Response to Comments Phase II Nox Sip Call Rulemaking

By Allman, Jo Ann

Book Id: WPLBN0000061409
Format Type: PDF eBook:
File Size: 0.1 MB
Reproduction Date: 2007

Title:	Response to Comments Phase II Nox Sip Call Rulemaking
Author:	Allman, Jo Ann
Volume:
Language:	English
Subject:	Ecology, Natural resource issues, Environemtal protection
Collections:	Environmental Awareness Library Collection
Historic Publication Date:
Publisher:	United States Environmental Protection Agency


Citation APA MLA Chicago Ann Allman, B. J. (n.d.). Response to Comments Phase II Nox Sip Call Rulemaking. Retrieved from http://gutenberg.cc/

Description
Excerpt: Comment: One commenter stated that because the Court of Appeals vacated the inclusion of small cogenerators as EGUs in Appalachian Power Company v. EPA, 249 F.3d 1032 (D.C. Cir. 2001), that EPA must make new findings of Significant Contribution and provide a three-year compliance period for these sources. The commenter further stated that EPA was attempting to circumvent the three-year compliance period by stating that the Court of Appeals remanded instead of vacated the Rule as it relates to small cogenerators.

Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS I. DC Circuit Remands/Vacaturs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 II. Scope of Final Rule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 II.A How do We Treat Cogenerators and Non-Acid Rain Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 II.A.1 What is the Historical Definition of Acid Rain Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 II.A.2 What is the Nox SIP Call Definition of EGU. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 II.A.3 What Minor Revisions Are Being Made to the Definition of EGU in the NOx SIP Call and Section 126 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 II.A.4 What Methodology Are We Using to Classify EGU/Non-EGU Cogeneration Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 II.A.5 What is the Effect on Cogeneration Unit Classification of Applying the Same Methodology as Used for Other Units, Rather Than the One-Third Potential Electrical Output Capacity/25 MWe Sales Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 II.B. Control Level for Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion (IC) Engines . . . . . . . . . . 3 II.B.1 Level of NOx Control to Assume for Budget . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 II.B.2 NOx Uncontrolled Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 II.B.3 Controlled Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 II.B.4 Flexibility/Averaging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 II.B.5 NSR Exclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 II.B.6 Early Reductions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 II.B.7 Executive Order 13211 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 II.B.8 Presumptive Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 II.B.9 Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 II.B.10 Emission Factors for 2- and 4-Stroke Engines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 II.B.11 Other Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 III. Court Decision’s Effect on Georgia and Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 IV. Modifications Made to NOx Emission Budgets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 V. Compliance Supplement Pools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 VI. SIP Submittal Dates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 VII. Compliance Dates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 VII.A EGUs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 VII.B Georgia and Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 VII.C Internal Combustion Engines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .