Navigation

RULES AND REGULATIONS

Title 25—ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY BOARD

[ 25 PA. CODE CHS. 121 AND 129 ]

Additional RACT Requirements for Major Sources of NOx and VOCs

[46 Pa.B. 2036]
[Saturday, April 23, 2016]

 The Environmental Quality Board (Board) amends Chapters 121 and 129 (relating to general provisions; and standards for sources) to read as set forth in Annex A. The final-form rulemaking amends Chapter 129 to adopt presumptive reasonably available control technology (RACT) requirements and RACT emission limitations for certain major stationary sources of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions. The final-form rulemaking also provides for a petition process for an alternative compliance schedule, a facility-wide or system-wide NOx emissions averaging plan provision, an alternative RACT proposal petition process, and compliance demonstration and recordkeeping requirements.

 The final-form rulemaking also amends § 121.1 (relating to definitions) to revise or add terms to support the final-form amendments to Chapter 129.

 This order was adopted by the Board at its meeting of November 17, 2015.

A. Effective Date

 This final-form rulemaking will be effective upon publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.

 This final-form rulemaking will be submitted to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval as a revision to the Commonwealth's State Implementation Plan (SIP) upon publication.

B. Contact Persons

 For further information, contact Kirit Dalal, Chief, Division of Air Resource Management, Bureau of Air Quality, 12th Floor, Rachel Carson State Office Building, P. O. Box 8468, Harrisburg, PA 17105-8468, (717) 772-3436; or Robert ''Bo'' Reiley, Assistant Director, Bureau of Regulatory Counsel, 9th Floor, Rachel Carson State Office Building, P. O. Box 8464, Harrisburg, PA 17105-8464, (717) 787-7060. Persons with a disability may use the Pennsylvania AT&T Relay Service, (800) 654-5984 (TDD users) or (800) 654-5988 (voice users). This final-form rulemaking is available on the Department of Environmental Protection's (Department) web site at www.dep.pa.gov (select ''Public Participation,'' then ''Environmental Quality Board (EQB)'').

C. Statutory Authority

 This final-form rulemaking is authorized under section 5(a)(1) of the Air Pollution Control Act (act) (35 P.S. § 4005(a)(1)), which grants the Board the authority to adopt rules and regulations for the prevention, control, reduction and abatement of air pollution in this Commonwealth, and section 5(a)(8) of the act, which grants the Board the authority to adopt rules and regulations designed to implement the Clean Air Act (CAA) (42 U.S.C.A. §§ 7401—7671q).

D. Background and Summary

 The EPA is required under section 109 of the CAA (42 U.S.C.A. § 7409) to set National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for six criteria pollutants, of which ground-level ozone is one. The NAAQS are established by the EPA as the maximum concentrations in the ambient atmosphere for specific air contaminants to protect public health and welfare.

 Ozone is a highly reactive gas which at sufficient concentrations can produce a wide variety of harmful effects. At elevated concentrations, ground-level ozone can adversely affect human health, vegetation, materials, economic values, and personal comfort and well-being. It can cause damage to important food crops, forests, livestock and wildlife. Repeated exposure to ozone pollution may cause a variety of adverse health effects for healthy people and those with existing conditions including difficulty breathing, chest pains, coughing, nausea, throat irritation and congestion. It can worsen bronchitis, heart disease, emphysema and asthma, and reduce lung capacity. Asthma is a significant and growing threat to children and adults. High levels of ground-level ozone also affect animals in ways similar to humans.

 The EPA promulgated primary and secondary NAAQS for photochemical oxidants under section 109 of the CAA at 36 FR 8186 (April 30, 1971). These were set at an hourly average of 0.08 parts per million (ppm) total photochemical oxidants not to be exceeded more than 1 hour per year. The EPA announced a revision to the then-current 1-hour standard at 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979). The EPA final rule revised the level of the primary 1-hour ozone standard from 0.08 ppm to 0.12 ppm and set the secondary standard identical to the primary standard. This revised 1-hour standard was subsequently reaffirmed at 58 FR 13008 (March 9, 1993).

 Section 110 of the CAA (42 U.S.C.A. § 7410) gives states primary responsibility for achieving the NAAQS. The principal mechanism at the state level for complying with the CAA is the SIP. A SIP includes the regulatory programs, actions and commitments a state will carry out to implement its responsibilities under the CAA. Once approved by the EPA, a SIP is legally enforceable under both Federal and state law.

 Section 182 of the CAA (42 U.S.C.A. § 7511a) requires that, for areas that exceed the NAAQS for ozone, states shall develop and implement a program that mandates that certain major stationary sources develop and implement a RACT program. RACT is defined as the lowest emissions limitation that a particular source is capable of meeting by the application of control technology that is reasonably available considering technological and economic feasibility. See 44 FR 53762 (September 17, 1979).

 Under section 182(f)(1) of the CAA and section 184(b)(2) of the CAA (42 U.S.C.A. § 7511c(b)(2)), these RACT requirements are applicable to all sources in this Commonwealth that emit or have a potential to emit greater than 100 tons per year (tpy) of NOx. Under sections 182(b)(2) and 184(b)(2) of the CAA, these RACT requirements are applicable to all sources in this Commonwealth that emit or have a potential to emit greater than 50 tpy of VOCs. NOx and VOC controls are required Statewide because of the Commonwealth's inclusion in the Northeast Ozone Transport Region. See section 184(a) of the CAA. Additionally, because the five-county Philadelphia area was designated as severe ozone nonattainment for the 1-hour standard, sources of greater than 25 tpy of either pollutant are required to implement RACT under section 182(d) of the CAA. The Commonwealth's RACT regulations in §§ 129.91—129.95 (relating to stationary sources of NOx and VOCs) were implemented for the 1-hour ozone standard. These regulations became effective January 15, 1994.

 The EPA concluded that revisions to the current primary standard to provide increased public health protection were appropriate at this time to protect public health with an adequate margin of safety. See 62 FR 38856 (July 18, 1997). Further, the EPA determined that it was appropriate to promulgate primary and secondary ozone standards at a level of 0.08 ppm averaged over 8 hours. See 62 FR 38856. The EPA lowered the 8-hour standard from 0.08 ppm to 0.075 ppm at 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008).

 The EPA designated 37 counties in this Commonwealth as 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS at 69 FR 23858, 23931 (April 30, 2004). The EPA published final designations and classifications for the 2008 8-hour ozone standards at 77 FR 30088 (May 21, 2012) with an effective date of July 20, 2012. The following nonattainment areas were classified as ''marginal'' ozone nonattainment areas: Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton (Carbon, Lehigh and Northampton Counties); Lancaster (Lancaster County), Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City (the Pennsylvania areas include Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery and Philadelphia Counties); Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley (Allegheny, Armstrong, Beaver, Butler, Fayette, Washington and Westmoreland Counties); and the Reading area (Berks County); the remainder of this Commonwealth was designated ''Unclassifiable/Attainment.'' See 77 FR 30088, 30142. The Commonwealth must ensure that these areas attain the 2008 ozone standard by July 20, 2015, and that they continue to maintain the standard thereafter. The Department will seek an extension of the July 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS attainment date for the five-county Philadelphia Area (Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery and Philadelphia Counties) due to several violating monitors in Maryland and New Jersey, and for the seven-county Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area (Allegheny, Armstrong, Beaver, Butler, Fayette, Washington and Westmoreland Counties).

 A re-evaluation of what measures constitute RACT is a requirement to be fulfilled each time a NAAQS is promulgated or revised, as happened in 1997 and 2008 for ozone. According to the EPA's final rule to implement the 8-hour ozone NAAQS published at 70 FR 71612 (November 29, 2005), areas classified as ''moderate'' nonattainment or higher must submit a demonstration, as a revision to the SIP, that their current rules fulfill 8-hour ozone RACT requirements for all Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) categories and all major, non-CTG sources.

 According to this implementation rule, demonstrations can be made with either a new RACT determination or a certification that previously-required RACT controls represent RACT for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The certification should be accompanied by appropriate supporting information, such as consideration of information received during the public comment period. The RACT SIP revision submittal is in addition to the 8-hour ozone attainment demonstration plan for the area, which will also be a revision to the Commonwealth's SIP. The RACT SIP revision was required to be submitted to the EPA by September 15, 2006.

 The Commonwealth submitted a SIP revision in September 2006 certifying that RACT determinations made for the 1-hour ozone standard from 1995 to 2006 under §§ 129.91—129.95 were still RACT for the 8-hour standard, including for those sources where a determination was made that ''no controls'' continued to represent RACT for the 1-hour ozone standard. However, the EPA informally indicated to the Department that based on NRDC v. EPA, 571 F.3d 1245 (July 10, 2009), a reanalysis rather than certification is necessary for sources for which the Department previously determined that ''no controls'' represented RACT for the 1-hour ozone standard.

 As a result of the EPA's decision, the Department conducted a generic RACT analysis of those existing sources for which a RACT determination was previously made under §§ 129.91—129.95 for the 1-hour ozone standard to evaluate whether the RACT determination under §§ 129.91—129.95 would represent RACT-level control for the 8-hour ozone standards or if new or additional add-on control technology would represent RACT-level control for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. That generic analysis identified existing affected source categories by size and fuel type; identified available feasible NOx or VOC control options for each type of existing source; estimated emission reduction potential for each control technology; identified costs for technologies, using appropriate updates; evaluated cost-effectiveness per EPA guidance for uncontrolled and controlled sources (combinations of technologies); and projected what type of control technology might be applied to each affected source. The Department evaluated technically feasible emission controls for cost-effectiveness and economic feasibility. Based on this analysis, the Board determined that additional cost-effective controls represent RACT for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. There are nine source categories that are affected by this final-form rulemaking: combustion units; boilers; process heaters; turbines; engines; municipal solid waste landfills; municipal waste combustors; cement kilns; and other sources that are not regulated elsewhere under Chapter 129.

 All together, this final-form rulemaking affects the owners and operators of approximately 810 individual sources at 192 major facilities throughout this Commonwealth. Under this final-form rulemaking, the Board anticipates that the total potential NOx emission reductions will be approximately 253,623 tpy. The amount of NOx and VOC emission reductions achieved as a result of the application of RACT-level control is determined on the basis of the source's potential to emit before and after the application of RACT-level control.

 The Board determines that this final-form rulemaking fulfills the requirements for re-evaluation of RACT-level control for the 1997 and 2008 ozone NAAQS and is less resource intensive than imposing case-by-case analysis for affected facilities in the covered categories, as was done under §§ 129.91—129.95. As more fully discussed in Section E of this preamble, the Board finalized a suite of compliance options. The owner and operator of an individual affected source may demonstrate compliance for that source in one of three ways: first, with the applicable presumptive RACT requirement or emission limitation under § 129.97 (relating to presumptive RACT requirements, RACT emission limitations and petition for alternative compliance schedule); second, either by participating in the emissions averaging plan under § 129.98 (relating to facility-wide or system-wide NOx emissions averaging plan general requirements) or by submitting a request for an alternative case-by-case RACT determination under § 129.99 (relating to alternative RACT proposal and petition for alternative compliance schedule).

 The Board determines that the requirements under this final-form rulemaking are reasonably necessary to attain and maintain the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

 The Air Quality Technical Advisory Committee (AQTAC) was briefed on the final-form rulemaking and public comments on November 7, 2014. The AQTAC recommended that the preamble to the final-form rulemaking include the clarifications for the following sections: § 129.96(c) (relating to applicability) and § 129.97(c)—applicability to sources emitting less than 1 ton; and § 129.100(a) (relating to compliance demonstration and recordkeeping requirements)—calculations for the 30-day rolling average. Following its discussion on November 7, 2014, the AQTAC voted 11-5-0 (yes; no; abstain) to concur with the Department's recommendation to move the final-form rulemaking forward to the Board for consideration. The draft final-form rulemaking was discussed with the Small Business Compliance Advisory Committee (SBCAC) on January 28, 2015. The SBCAC voted 6-2-0 to concur with the Department's recommendation to forward the final-form rulemaking to the Board. The final-form rulemaking was discussed with the Citizens Advisory Council (CAC), Policy and Regulatory Oversight Committee on February 20, 2015, and May 12, 2015. The Policy and Regulatory Oversight Committee recommended that the CAC concur with the Department's recommendation to move the final-form rulemaking forward to the Board. However, the CAC tabled consideration of the final-form rulemaking at its March 17, 2015, and May 20, 2015, meetings. The CAC considered the final-form rulemaking at its September 15, 2015, meeting. The CAC raised several concerns and recommendations that were considered by the Department. The CAC supported the adoption of the final-form rulemaking and unanimously voted to concur with advancing it to the Board for action.

E. Summary of Final-Form Rulemaking and Changes from Proposed to Final-Form Rulemaking

§ 121.1. Definitions

 The final-form rulemaking amends § 121.1 by revising the terms ''CEMS—continuous emissions monitoring system,'' ''major NOx emitting facility,'' ''major VOC emitting facility'' and ''stationary internal combustion engine or stationary reciprocating internal combustion engine'' and by adding the terms ''process heater,'' ''refinery gas,'' ''regenerative cycle combustion turbine,'' ''simple cycle combustion turbine'' and ''stationary combustion turbine.''

 The final-form rulemaking made clarifying changes to ''CEMS—continuous emissions monitoring system'' and ''stationary internal combustion engine or stationary reciprocating internal combustion engine.''

 In addition, under the final-form rulemaking the definitions of ''major NOx emitting facility'' and ''major VOC emitting facility'' are amended. The 25 tpy major source NOx and VOC thresholds do not apply in Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery and Philadelphia Counties for sources that would be subject to §§ 129.96—129.100. For the purposes of this final-form rulemaking, the 100-tpy threshold applies for major NOx emitting sources and the 50-tpy threshold applies for major VOC emitting sources in those counties. However, the existing 25-tpy major source NOx and VOC thresholds continue to apply to RACT sources subject to §§ 129.91—129.95 in those counties.

§ 129.96. Applicability

 Under subsection (a), the NOx requirements of the final-form rulemaking apply Statewide to the owner and operator of a major NOx emitting facility and the VOC requirements apply Statewide to the owner and operator of a major VOC emitting facility that were in existence on or before July 20, 2012, for which a requirement or emission limitation, or both, has not been established in §§ 129.51—129.52c, 129.54—129.69, 129.71—129.73, 129.75, 129.77, 129.101—129.107 and 129.301—129.310.

 Under subsection (b), the NOx requirements of the final-form rulemaking apply Statewide to the owner and operator of a NOx emitting facility and the VOC requirements apply Statewide to the owner and operator of a VOC emitting facility when the installation of a new source or a modification or change in operation of an existing source after July 20, 2012, results in the source or facility meeting the definition of a major NOx emitting facility or a major VOC emitting facility and for which a requirement or an emission limitation, or both, has not been established in §§ 129.51—129.52c, 129.54—129.69, 129.71—129.73, 129.75, 129.77, 129.101—129.107 and 129.301—129.310.

 Under subsections (a) and (b), the final-form rulemaking was clarified to ensure that it applies Statewide to the owner and operator of a major NOx emitting facility or a major VOC emitting facility that was in existence on or before July 20, 2012. That is, the NOx requirements apply Statewide to the owner and operator of a major NOx emitting facility and the VOC requirements apply Statewide to the owner and operator of a major VOC emitting facility.

 Subsection (c) was added to provide that the requirements do not apply to the owner and operator of a NOx air contamination source located at a major NOx emitting facility that has the potential to emit less than 1 tpy of NOx or of a VOC air contamination source located at a major VOC emitting facility that has the potential to emit less than 1 tpy of VOC. This change addresses one of the concerns raised by the AQTAC at its November 7, 2014, meeting.

 Subsection (d) was added to provide that the requirements do not apply to the owner and operator of a facility which is not a major NOx emitting facility or a major VOC emitting facility on or before January 1, 2017.

§ 129.97. Presumptive RACT requirements, RACT emission limitations and petition for alternative compliance schedule

 Under subsection (a), the owner and operator of a source listed in one or more of subsections (b)—(h) located at a major NOx emitting facility or major VOC emitting facility subject to § 129.96 shall comply with the applicable presumptive RACT requirement or RACT emission limitation beginning with the specified compliance date, unless an alternative compliance schedule is submitted and approved under subsections (k)—(m) or § 129.99.

 Under subsection (b), the owner and operator of a listed combustion unit that is located at a major NOx emitting facility or major VOC emitting facility subject to § 129.96 shall comply with the applicable presumptive RACT requirement for that source, which includes, among other things, inspection and adjustment requirements.

 The applicable requirements of paragraphs (1) and (2) have been clarified in the final-form rulemaking. The owner and operator of an affected combustion unit which is located at a major NOx emitting facility or major VOC emitting facility subject to § 129.96 shall comply with the applicable requirements in paragraph (1) or (2).

 Paragraph (1) has been amended to delete the reference to the requirements in paragraph (2) and to specify that the applicable requirement for the owner and operator of a combustion unit with a rated heat input equal to or greater than 20 million British thermal units (Btu)/hour and less than 50 million Btu/hour is a biennial tune-up conducted in accordance with the procedures described in 40 CFR 63.11223 (relating to how do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the work practice and management practice standards). The biennial tune-up performed to comply with this paragraph must include, at a minimum, the inspections in subparagraphs (i)—(iii).

 Paragraph (2) has been amended to delete the requirements that applied only to an oil-fired, a gas-fired or a combination oil-fired and gas-fired combustion unit with a rated heat input equal to or greater than 20 million Btu/hour and less than 50 million Btu/hour. Additionally, the reference to the 1983 EPA document has been deleted. Paragraph (2) specifies that the owner or operator of a combustion unit with an oxygen trim system that maintains an optimum air-to-fuel ratio that would otherwise be subject to a biennial tune-up shall conduct a tune-up of the boiler one time in each 5-year calendar period. The tune-up performed to comply with this paragraph must include, at a minimum, the inspections in subparagraphs (i)—(iii).

 Under subsection (c), the owner and operator of a source listed in this subsection located at a major NOx emitting facility or major VOC emitting facility subject to § 129.96 shall comply with the applicable presumptive RACT requirement, which includes, among other things, the operation of the source in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications and good operating practices.

 In subsection (c), ''good engineering practices'' has been amended to ''good operating practices'' and air contamination sources that have the potential to emit less than 5 tpy of NOx or the potential to emit less than 2.7 tpy of VOC have been added to the list of sources for which the owner and operator shall install, maintain and operate in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications and with good operating practices. Additionally, language regarding the annual capacity factors that must be used for certain units has been added.

 Under subsection (d), the owner and operator of a combustion unit or other combustion source located at a major VOC emitting facility subject to § 129.96 shall install, maintain and operate the source in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications and with good operating practices for the control of the VOC emissions from the combustion unit or other combustion source.

 Under subsection (d), ''good engineering practices'' has been amended to ''good operating practices'' and clarifying changes were made to ensure that the owner and operator of an affected VOC facility shall install, maintain and operate the source in accordance with specified requirements.

 Under subsection (e), the owner and operator of a municipal solid waste landfill subject to § 129.96 shall comply with the applicable presumptive RACT requirement identified under paragraph (1) or (2). No changes were made from proposed to final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (f), the owner and operator of a municipal waste combustor subject to § 129.96 shall comply with the presumptive RACT requirement of 180 parts per million, volumetric dry (ppmvd) NOx @ 7% oxygen.

 Under subsection (f), the applicable requirement for a municipal waste combustor was revised from the proposed requirement of the applicable Federal standards to the final-form rulemaking requirement of 180 ppmvd NOx @ 7% oxygen.

 Under subsection (g), except as specified under subsection (c), the owner and operator of a NOx air contamination source listed in this subsection located at a major NOx emitting facility or of a VOC air contamination source listed in this subsection located at a major VOC emitting facility subject to § 129.96 may not cause, allow or permit NOx or VOCs to be emitted from the air contamination source in excess of the applicable presumptive RACT emission limitation under paragraphs (1)—(4).

 Under subsection (g), a number of minor clarifications were made regarding grammar and the types of fuels used with certain air contamination sources.

 In addition to these clarifications, a number of substantive changes were made to the RACT limitations under subsection (g) between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

 For instance, under subsection (g)(1)(i), the presumptive RACT emission limitation for natural gas-fired combustion units or process heaters with a rated heat input equal to or greater than 50 million Btu/hour was changed from 0.08 to 0.10 lb NOx/million Btu heat rate.

 Under subsection (g)(1)(vi)(A), the presumptive RACT emission limitation for a circulating fluidized bed (CFB) combustion unit was changed from 0.20 to 0.16 lb NOx/million Btu heat input.

 Under subsection (g)(2)(i)(B) and (D), the presumptive RACT emission limitation for certain combustion units when firing fuel oil was changed from 75 to 96 ppmvd NOx @ 15% oxygen and from 2 to 9 ppmvd VOC (as propane) @ 15% oxygen, respectively.

 Under subsection (g)(2)(i)(C), the presumptive RACT emission limitation for certain combustion units when firing natural gas or noncommercial gaseous fuel was changed from 2 to 5 ppmvd VOC (as propane) @ 15% oxygen.

 Under final-form subsection (g)(2)(iv), proposed subsection (g)(2)(iii), the rated output for an affected simple cycle or regenerative cycle combustion turbine was increased from equal to or greater than 1,000 bhp to equal to or greater than 6,000 bhp. Furthermore, under subsection (g)(2)(iv)(B), the presumptive RACT emission limitation for these turbines that burn fuel oil was changed from 75 to 96 ppmvd NOx @ 15% oxygen.

 Under subsection (g)(3)(i)(B), the presumptive RACT emission limitation for a lean burn stationary internal combustion engine with a rating equal to or greater than 500 bhp that burns natural gas or a noncommercial gaseous fuel, liquid fuel or dual-fuel was revised from 0.4 to 1.0 gram VOC/bhp-hr excluding formaldehyde.

 The following subparagraphs were added to subsection (g)(1) in the final-form rulemaking: subparagraph (vii)—the presumptive RACT emission limitation for any other type of solid fuel-fired combustion unit with a rated heat input equal to or greater than 50 million Btu/hr is 0.25 lb NOx/million Btu heat input; subparagraph (viii)—the presumptive RACT emission limitation for a coal-fired combustion unit with a selective catalytic reduction (SCR) system operating with an inlet temperature equal to or greater than 600°F is 0.12 lb NOx/million Btu heat input and compliance with this limit is also required when by-passing the SCR system; and subparagraph (ix)—the presumptive RACT requirement for a coal-fired combustion unit with a selective noncatalytic reduction (SNCR) system is that the SNCR system shall be operated with the injection of reagents including ammonia or other NOx-reducing agents, when the temperature at the area of the reagent injection is equal to or greater than 1,600°F.

 Subsection (g)(2)(iii) was added in the final-form rulemaking. A presumptive RACT emission limitation was added for a simple cycle or regenerative cycle combustion turbine with a rated output equal to or greater than 1,000 bhp and less than 6,000 bhp: clause (A)—when firing natural gas or a noncommercial gaseous fuel is 150 ppmvd NOx @ 15% oxygen; clause (B)—when firing fuel oil is 150 ppmvd NOx @ 15% oxygen; clause (C)—when firing natural gas or a noncommercial gaseous fuel is 9 ppmvd VOC (as propane) @ 15% oxygen; and clause (D)—when firing fuel oil is 9 ppmvd VOC (as propane) @ 15% oxygen. Proposed subsection (g)(2)(iii) has been renumbered as final-form subsection (g)(2)(iv).

 Under subsection (h), the owner and operator of a Portland cement kiln subject to § 129.96 shall comply with the applicable presumptive RACT emission limitation under paragraphs (1)—(3). No changes were made from proposed to final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (i), among other things, the requirements and emission limitations of this section supersede the requirements and emission limitations of a RACT permit issued to the owner or operator of an air contamination source subject to one or more of subsections (b)—(h) prior to April 23, 2016, under §§ 129.91—129.95 to control, reduce or minimize NOx emissions or VOC emissions, or both, from an air contamination source unless the permit contains more stringent requirements or emission limitations, or both. Minor clarifying changes were made from proposed to final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (j), among other things, the requirements and emission limitations of this section supersede the requirements and emission limitations of §§ 129.201—129.205, 145.111—145.113 and 145.141—145.146 (relating to additional NOx requirements; emissions of NOx from stationary internal combustion engines; and emissions of NOx from cement manufacturing) unless the requirements or emission limitations of §§ 129.201—129.205, §§ 145.111—145.113 or §§ 145.141—145.146 are more stringent. Minor clarifying changes were made from proposed to final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (k), the owner or operator of a major NOx emitting facility or a major VOC emitting facility subject to § 129.96 that includes an air contamination source subject to one or more of subsections (b)—(h) that cannot meet the applicable presumptive RACT requirement or RACT emission limitation without installation of an air cleaning device may submit a petition, in writing, requesting an alternative compliance schedule in accordance with paragraphs (1) and (2).

 Minor clarifying changes were made to subsection (k) from proposed to final-form rulemaking. Additionally, subsection (k)(2)(v) was revised from proposed to final-form rulemaking to specify that the written petition must include a proposed final compliance date that is as soon as possible but not later than 3 years after the written approval of the petition by the Department or the appropriate approved local air pollution control agency. Further, the approved petition shall be incorporated in an applicable operating permit or plan approval. The proposed rulemaking specified under paragraph (2)(v) that the proposed final compliance date be as soon as possible but not later than the date 3 years after the effective date of adoption of the proposed rulemaking.

 Under subsection (l), the Department or appropriate approved local air pollution control agency will review a timely and complete written petition requesting an alternative compliance schedule submitted in accordance with subsection (k) and approve or deny the petition in writing. No changes were made from proposed to final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (m), approval or denial under subsection (l) of the timely and complete petition for an alternative compliance schedule submitted under subsection (k) will be effective on the date the letter of approval or denial of the petition is signed by the authorized representative of the Department or appropriate approved local air pollution control agency. No changes were made from proposed to final-form rulemaking.

§ 129.98. Facility-wide or system-wide NOx emissions averaging plan general requirements

 Under subsection (a), the owner or operator of a major NOx emitting facility subject to § 129.96 that includes at least one air contamination source subject to a NOx RACT emission limitation in § 129.97 that cannot meet the applicable NOx RACT emission limitation may elect to meet that applicable NOx RACT emission limitation in § 129.97 by averaging NOx emissions on either a facility-wide or system-wide basis using a 30-day rolling average. System-wide emissions averaging must be among sources under common control of the same owner or operator within the same ozone nonattainment area in this Commonwealth.

 Under proposed subsection (a), there was no requirement that system-wide averaging be conducted within the same ozone nonattainment area. The final-form rulemaking requires that system-wide emissions averaging must be among sources under common control of the same owner or operator. The averaging must be conducted within the same ozone nonattainment area in this Commonwealth. The Department interprets this provision to allow emissions averaging in areas designated as unclassifiable/attainment for the ozone NAAQS.

 Under subsection (b), the owner or operator of each facility that elects to comply with subsection (a) shall submit a written NOx emissions averaging plan to the Department or appropriate approved local air pollution control agency as part of an application for an operating permit modification or a plan approval, if otherwise required. The application incorporating the requirements of this section shall be submitted by the applicable date in paragraph (1) or (2). Only minor clarifying changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (c), each NOx air contamination source included in the application for an operating permit modification or a plan approval, if otherwise required, for averaging NOx emissions on either a facility-wide or system-wide basis using a 30-day rolling average submitted under subsection (b) must be an air contamination source subject to a NOx RACT emission limitation in § 129.97. Only minor clarifying changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (d), the application for the operating permit modification or the plan approval, if otherwise required, for averaging NOx emissions on either a facility-wide or system-wide basis using a 30-day rolling average submitted under subsection (b) must demonstrate that the aggregate NOx emissions emitted by the air contamination sources included in the facility-wide or system-wide NOx emissions averaging plan using a 30-day rolling average are not greater than the NOx emissions that would be emitted by the group of included sources if each source complied with the applicable NOx RACT emission limitation in § 129.97 on a source-specific basis. The proposed ''not greater than 90% of the sum'' provision was deleted from this final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (e), the owner or operator shall calculate the alternative facility-wide or system-wide NOx RACT emissions limitation using a 30-day rolling average for the air contamination sources included in the application for the operating permit modification or plan approval, if otherwise required, submitted under subsection (b) by using the equation in this subsection to sum the emissions for all of the sources included in the NOx emissions averaging plan.

 Under subsection (e), the equation used in the NOx emissions averaging plan was modified. Emissions from start-ups, shutdowns and malfunctions shall be included as well as the most stringent numerical emission rate applicable to each air contamination source in the calculations. The more stringent numerical emission rate limit will include a limit established in the CAA, the act, regulations adopted under these acts, a plan approval, operating permit, consent decree, consent order and agreement, Department order or the SIP.

 Under subsection (f), the application for the operating permit modification or a plan approval, if otherwise required, specified in subsections (b)—(e) may include facility-wide or system-wide NOx emissions averaging using a 30-day rolling average only for NOx emitting sources or NOx emitting facilities that are owned or operated by the applicant. Only minor clarifying changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (g), the application for the operating permit modification or a plan approval, if otherwise required, specified in subsections (b)—(f) must include the information identified under paragraphs (1)—(3). Only minor clarifying changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (h), an air contamination source or facility included in the facility-wide or system-wide NOx emissions averaging plan submitted in accordance with subsections (b)—(g) may be included in only one facility-wide or system-wide NOx emissions averaging plan. Only minor clarifying changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (i), the Department or appropriate approved local air pollution control agency will issue a modification to the operating permit or a plan approval authorizing the NOx emissions averaging plan. Only minor clarifying changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (j), the owner or operator of an air contamination source or facility included in the facility-wide or system-wide NOx emissions averaging plan submitted in accordance with subsections (b)—(h) shall submit the reports and records in subsection (g)(3) to the Department or appropriate approved local air pollution control agency on the schedule specified in subsection (g)(3) to demonstrate compliance with § 129.100. Only minor clarifying changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (k), the owner or operator of an air contamination source or facility included in a facility-wide or system-wide NOx emissions averaging plan submitted in accordance with subsections (b)—(h) that achieves emission reductions in accordance with other emission limitations required under the act or the CAA, or regulations adopted under the act or the CAA, that are not NOx RACT emission limitations may not substitute those emission reductions for the emission reductions required by the facility-wide or system-wide NOx emissions averaging plan submitted to the Department or appropriate approved local air pollution control agency under subsection (b). Only minor clarifying changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (l), the owner or operator of an air contamination source subject to a NOx RACT emission limitation in § 129.97 that is not included in a facility-wide or system-wide NOx emissions averaging plan submitted under subsection (b) shall operate the source in compliance with the applicable NOx RACT emission limitation in § 129.97. Only minor clarifying changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (m), the owner and operator of the air contamination sources included in a facility-wide or system-wide NOx emissions averaging plan submitted under subsection (b) shall be liable for a violation of an applicable NOx RACT emission limitation at each source included in the NOx emissions averaging plan. Only minor clarifying changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

§ 129.99. Alternative RACT proposal and petition for alternative compliance schedule

 Under subsection (a), the owner or operator of an air contamination source subject to § 129.97 located at a facility subject to § 129.96 that cannot meet the applicable presumptive RACT requirement or RACT emission limitation of § 129.97 may propose an alternative RACT requirement or RACT emission limitation in accordance with subsection (d). Only minor clarifying changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (b), the owner or operator of a NOx air contamination source with a potential emission rate equal to or greater than 5.0 tons of NOx per year that is not subject to § 129.97 or §§ 129.201—129.205 located at a major NOx emitting facility subject to § 129.96 shall propose a NOx RACT requirement or RACT emission limitation in accordance with subsection (d). Only minor clarifying changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (c), the owner or operator of a VOC air contamination source with a potential emission rate equal to or greater than 2.7 tons of VOC per year that is not subject to § 129.97 located at a major VOC emitting facility subject to § 129.96 shall propose a VOC RACT requirement or RACT emission limitation in accordance with subsection (d). Only minor clarifying changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (d), the owner or operator proposing an alternative RACT requirement or RACT emission limitation under subsection (a), (b) or (c) shall comply with all of the RACT proposal requirements specified under paragraphs (1)—(7).

 Under subsection (d), the deadline for completing the implementation of the RACT requirement or limitation was changed between proposed and final-form rulemaking to not later than January 1, 2017, which is the Federal implementation requirement date for RACT for the 2008 8-hour ozone standard.

 Under subsection (e), the Department or appropriate approved local air pollution control agency will review the timely and complete alternative RACT proposal submitted in accordance with subsection (d) as specified in paragraph (1) and approve, deny or modify the alternative RACT proposal as indicated under paragraph (2) or (3). Only minor clarifying changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (f), the proposed alternative RACT requirement or RACT emission limitation and the implementation schedule submitted under subsection (d) will be approved, denied or modified by the Department or appropriate approved local air pollution control agency in accordance with subsection (e) in writing through the issuance of a plan approval or operating permit modification prior to the owner or operator implementing the alternative RACT requirement or RACT emission limitation. Only minor clarifying changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (g), the emission limit and requirements specified in the plan approval or operating permit issued under subsection (f) supersede the emission limit and requirements in the existing plan approval or operating permit issued to the owner or operator of the source prior to April 23, 2016, on the date specified in the plan approval or operating permit issued by the Department or appropriate approved local air pollution control agency under subsection (f), except to the extent the existing plan approval or operating permit contains more stringent requirements. No changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (h), the Department will submit each alternative RACT requirement or RACT emission limitation approved under subsection (f) to the EPA for approval as a revision to the SIP. The owner and operator of the facility shall bear the costs of public hearings and notifications required for the SIP submittal. Only minor clarifying changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (i), the owner and operator of a facility proposing to comply with the applicable RACT requirement or RACT emission limitation under subsection (a), (b) or (c) through the installation of an air cleaning device may submit a petition, in writing, requesting an alternative compliance schedule in accordance with paragraphs (1) and (2).

 Subsection (i)(2)(v) is revised from proposed to final-form rulemaking to specify that the written petition must include a proposed final compliance date that is as soon as possible but not later than 3 years after the written approval of the petition. If the petition is for the replacement of an existing source, the final compliance date will be determined on a case-by-case basis. The proposed rulemaking specified under subsection (i)(2)(v) that the proposed final compliance date be as soon as possible but not later than the date 3 years after the effective date of adoption of the proposed rulemaking.

 Under subsection (j), the Department or appropriate approved local air pollution control agency will review the timely and complete written petition requesting an alternative compliance schedule submitted in accordance with subsection (i) and approve or deny the petition in writing. Only minor clarifying changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (k), the emission limit and requirements specified in the plan approval or operating permit issued by the Department or appropriate approved local air pollution control agency under subsection (j) supersede the emission limit and requirements in the existing plan approval or operating permit issued to the owner or operator of the source prior to April 23, 2016, on the date specified in the plan approval or operating permit issued by the Department or appropriate approved local air pollution control agency under subsection (j), except to the extent the existing plan approval or operating permit contains more stringent requirements. No changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (l), approval or denial under subsection (j) of the timely and complete petition for an alternative compliance schedule submitted under subsection (i) will be effective on the date the letter of approval or denial of the petition is signed by the authorized representative of the Department or appropriate approved local air pollution control agency. No changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

§ 129.100. Compliance demonstration and recordkeeping requirements

 Under subsection (a), the owner and operator of an air contamination source subject to a requirement in § 129.97 shall demonstrate compliance with the applicable RACT requirement or RACT emission limitation by performing the monitoring or testing procedures under paragraph (1) or (2), except as provided in subsection (c).

 Under subsection (a)(1)—(4), the monitoring and testing requirements have been amended from proposed to final-form rulemaking for all affected air contamination sources.

 Under subsection (b), except as provided in §§ 129.97(k) and 129.99(i), the owner and operator of an air contamination source subject to subsection (a) shall demonstrate compliance with the applicable RACT requirement or RACT emission limitation in accordance with the procedures in subsection (a) not later than the applicable time frame under paragraph (1) or (2).

 Under subsection (b), the compliance demonstration date was changed between proposed and final-form rulemaking to not later than January 1, 2017, which is the Federal implementation requirement date for RACT.

 Under subsection (c), an owner or operator of an air contamination source subject to this section and §§ 129.96—129.98 may request a waiver from the requirement to demonstrate compliance with the applicable emission limitation in § 129.97 if the requirements under paragraphs (1)—(4) are met. Only minor clarifying changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (d), the owner and operator of an air contamination source subject to this section and §§ 129.96—129.99 shall keep records to demonstrate compliance with §§ 129.96—129.99 as set forth in paragraphs (1) and (2). No changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (e), beginning with the compliance date specified in § 129.97(a), the owner or operator of an air contamination source claiming that the air contamination source is exempt from the applicable NOx emission rate threshold specified in § 129.99(b) and the requirements of § 129.97 based on the air contamination source's potential to emit shall maintain records that demonstrate to the Department or appropriate approved local air pollution control agency that the air contamination source is not subject to the specified emission rate threshold. Only minor clarifying changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (f), beginning with the compliance date specified in § 129.97(a), the owner or operator of an air contamination source claiming that the air contamination source is exempt from the applicable VOC emission rate threshold specified in § 129.99(c) and the requirements of § 129.97 based on the air contamination source's potential to emit shall maintain records that demonstrate to the Department or appropriate approved local air pollution control agency that the air contamination source is not subject to the specified emission rate threshold. Only minor clarifying changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

 Under subsection (g), the owner or operator of a combustion unit subject to § 129.97(b) shall record each adjustment conducted under the procedures in § 129.97(b). This record must contain, at a minimum, the information in paragraphs (1)—(6). Only minor clarifying changes were made between proposed and final-form rulemaking.

 Proposed subsection (h), providing a requirement for the owner or operator of an oil-fired, gas-fired or combination oil-fired and gas-fired unit subject to § 129.97(b)(2) to maintain records of the type of fuel, was deleted in the final-form rulemaking.

 Under final-form subsection (h), proposed subsection (i), the owner or operator of a Portland cement kiln subject to § 129.97(h) shall maintain a daily operating log for each Portland cement kiln. The record for each kiln must include the items in paragraphs (1)—(4).

 Under final-form subsection (i), records shall be retained by the owner or operator for 5 years and made available to the Department or appropriate approved local air pollution control agency upon receipt of a written request from the Department or the appropriate approved local air pollution control agency.

F. Summary of Major Comments and Responses

General comments

 A commentator stated that the proposed rulemaking is not RACT. It does not accomplish RACT, but maintains a status quo that does not meet the CAA test of reducing air pollution emissions for NOx and VOCs (volatile organic chemicals) ''. . . as expeditiously as practicable.'' The proposed rulemaking would have allowed higher limit (132,000 tons NOx) than what is already emitted. Power plants would have been allowed to increase emissions, while the purpose of RACT is to decrease emissions.

 The Board disagrees that the proposed rulemaking was not RACT. The evaluation or re-evaluation of what constitutes RACT-level control for affected sources is a requirement that must be fulfilled each time the EPA promulgates a new NAAQS as was the case in 1979 for the 1-hour ozone standard and in 1997 for the 8-hour ozone standard; re-evaluation of RACT is also required when the EPA revises a NAAQS as was the case in 2008 for the 8-hour ozone standard. The proposed rulemaking addressed the RACT requirements for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS promulgated in 1997 and 2008. The final-form rulemaking is applicable to certain owners and operators of major sources of NOx or VOC emissions (precursors to ozone formation) in existence on or before July 20, 2012, the effective date of the EPA's designations and classifications for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. See 77 FR 30088.

