments on: Tiered Risk assessment Methodology (appendix A) Look-up tables and Methodology (HCL, Mn, appendix A) Site Specific Risk Assessment Process (section 7, appendix A) HI or HQ of 1.0 for HCL, Cl, Mn (applicability cut off for RA’s) Background concentrations (were not considered) Overall Adoption of Health based compliance alternative for Mn Exclusion of Mn from the TSM limit in table 1 Correction Health based compliance alternatives for HCL & TSM are applicable to any affected source (not only large solid fuel subcategory)

Questions Received What does “Equivalent” mean in Table 6 ? (Fuel Analysis Requirements) Are “hybrid boilers” considered firetube or watertube boilers? Can a common stack be tested instead of the individual ducts? Are auxiliary boilers at power plants covered by subpart DDDDD?

INFORMATION SITES www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/boiler/boilerpg.html Implementation tools (timelines, initial notification, state/local contacts, Q/A) and information on the MACT rulemaking for DDDDD is available on EPA’s web site at: www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/boiler/boilerpg.html An electronic version of public docket (including public comments) is available at: www.epa.gov/edocket/ Search for docket ID No. OAR-2002-0058

Contacts Rule Development Compliance Jim Eddinger Greg Fried (OECA) 919-541-5426 202-564-7016 eddinger.jim@epa.gov fried.greg@epa.gov Region 4 Leonardo Ceron 404-562-9129 ceron.leonardo@epa.gov

The Effects of Asking Questions

ANY QUESTIONS? That concludes my presentation. I will take some questions and turn it over to Ken.