Issues for Andy Meeting
09/17/12 Meeting
Issue | Options | PROs | CONs |
Net Air Quality Benefit | • Option 1A: Define NAQB as 1:1 offset ratio for all sources based on CA rules • Option 1B: Define NAQB as greater than 1:1 offset ratio for all sources • Option 2: 1A or 1B for non-federal majors and retain current version of NAQB for federal majors sources but eliminate “less than a significant impact level increase at all modeled receptors” | • Eliminate “less than a significant impact level increase at all modeled receptors” problem | • Backsliding
|
“Small” scale local energy project – what is “small?” | • Not needed if we eliminate NAQB • Energy Facility Siting Council: The following types of energy facilities must have a site certificate from the Council before construction: ◦ Electric power plants with a nominal electric generating capacity of 25 megawatts or more from thermal power or combustion turbines. | • Consistent with most other programs • Emissions ~30 tpy PM2.5 | |
Areas violating NAAQS but not yet designated NAA – where DEQ has determine the background concentration levels are above the standard through monitoring | • Federal Major sources are excluded because that would change the federal PSD program • For non-federal major sources only in the PSEL rules: 1. Modeling < SIL – done 2. Modeling > SIL: a. Offsets ratio of greater than 1:1 (TBD) and at least X% of offsets from sources or activities that are known to contribute the most of the NAAQS exceedance b. BACT c. Modeling for increment • Request NAA designation after buy-off from community | • Could protect AQ in same way as if EPA had designated area NAA (need attainment plan) | • Woodstove problem
|
Attainment Plan/Maintenance Plan Bridge (COLLIER) | After 3 years of monitoring showing attainment and continued monitored attainment: • Allow sources to construct under maintenance plan rule requirements before maintenance plan is approved • Limit to nonattainment non-federal majors (<100 tpy sources) | • Promotes economic development | • backsliding |
Netting basis for sources that went through PSD before 2001 | • NB | • Consistent with intent | • No BACT |
Change 40% opacity to 20% and require COMS | • Leave as is
• Visible emissions from the hog fuel boiler may exceed the general standard of 20% during periods of soot blowing and/or grate cleaning. Periods of excess emissions from soot blowing and/or grate cleaning are limited to not more than 15 minutes in any 8 consecutive hours. | • sources happy
• equity | • embarrassment
• none |
Delete 3 minute aggregate opacity limit and use 6-minute averages (EPA Method 9) |
• Leave as is
| • Line up standard with reference test method • Simplifies monitoring conditions in TV permits | • Backsliding • EPA stringency demonstration |
Change 0.2 gr/dscf to 0.10 gr/dscf and add 3 year compliance schedule | • Leave as is | • sources happy | • embarrassment
|
Exempt sources with specific standards from general grain loading/opacity standards- (add more substantive provisions for O&M during startup/shutdown and add provision for source to prove that emissions during startup/shutdown do not violate NAAQS through modeling if necessary to appease EPA) |
• Leave as is
| • Simplifies monitoring conditions in TV permits • Reduces DEQ workload regarding unavoidable excess emissions | • Backsliding • EPA stringency demonstration (during startup/ shutdown) |
Splitting Sources – not retroactive | • Same SIC – split NB evenly or proportionately
• 2 different SICs – NB stays with original SIC and cannot be split and the new SIC is a new source
| • Aligns with majority of past guidance given to sources • PSD is not avoided | • Perceived as detriment to economic development |