 The Board agrees that the purpose of RACT is to decrease ozone precursor emissions. However, the amount of emission reductions achieved as a result of the application of RACT-level control is determined on the basis of the source's potential to emit before and after the application of RACT-level control, not on a comparison with a source's current actual emissions. The final-form rulemaking establishes presumptive RACT requirements and RACT emission limitations for NOx or VOCs that are achievable and sustainable during the expected life of the affected unit using technologies that are technically and economically feasible. Implementation of the final-form rulemaking presumptive RACT requirements and RACT emission limitations will reduce the amount of NOx and VOC emissions that the owner and operator of a facility subject to §§ 129.96—129.100 would be legally allowed to emit to the atmosphere.

 In response to comments and the EPA's Ozone NAAQS Implementation Rule published at 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015), the Department conducted additional reviews of historical emissions data for coal-fired electric generating units (EGU) equipped with SCR technology. The Department determined that the NOx limit specified in § 129.97(g)(1)(viii) should be revised. Section 129.97(g)(1)(viii) specifies that any combustion unit equipped with an SCR system that is operating with an inlet temperature equal to or greater than 600°F must meet a NOx emission limit of 0.12 lb NOx/million Btu. Compliance with this emission limit is also required when by-passing the SCR system. The Department acknowledges that the NOx RACT limit in the final-form rulemaking is not the lowest achievable emissions rate for this technology. However, the EPA has indicated in the preamble for the final rule approving a SIP revision for Wisconsin's NOx RACT Rule that:

RACT limits are not meant to be the lowest achievable emission rates. The Nitrogen Oxides Supplement to the General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 addresses the issue of an acceptable emission limit. See section 4.6 RACT for Certain Electric Utility Boilers (57 FR 55626), ''The EPA expects States, to the extent practicable, to demonstrate that the variety of emission controls adopted are consistent with the most effective level of combustion modification reasonably available for its individual affected sources.''

 See 75 FR 64155, 64157 (October 19, 2010). The Department's re-evaluation of the NOx RACT limit for coal-fired EGUs, taking into consideration cost-effectiveness and technological feasibility, is consistent with the approach outlined in the preamble of the rulemaking published at 75 FR 64155 approving Wisconsin's RACT SIP revision.

 The final-form RACT rulemaking will reduce the amount of pollution that is currently allowed to be emitted through implementation of more stringent limitations. No facility owner or operator will be allowed to increase their emissions. The final-form RACT rulemaking sets forth emission limitations for NOx or VOCs that are achievable using technologies that are reasonably available. For example, upon re-evaluation of the NOx emissions data from coal-fired EGUs equipped with SCR, the Board concluded that a NOx emission limit of 0.12 lb/MMBtu heat input is achievable with operation of the SCR when an inlet temperature of 600°F is reached. The Board also concluded that a NOx emission limit of 0.16 lb/MMBtu heat input is achievable for CFB combustion units. The final-form rulemaking has been amended accordingly.

 Potential NOx emission reductions beyond current RACT allowable emissions are presented as follows. For 257 boilers, the potential NOx emissions reduction is 70,149 tpy or a 28% reduction. For 12 EGUs equipped with SCR systems, the potential NOx emissions reduction is 138,972 tpy or a 75% reduction. For 393 engines, the potential NOx emissions reduction is 20,596 tpy or a 44% reduction. For 148 turbines, the potential NOx emissions reduction is 23,906 tpy or a 40% reduction. In total for 810 air contamination sources, the potential NOx emissions reduction is 253,623 tpy or a 47% reduction.

 Reductions in actual NOx emissions from coal-fired boilers or EGUs are also anticipated as a result of the implementation of the final-form RACT requirements and RACT emission limitations. The actual NOx emissions from coal-fired EGUs in this Commonwealth for 2013 were 119,025 tons. The actual 2013 NOx emissions from coal-fired EGUs that are not scheduled for retirement or for fuel-switching were 92,728 tons. The expected NOx emissions from coal-fired EGUs that are not scheduled for retirement or fuel-switching, based on 2013 production rates and the NOx emission limitations in the final-form rulemaking, are 59,039 tpy. This is an anticipated reduction in actual emissions of approximately 36% [{(92,728 tons − 59,039 tons) / 92,728 tons} × 100 = 36%] from this sector.

 A commentator cautioned the Department not to rigidly apply a benchmark as low as $2,500 per ton to exclude consideration of technically feasible controls. Rather, the Commonwealth needs to consider a broader range of cost effectiveness to see if some level of additional control falls within that range. Based on Wisconsin's analysis, the Department should consider raising its cost-effectiveness ''benchmark'' like Wisconsin and New York after considering and evaluating thoroughly the states' analyses.

 The Board did not establish a bright-line cost effectiveness threshold to determine RACT. The Board initially used minimum cost-effectiveness thresholds of $1,500 and $3,000 per ton of NOx and VOC controlled, respectively, in 1990 dollars, for the implementation of RACT requirements for the 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS in §§ 129.91—129.95. These cost-effectiveness thresholds were consistent with thresholds used at that time by other states for RACT determinations for the 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS as well. The Board used the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index to adjust $1,500 in 1990 dollars to $2,500 in 2010 dollars. When extrapolated into 2014 dollars, this figure is approximately $2,750. The Board used a NOx emission cost-effectiveness upper-bound of $2,800 per ton NOx controlled.

 Even with an additional 25% margin, the upper-bound cost-effectiveness threshold would not be any greater than $3,500 per ton NOx controlled. Similarly for VOC, the upper-bound cost-effectiveness threshold would not be any greater than $7,000 per ton VOC controlled. Applying these new thresholds does not have an effect on the add-on control technology decisions for the presumptive RACT requirements established in the final-form rulemaking. The RACT limits included in the final-form rulemaking are comparable to emission limits included in other states' RACT regulations.

 It should be noted that Wisconsin's SIP-approved RACT regulations in 2010 were based on a NOx cost-effectiveness benchmark of $2,500 per ton controlled.

 Commentators believed that the proposed rulemaking would weaken current emissions limits. Regulatory and policy changes will add ozone and other criteria pollutants to some of the most overburdened communities in this Commonwealth.

 The Board disagrees because the final-form rulemaking does not weaken existing emissions limits. The final-form RACT rulemaking includes emission limitations for NOx or VOCs that are achievable using technologies that are reasonably available.

 Following the adoption and implementation of the final-form rulemaking, NOx emissions from the electric generating sector in this Commonwealth are expected to be reduced from 119,025 tpy, based on 2013 production rates, to 59,039 tpy. The actual NOx emissions from coal-fired EGUs in this Commonwealth for 2013 were 119,025 tons. The actual 2013 NOx emissions from coal-fired EGUs that are not scheduled for retirement or for fuel-switching were 92,728 tons. The expected NOx emissions from coal-fired EGUs that are not scheduled for retirement or fuel-switching, based on 2013 production rates and the NOx emission limitations in the final-form rulemaking, are 59,039 tpy.

 In addition, the final-form rulemaking specifically provides under § 129.97(i) and (j) that the more stringent limitation or requirement applies to the owner or operator of a facility subject to the regulation.

 A commentator represented that for the class of the largest NOx-emitting sources, the representations of ''Anticipated Effect on Emissions'' are overstatements in contrast with the much more common sense approach of comparing the proposed emission limitation with current actual emissions. The latter comparison demonstrates that the proposed RACT requirements are no substantial improvement with respect to controlling NOx emissions from large coal-fired power plants.

 The Board disagrees that the representation of ''anticipated effect on emissions'' should be based on a comparison of the emissions expected as a result of implementation of the presumptive RACT requirements and RACT emission limitations with current actual emissions. The amount of NOx and VOC emission reductions achieved as a result of the application of RACT-level control is determined on the basis of the source's potential to emit before and after the application of RACT-level control. Implementation of the final-form rulemaking presumptive RACT requirements and RACT emission limitations will reduce the amount of ozone precursor emissions that the owner and operator of a facility subject to §§ 129.96—129.100 would be legally allowed to emit to the atmosphere. Further, the final-form rulemaking revises the NOx emission limit for CFB combustion units in § 129.97(g)(1)(vi)(A) from 0.20 lb NOx/million Btu heat input to 0.16 lb NOx/million Btu heat input. The final-form rulemaking also addresses the use of installed SCR or SNCR equipment in § 129.97(g)(1)(viii) and (ix).

 The potential NOx emission reductions in tpy beyond current RACT allowable emissions is approximately 253,623 tons from 810 units as follows: for 257 boilers— approximately 70,149 tons; for EGUs equipped with SCR systems—approximately 138,972 tons; for engines—approximately 20,596 tons; and for turbines—approximately 23,906 tons.

 The actual NOx emissions from coal-fired EGUs in this Commonwealth for 2013 were 119,025 tons. The actual 2013 NOx emissions from coal-fired EGUs that are not scheduled for retirement or for fuel-switching were 92,728 tons. The expected NOx emissions from coal-fired EGUs that are not scheduled for retirement or fuel-switching, based on 2013 production rates and the NOx emission limitations in the final-form rulemaking, are 59,039 tpy. This is an anticipated reduction in actual emissions of approximately 36% from this sector.

 Some commentators allege that additional support and analysis is needed in the Regulatory Analysis Form (RAF) and preamble to justify the proposed regulations.

 The Board disagrees that there is insufficient information in either the preamble to the proposed rulemaking or the RAF to justify the regulations. Both of these documents are replete with substantive information regarding emissions data, cost-effectiveness numbers, public health information, statutory requirements, small business information and other types of analyses to demonstrate that the regulations are legally required, in the public interest, economically and technologically feasible, and will reduce emissions. The estimates included in the RAF to the proposed rulemaking and the final-form rulemaking are based on the information available to the Department. The presumptive RACT emission limitations were established based on cost-effectiveness of available control technology and are not based on the total number of affected units or number of total units requiring control.

 Some commentators believed that the proposed rulemaking significantly underestimated the number of affected units that would require installation of NOx or VOC control technology. Approximately 150 units operated by natural gas transmission companies would be affected by the proposed rulemaking; this exceeds the Department's estimate for all affected units Statewide. The proposed rulemaking would have significant impact on natural gas transmission company operations, including many requirements to install control technology and associated costs that are significantly under-estimated by the Commonwealth.

 The Board finds that the estimates for numbers of affected units included in the RAF to the proposed rulemaking and the final-form rulemaking are based on the information available to the Department. The presumptive RACT emission limitations were established based on cost-effectiveness of available control technology and not based on the total number of affected units or number of total units requiring control.

 The Board re-evaluated the number of units requiring control as a result of revisions to emission limitations in the final-form rulemaking. The number of turbines requiring control has dropped from 64 to 17 primarily due to the final-form rulemaking setting forth a presumptive RACT emission limitation of 150 ppmvd NOx @ 15% oxygen for simple cycle or regenerative cycle turbines equal to or greater than 1,000 bhp and less than 6,000 bhp.

 Several commentators said that compliance with the Federal Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) or Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) should constitute compliance with RACT. The Department should rely on CAIR/CSAPR to satisfy RACT for EGUs.

 The Board disagrees that compliance with CAIR/CSAPR should constitute compliance with RACT and that the Department should rely on CAIR/CSAPR to satisfy RACT for EGUs. Moreover, the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit granted the EPA's request for voluntary vacatur of the presumption that compliance with the CAIR or the NOx SIP Call automatically constitutes RACT or reasonably available control measures for NOx emissions from EGUs participating in regional cap-and-trade programs. NRDC v. EPA, No. 09-1198 (D.C. Cir.) (order of August 30, 2013). In the EPA's comments on the proposed rulemaking, designated ozone nonattainment areas required to implement RACT must achieve RACT level reductions inside the nonattainment area. In response to the EPA's comment, final-form § 129.98(a) has been amended to address the system-wide averaging provisions as follows: ''System-wide emissions averaging must be among sources under common control of the same owner or operator within the same ozone nonattainment area in this Commonwealth.'' This approach should assure that emissions averaging will occur among units in the same ozone nonattainment area and that emission reductions from outside a given area of more severe nonattainment cannot be used to offset emissions within the area of more severe nonattainment.

 Some commentators believed that the proposed RACT standard would allow coal plants to keep the air in some communities cleaner than others, a fact highly likely to continue racial disparity in air pollution. The health of citizens in this Commonwealth who have limited incomes or are living in poverty is also especially vulnerable to smog pollution. The Department runs the risk of exposing certain citizens, including those living in environmental justice communities, to a disproportionate amount of extra pollution.

 The Board disagrees. The final-form rulemaking reduces the allowable emission rates for certain coal-fired facilities and requires the operation of existing control equipment for other facilities. Pollution from this sector continues to decline. For example, the actual NOx emissions from coal-fired EGUs in this Commonwealth for 2000 were 192,004 tons; the actual NOx emissions from coal-fired EGUs in this Commonwealth for 2013 were 119,025 tons. The actual 2013 NOx emissions from coal-fired EGUs that are not scheduled for retirement or for fuel-switching were 92,728 tons. The expected future NOx emissions from coal-fired EGUs that are not scheduled for retirement or fuel-switching, based on 2013 production rates and the NOx emission limitations in the final-form rulemaking, are 59,039 tpy.

§ 121.1. Definitions

 Several commentators believed that all definitions should match Federal definitions. The proposed new definition for ''stationary internal combustion engine'' opens up application to the entirety of air quality regulations. It appears the Pennsylvania definition has always included portable (not mobile) internal combustion engines. The definition should be same as the EPA's reciprocating internal combustion engines rule in 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart ZZZZ (relating to National emission standards for hazardous air pollutants for stationary reciprocating internal combustion engines). Some commentators suggested that definitions consistent with the Federal definitions '''capacity factor' in 40 CFR 72, 'combustion turbine' in 40 CFR 60 NSPS, and 'stationary internal combustion engine' in NSPS IIII and JJJJ and NESHAPS ZZZZ'' should be added.

 The Board agrees. The final-form rulemaking contains definitions consistent with the Federal regulations. The final-form rulemaking revises the definition of ''stationary internal combustion engine'' to include the term ''stationary reciprocating internal combustion engine.'' The final-form rulemaking adds definitions for ''regenerative cycle combustion turbine,'' ''simple cycle combustion turbine'' and ''stationary combustion turbine.'' Final-form § 129.97(c)(7)(i) establishes that the ''annual capacity factor'' for a combustion unit is the ratio of the unit's heat input (in million Btu or equivalent units of measure) to the unit's maximum rated heat input (in million Btu or equivalent units of measure) times 8,760 hours during a period of 12 consecutive calendar months. The ''annual capacity factor'' for an EGU is established in final-form § 129.97(c)(7)(ii) as the ratio of the unit's actual electric output (expressed in MWe/hr) to the unit's nameplate capacity (or maximum observed hourly gross load (in MWe/hr) if greater than the nameplate capacity) times 8,760 hours during a period of 12 consecutive calendar months. Final-form § 129.97(c)(7)(iii) establishes that for any other unit, the ''annual capacity factor'' is the ratio of the unit's actual operating level to the unit's potential operating level during a period of 12 consecutive calendar months.

 A commentator stated that ''air contamination source'' is broadly defined and becomes problematic when used in § 129.99(b) and (c). The commentator asked if the term applies to each individual piece of equipment or to a grouping of equipment.

 The Board disagrees. The applicability threshold values of § 129.99(b) and (c) were determined as generic emission levels below which the application of add-on emission control technology is not economically feasible. ''Air contamination source'' is already defined in the act and § 121.1 and needs no further clarification.

§ 129.96. Applicability

 A commentator believed that the preamble should have clearly indicated that the proposed rulemaking only applied to major sources of NOx and VOCs.

 The Board agrees that the NOx RACT requirements are applicable to major NOx emitting facilities and the VOC RACT requirements are applicable to major VOC emitting facilities. The NOx requirements of §§ 129.96—129.100 apply Statewide to the owner and operator of a major NOx emitting facility and the VOC requirements of §§ 129.96—129.100 apply Statewide to the owner and operator of a major VOC emitting facility. Section 129.96 was amended to clarify the applicability.

 A commentator stated that while a number of existing regulations are referenced in the applicability section, there is no clarifying statement of prior presumptive RACT requirements that were promulgated under §§ 129.91—129.95. In the proposed rulemaking, these regulations are not superseded until the end of § 129.97. It may be clearer to address all the applicability pieces under § 129.96 instead of splitting it up.

 The Board disagrees. Sections 129.91—129.95 are not superseded by the final-form rulemaking. The affected owners and operators of major VOC and NOx emitting facilities are subject to §§ 129.91—129.95 and §§ 129.96—129.100. Section 129.97(i) is intended to ensure that an owner or operator complies with the more stringent of the RACT requirements in a RACT permit issued under §§ 129.91—129.95 and the presumptive RACT requirements in the final-form rulemaking. Section 129.97(i) and (j) specifically provides that the more stringent provisions apply whether those provisions are under the final-form rulemaking, some other regulation or a previously issued permit. These safeguards prevent backsliding from the most stringent applicable requirements.

 A commentator's understanding of EPA policy is that those sources that have already installed air pollution control equipment as a result of previous RACT are not required to install additional controls absent new information indicating otherwise. See, for example, 70 FR 71612, 71655 and NRDC v. EPA, 571 F.3d 1245, 1253—55. The Department should amend proposed § 129.96 to exclude NOx and VOC sources that have already undergone RACT review and have resulting NOx or VOC, or both, limits or restrictions, unless new information indicates that a new RACT analysis is justified.

 The Board believes that the commentator is referring to NRDC v. EPA, 571 F.3d 1245 (D.C. Cir. 2009), decided by the D.C. Circuit Court in 2009, not 2008 as stated by the commentator. The Board disagrees with the commentator's assertion. The evaluation or re-evaluation of what constitutes RACT-level control for affected sources is a requirement that must be fulfilled each time the EPA promulgates a new NAAQS as was the case in 1979 for the 1-hour ozone standard and in 1997 for the 8-hour ozone standard or revises a NAAQS as was the case in 2008 for the 8-hour ozone standard. The final-form rulemaking addresses the RACT requirements for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS promulgated in 1997 and revised in 2008. The final-form rulemaking requirements are applicable to the owners and operators of subject sources in existence on or before July 20, 2012, and to owners and operators of subject sources when the installation of a new source or a modification or change in operation of an existing source after July 20, 2012, results in the source or facility meeting the definition of a major NOx emitting facility or a major VOC emitting facility.

 The EPA's Phase 2 Rule certification provision allows states to certify that the control measures approved as RACT under the 1-hour ozone standard also satisfy the RACT requirements under the 8-hour ozone standard absent information indicating they should not be approved. This approach adequately ensures that RACT determinations will take into account advances in technology.

 The Department reviewed all available information, including Federal regulations and RACT regulations from various states. This review showed that a new RACT analysis is justified. The Board believes that the presumptive RACT requirements included in the final-form rulemaking are appropriate. Should an affected owner or operator not be able to comply with the presumptive requirement or emission limitation, the owner or operator may propose an alternative RACT requirement or RACT emission limitation under § 129.99(a) based on the source's potential to emit NOx or VOCs.

 Several commentators believed that since they are subject to more stringent requirements under other programs (such as Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT), National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) and New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)) they should be exempt from RACT requirements. The Department should exempt emergency generators and other sources with applicable Federally-mandated NOx and VOC control requirements from RACT requirements. Additional exemptions are needed to accommodate facilities that are already subject to more stringent requirements or have already completed a RACT process.

 The Board disagrees. An evaluation or re-evaluation of what constitutes RACT for affected sources is required under section 182 of the CAA for existing major NOx emitting or existing major VOC emitting facilities each time a NAAQS is promulgated or revised. The final-form rulemaking addresses the RACT requirements for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS promulgated in 1997 and revised in 2008. RACT applies to the owners and operators of existing major stationary sources of NOx and VOC in ozone nonattainment areas. RACT for covered categories is required Statewide and not just in designated ozone nonattainment areas in this Commonwealth because the Commonwealth is in the Northeast Ozone Transport Region established under section 184 of the CAA.

 Section 182(b)(2) of the CAA requires that the Commonwealth implement RACT for each category of existing VOC sources in the area covered by a CTG document issued by the Administrator between November 15, 1990, and the date of attainment, as well as for all existing VOC sources in the area covered by any CTG issued before November 15, 1990, and all other major stationary sources of VOCs that are located in the area. Under sections 182(f)(1) and 184(b)(2) of the CAA, RACT requirements are applicable to all existing major sources of NOx in this Commonwealth.

 The MACT and NESHAP requirements apply to the control of emissions of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) from existing or new major sources as required under section 112 of the CAA (42 U.S.C.A. § 7412). Many HAPs are also VOCs, but not all VOCs are HAPs. NOx are also not HAP. Therefore the owner and operator of an existing major source subject to MACT/NESHAP requirements for the control of HAP emissions may also be subject to RACT requirements for the control of NOx and VOC emissions. Therefore, the Board believes that no additional exemptions are warranted to accommodate the owners and operators of facilities that are already subject to more stringent requirements or have already completed a RACT process.

§ 129.97. Presumptive RACT requirements, RACT emission limitations and petition for alternative compliance schedule

 Some commentators felt the proposed regulations were less stringent than those that similarly-situated Mid-Atlantic states, including New Jersey, are proposing. The commentators requested that the Board explain how the final-form rulemaking will ensure that the Commonwealth is adequately addressing emissions under its jurisdiction so that the Commonwealth is properly meeting its pollution control responsibilities to other states.

 The Board disagrees. The Department reviewed and considered RACT regulations from similarly situated Mid-Atlantic states, including New Jersey, during the development of the proposed and final-form rulemakings. Source categories in this Commonwealth are diverse with numerous sources having varying characteristics differing from those of the other Mid-Atlantic states. The Department evaluated these source categories and determined that the presumptive RACT requirements included in the final-form rulemaking are appropriate. In this Commonwealth, all monitored areas are attaining the 1997 and 2008 ozone standards, except the Harrison monitor in Allegheny County. RACT regulations are not intended to address interstate transport issues.

 Commentators said proposed § 129.97(c) appeared to establish an absolute obligation for relevant sources to be maintained and operated in accordance with both manufacturer's specifications and good engineering practices. However, in many cases, existing sources are components of complex process systems, integrated operations, or are specialized and custom designed, such that the equipment-specific manufacturer's specifications do not exist or are no longer relevant or applicable, and indeed can be inconsistent with ''good engineering practice.'' Even more simply, with respect to older sources, manufacturer's specifications may no longer even be available. Therefore, the regulation should be amended to require operation and maintenance of regulated sources in accordance with good engineering practice, which, in appropriate circumstances, would include operation in accordance with manufacturer's specifications.

 The Board notes that the presumptive RACT requirements included in § 129.93 (relating to presumptive RACT emission limitations) require the installation, maintenance and operation of the source in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. This requirement has been implemented since 1995. In addition, an affected owner or operator that is not able to comply with the applicable presumptive RACT requirements and emission limitations in the final-form rulemaking may opt to determine RACT requirements on a case-by-case basis under § 129.99.

 In the final-form rulemaking, ''good engineering practices'' has been replaced with ''good operating practices.'' ''Engineering'' refers to design, whereas ''operating'' refers to operation. Since this final-form rulemaking is applicable to the owners and operators of existing operating sources, it is more appropriate to regulate operating practices. In addition, this language is consistent with the permit compliance requirements in § 127.444 (relating to compliance requirements.)

 Some commentators stated that in proposed § 129.97(g)(3) there appears to be some disparity between the combustion turbine and the reciprocating engine proposed requirements. The proposed combustion turbine level of 42 ppm on natural gas is approximately four times lower than the RACT level for a lean burn reciprocating engine and approximately two times lower than a rich burn engine. Uncontrolled combustion turbines are close to the proposed RACT levels for reciprocating engines. With reciprocating engines far outnumbering gas turbines in this Commonwealth, the commentator asked if it makes sense, from an environmental or cost impact basis, or both, to have a RACT for combustion turbines, especially small combustion turbines. The RACT compliance cost analyses conducted by the Department is not detailed enough to determine if the RACT emissions level proposed for combustion turbines is cost effective.

 The Board disagrees with the comparison of emission rates for engines to turbines. They are different combustion technologies and are considered to be different source types for the purposes of RACT determinations. Therefore, the Board disagrees that presumptive RACT requirements and emission limitations should not be established for turbines. The number of turbines subject to RACT requirements in this Commonwealth justifies the establishment of presumptive RACT emission limitations for turbines to minimize case-by-case RACT determinations.

 Presumptive RACT emission limitations are implemented for each source category based on RACT determinations and associated emissions data. In addition, the owner or operator of any affected source that cannot meet a presumptive RACT emission limitation may propose an alternative limit determined on a case-by-case basis.

 One commentator was concerned with the Board's statement in RAF Question 12 that the proposed regulations are ''similar to regulations already adopted by Wisconsin and New York and approved by the EPA.'' However, the commentator believed that New York has in place significantly more stringent emissions limits than the Commonwealth. The commentator stated that the Board should either support or amend its response to RAF Question 12.

 The Board believes that its response is adequate. The Department reviewed and considered RACT regulations from various states when evaluating what constitutes RACT for the types of sources affected by the final-form rulemaking. Source categories in this Commonwealth are diverse with numerous individual sources having varying characteristics. The Department evaluated these source categories and determined that the presumptive RACT requirements included in the final-form rulemaking are appropriate.

 Due to variability in source type, combustion characteristics, unit size, fuel usage, operating conditions and source age, there are differences between the final-form rulemaking and the New York RACT regulations in terms of emission limits, exceptions, size cutoffs, and the like. For example, New York determined that combined-cycle combustion turbines operated after July 1, 2014, should undergo case-by-case analysis due to limited numbers. As New York noted in their Regulatory Impact Statement, ''Because of the limited number of sources and the wide range of available control technologies, the [NY] Department was not able to identify a presumptive NOx RACT emission limit for combined cycle combustion turbines.'' However, due to the large number of these sources operating in this Commonwealth, the Department was able to determine a presumptive NOx RACT emission limitation for different categories of combined-cycle combustion turbines, including large combustion turbines that will likely be required to use SCR control to meet the applicable NOx RACT emission limitation. The basis for the determination of the presumptive RACT requirements and emission limitations included in the final-form rulemaking is included in the RAF and the comment and response document.

 The determinations of what add-on control technologies are reasonably available to meet the presumptive RACT requirements and emission limitations included in the final-form rulemaking are consistent with the determinations of what add-on control technologies are reasonably available to meet the presumptive RACT requirements in New York. The RACT emission limits included in the final-form rulemaking are comparable to emission limits included in other states' RACT regulations, including New York and Wisconsin.

Subsections (b) and (g)(1)—Combustion units

 A commentator believed that the proposed rulemaking requires minimization of NOx and carbon monoxide (CO) emissions which is inconsistent with the boiler MACT rule. The commentator recommended that this provision be amended to mirror the boiler MACT requirements. The commentator also stated that a periodic tune-up conducted in accordance with the boiler MACT satisfies § 129.99 in the year in which it is conducted.

 The Board revised the final-form rulemaking to require biennial tune-ups for a combustion unit with a rated heat input equal to or greater than 20 million Btu/hour and less than 50 million Btu/hour conducted in accordance with 40 CFR 63.11223. CO emissions are required to be included in the record under 40 CFR 63.11223. In addition, CO emissions are recorded as a surrogate for VOC emissions.

 The commentator found that reference to ''flame pattern'' is not applicable to all combustion sources. The commentator has seen instances when combustion unit language has been included in a combustion turbine permit rendering an irrelevant and impossible-to-comply-with permit condition.

 The Board agrees that the requirements for combustion units referencing ''flame pattern'' are not applicable to all combustion sources, including turbines. The presumptive RACT requirement for a combustion unit with a rated heat input equal to or greater than 20 million Btu/hour and less than 50 million Btu/hour is a biennial tune-up conducted in accordance with the procedures in 40 CFR 63.11223, which includes inspection and adjustment of the flame pattern. A combustion unit is a stationary equipment used to burn fuel primarily for the purpose of producing power or heat by indirect heat transfer. While turbines are combustion sources, they produce power by direct heat transfer and are not combustion units by definition. Therefore, the tune-up requirement is not applicable to combustion turbines. In addition, this tune-up requirement should not appear as an applicable permit requirement for combustion turbines.

 Commentators recommended that the presumptive RACT requirements for coal-fired boilers should be established based on actual emission levels achieved in practice while operating with post-combustion controls, such as SCR or SNCR systems. The RACT regulations should require the use of SCR or other control devices continuously to minimize NOx pollution.

 The Board disagrees that the presumptive RACT requirements for coal-fired boilers should be established based solely on the lowest actual emission levels achieved in practice by some of the affected units while operating with post-combustion controls. The proposed and final-form RACT rulemakings establish presumptive emission limitations for NOx or VOCs that are achievable and sustainable during the expected life of the affected unit using technologies that are both technically and economically feasible. Implementation of the final-form rulemaking presumptive RACT requirements and RACT emission limitations will reduce the amount of ozone precursor emissions that the owner and operator of a facility subject to §§ 129.96—129.100 would be legally allowed to emit to the atmosphere.

 Design limitations of the existing SCR and SNCR control technology installed on the affected coal-fired boilers dictate the operating parameters that are reasonably achievable. However, based on consideration of comments received during the public comment period and on the evaluation of NOx emissions data for coal-fired boilers for a 5-year period, the final-form rulemaking addresses the use of installed SCR or SNCR equipment in § 129.97(g)(1)(viii) and (ix). Further, the NOx emission limit for CFB combustion units in § 129.97(g)(1)(vi)(A) is revised from the proposed 0.20 lb NOx/million Btu heat input to 0.16 lb NOx/million Btu heat input in the final-form rulemaking.

 Upon re-evaluation of the NOx emissions data from the coal-fired EGUs equipped with SCR, the Board concluded that a NOx emission limit of 0.12 lb/MMBtu was achievable with operation of SCR when an inlet temperature of 600°F is reached. This limit accounts for the design limitations of the existing SCR systems. In addition, compliance with this emission limit is also required when by-passing the SCR system.

 Upon re-evaluation of the NOx emission data from CFB boilers, the Board concluded that a NOx emission limit of 0.16 lb/MMBtu was achievable. The 0.16 lb/MMBtu NOx emission level must be achieved at all times and, if equipped with SNCR, the SNCR must be in operation with the injection of reagents including ammonia or other NOx-reducing agents, when the temperature at the area of the reagent injection is 1,600°F or greater.

 The Board further believes that continuous operation of existing SCR and SNCR control technology installed on the combustion units subject to final-form § 129.97(g)(1)(vi)(A), (viii) and (ix) cannot be required due to changing market conditions and deployment of electric generating capacity. Therefore, due to the design limitations of the SCR and SNCR control technology and the minimum operating temperatures required for efficient operation and optimized NOx emission reduction, operation of the existing SCR and SNCR controls below the minimum designed temperature cannot be required in the final-form rulemaking.

 A commentator wanted the Board to provide the technical analysis that supports the 0.08 lb NOx/MMBtu heat input, as that is different from the EPA's NSPS which recognizes 0.10 lb NOx/MMBtu.

 The Board agrees and that analysis is as follows. The Department determined that the average uncontrolled NOx emission rate for natural gas-fired combustion units was 0.2 lb/MMBtu. At an average NOx control efficiency of 50% for low-NOx burners, the feasible control for natural gas-fired combustion units, the presumptive NOx RACT emission limitation for natural gas-fired combustion units rated at or above 50 MMBtu/hr is 0.1 lb/MMBtu. The Department initially lowered this to 0.08 lb NOx/MMBtu to be consistent with Wisconsin's SIP-approved RACT requirements.

 Upon further analysis, the Department could not find sufficient information to support the Commonwealth establishing a presumptive NOx RACT emission limitation of 0.08 lb/MMBtu just to be consistent with Wisconsin's RACT requirements. Therefore, in the final-form rulemaking, the presumptive NOx RACT emission limitation was revised from 0.08 lb NOx/MMBtu to 0.10 lb NOx/MMBtu for a natural gas-fired combustion unit or process heater with a rated heat input equal to or greater than 50 MMBtu/hour. This requirement is now consistent with the requirement in the NSPS in 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart Db (relating to standards of performance for industrial-commercial-institutional steam generating units) and § 129.201 (relating to boilers).

 A commentator believed that due to the larger combustion zone available on natural gas-fired combustion units rated greater than 50 million Btu/hour, the presumptive RACT emission rate of 0.08 lb NOx/MMBtu for these units is not achievable for a unit that was designed to burn coal or fuel oil and has been converted to firing natural gas. For example, the units at the Martins Creek facility were converted from an oil-fired design to allow combustion of natural gas. Stack testing of these units revealed that NOx emission rates cannot approach the standard that may be achievable for units originally designed to combust primarily or exclusively natural gas. Therefore, the commentator believed that case-by-case RACT determinations are appropriate for these sources.

 The Board finds that in the final-form rulemaking the presumptive NOx RACT emission limitation was revised from 0.08 lb NOx/MMBtu to 0.10 lb NOx/MMBtu for a natural gas-fired combustion unit or process heater with a rated heat input equal to or greater than 50 million Btu/hour. This requirement is now consistent with the requirement in the NSPS in 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart Db and § 129.201. Should the owner or operator of a combustion unit choose not to comply with the presumptive requirement, the owner or operator may propose an alternative NOx RACT emission limitation based on the potential to emit NOx under § 129.99(a).

 A commentator stated that even for those few boilers that lack controls superior to the contemplated RACT of low NOx burners, installation and operation of SNCR would achieve reductions of NOx at significantly less than $2,500 per ton.

 The Board disagrees. The Department reviewed all available information, including Federal regulations and RACT regulations from various states. The cost-effectiveness of technically feasible add-on control devices, including SNCR, was calculated in accordance with the EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Cost Manual. The Board believes that the presumptive RACT requirements included in the final-form rulemaking are appropriate.

Subsection (g)(2)—Combustion turbines

 A commentator found that the Commonwealth's analysis does not indicate whether a meaningful environmental benefit would be derived from VOC reductions. The Commonwealth should provide background documentation to support the basis for the concentration-based turbine standard.

 The Board notes that RACT re-evaluation is a requirement to be fulfilled each time a NAAQS is promulgated. The final-form rulemaking addresses the RACT requirements for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS promulgated in 1997 and 2008. However, no specific emission reductions are required under the re-evaluation.

 The Department found that the typical uncontrolled VOC emission limit for RACT I was 25 ppm @ 15% oxygen, as methane for turbines rated greater than 1,000 bhp and less than 180 MW. This translates into 9 ppm @ 15% oxygen, as propane. The cost of VOC control using an oxidation catalyst was found to be $21,112—$421,095, which is not cost-effective. Therefore, the final-form rulemaking establishes a presumptive RACT VOC emission limitation of 9 ppm @ 15% oxygen, as propane for simple cycle turbines and combined cycle turbines fired on fuel oil rated at greater than 1,000 bhp and less than 180 MW.

 Continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS) data indicates that a combined cycle turbine fired on natural gas rated at greater than 1,000 bhp and less than 180 MW can meet a VOC emission limitation of 5 ppm @ 15% oxygen, as propane. Additionally, CEMS data indicates that turbines rated at greater than 180 MW can meet a VOC emission of 2 ppm @ 15% oxygen, as propane. Therefore, these emission limitations are established in the final-form rulemaking.

 The technical support document is available with the final-form rulemaking, which includes documentation to support the basis for the VOC RACT emission limitations. VOC reductions of the type contemplated under this final-form rulemaking will assist in the maintenance of the 8-hour 1997 and 2006 ozone standards. The EPA regulates ground-level ozone as a criteria air pollutant because of its widespread adverse health and environmental effects. Exposure to high concentrations of ground-level ozone is a serious human and animal health and welfare threat, causing respiratory illnesses and decreased lung function, agricultural crop loss, visible foliar injury to sensitive plant species, and damage to forests, ecosystems and infrastructure.

Subsection (g)(3)—Internal combustion engines

 Some commentators believed § 129.97(g)(3) was unclear. This paragraph should clearly state that emergency engines greater than 500 bhp are excluded from the emission limits for stationary internal combustion engines greater than 500 bhp. Proposed subsections (c)(6) and (g)(3) were not compatible. One exempts emergency stand-by engines operating less than 500 hours in a 12-month rolling period, while the other generally includes stationary internal combustion engines. The commentators suggested adding ''[e]xcept as provided in § 129.97(c)(6)'' to the beginning of subsection (g)(3).

 The Board agrees that the proposed paragraph was unclear. The final-form rulemaking has been amended to clarify that the owner or operator of a source that meets the requirements under § 129.97(c) would not be required to also meet the numerical presumptive RACT emission limitations under § 129.97(g) for that source.

Subsection (h)—Portland cement kilns

 One commentator contended that the emissions limitations required of Portland cement kilns would likely require the significant expenditure of funds for the installation of NOx air pollution control technologies such as SNCR systems.

 The Board disagrees. The presumptive RACT emission limitations included in the final-form rulemaking for Portland cement kilns are consistent with the emission limitations for Portland cement kilns in § 145.143 (relating to standard requirements). The Department believes that the final-form rulemaking contains appropriate presumptive RACT emission limitations for Portland cement kilns. In addition, several existing Portland cement kilns are equipped with SNCR. Should the owner or operator of a Portland cement kiln choose not to comply with the presumptive requirement, the owner or operator may propose an alternative NOx RACT emission limitation based on the potential to emit NOx under § 129.99(a).

 Several commentators said that a compliance alternative needs to be included for cement kilns in this program, be it CAIR allowances or some other program NOx allowances. To ensure that this program does not result in an increase of emissions over what was contemplated in the proposed rulemaking, an allowance program should require a two-for-one allowance surrender. This provision would provide necessary flexibility to the cement industry and would also provide even greater emission offsets in the event a facility found itself out of compliance with the proposed regulation.

 The Board disagrees. RACT re-evaluation is a requirement to be fulfilled each time a NAAQS is promulgated. The final-form rulemaking addresses the RACT requirements for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS promulgated in 1997 and 2008. RACT applies to existing major stationary sources of VOCs and NOx in ozone nonattainment areas. RACT is defined as ''the lowest emission limitation that a particular source is capable of meeting by the application of control technology that is reasonably available considering technological and economic feasibility.'' Therefore, CAIR allowances or some other program NOx allowances cannot be used to meet the RACT requirements.

 Furthermore, the EPA commented on the proposed rulemaking that designated ozone nonattainment areas required to implement RACT must achieve RACT levels reductions inside the nonattainment area. In response to the EPA's comment, final-form § 129.98(a) has been amended to address the system-wide averaging provisions as follows: ''System-wide emissions averaging must be among sources under common control of the same owner or operator within the same ozone nonattainment area in this Commonwealth.'' This approach should assure that emissions averaging will occur among units in the same ozone nonattainment area.

 Some commentators found that the proposed rulemaking would impose year-round emission standards that are currently ozone season standards on cement kilns. This imposes additional costs without any public benefits.

 The Board disagrees that the final-form rulemaking imposes additional costs without any public benefits. RACT re-evaluation is a requirement to be fulfilled each time a NAAQS is promulgated. The final-form rulemaking addresses the RACT requirements for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS promulgated in 1997 and 2008. RACT applies to existing major stationary sources of VOCs and NOx in ozone nonattainment areas. RACT is defined as ''the lowest emission limitation that a particular source is capable of meeting by the application of control technology that is reasonably available considering technological and economic feasibility.'' Including §§ 145.141—145.146 in § 129.96 is not appropriate because the requirements included in § 145.143 are applicable only during the ozone season (May 1 through September 30), whereas RACT requirements are applicable on a year-round basis. The emissions reductions resulting from year-round requirements will be beneficial to the public due to lower concentrations of ground-level ozone.

[Continued on next Web Page]



No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.

This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Bulletin full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.


Navigation

webmaster@PaBulletin.com