The MPCA suggests using the following format to provide the information necessary for a BART analysis. Pollutant(s) Controlled

Transcription

1 Attachment 3 Suggested Format for BART Analysis The MPCA suggests using the following format to provide the information necessary for a BART analysis. 1.0 Executive Summary < Source Description> Table <1>. Summary of Proposed BART Unit Proposed BART Pollutant(s) led <EU, description> <control device or work practice> <,, or > Proposed BART emission limit <describe limit> Visibility Improvement on Percentile Day (delta ) Class I Area(s) Impacted 2.0 Introduction <Source Description and Background> <Identification of BART-eligible units at the facility> <BART analysis methodology> 3.0 BART-Eligible Units Subject to MACT Standard (Include this section only if appropriate) <Describe only those BART-eligible units for which a MACT applies and it addresses a visibilityimpairing pollutant. Describe your rationale as to why the MACT limit represents BART for that pollutant.> Page 1 of 8

2 Table <2>. Summary Table of BART-Eligible Units for which MACT Represents BART Unit No. Unit Description MACT Limit Visibility- Impairing Pollutant Regulated by MACT Std. MACT Limit Expressed in Pounds of Pollutant/day (for large numbers of units, grouping units is ok) 4.0 Baseline Conditions and Visibility Impacts for BART-eligible Units Unit ID Table <3>. Baseline Conditions Modeling Input Data. Unit Description Max 24-hr Max 24-hr PM2.5 Max 24-hr Max 24- hr No. Easting (utm)) Northing (utm) Height of opening ground Base elevation of ground length/ width,or diamete r Flow Rate at exit (acfm) Exit Gas Temperature (degrees F) Table <4>. Basis for 24-hour Data in Table <> Unit ID Basis for 24-hr actual Basis for 24-hr actual Basis for PM hr actual Basis for 24-hr actual (In this table, provide a detailed explanation of baseline data sources and any assumptions made. For example. if stack test data was used, include the date of the test and fuel combusted. ) Table <5>. Baseline Visibility Modeling Results. Unit ID Class I Area with Greatest Impact Combined <If a facility wishes to provide additional information about visibility modeling results regarding the extent and magnitude of improvement such as number of 1.0, number of receptors affected, or figures depicting modeling results, please include these metrics as an appendix to the BART analysis. This additional information is optional.> Page 2 of 8

3 5.0 BART Analysis for BART-Eligible Units A. Unit A Sulfur Dioxide s STEP 1 Identify All Available Retrofit Technologies a. Existing controls <and any other information pertinent to retrofit control equipment identification> b. Available Retrofit Technologies <identify work practices/ fuel changes/ operational changes/pollution prevention measures in this step as well> STEP 2 Eliminate Technically Infeasible Options STEP 3 Evaluate Effectiveness of Remaining Technologies STEP 4 Evaluate Impacts and Document the Results Impact analysis part 1: Costs of compliance Impact analysis part 2: Energy impacts Impact analysis part 3: Non-air quality environmental impacts Impact analysis part 4: Remaining useful life STEP 5 Evaluate Visibility Impacts <Describe modeling protocol used, options chosen where allowed and if any changes were made to specified protocol> Table <6>. Post-control Rates for Unit <insert > Max 24-hr Max 24-hr PM2.5 Max 24-hr Max 24-hr (Note that collateral reductions/increases in other pollutants may result application of a given control technology) Page 3 of 8

4 Table <7>. Post- Parameters for Unit <insert > No. Easting (utm)) Northing (utm) Base elevation of ground Height of opening ground length/ width,or diameter Flow Rate at exit (acfm) Exit Gas Temperature (degrees F) Table <8>. s - Visibility Modeling Results. Class I Area Combined with Greatest Impact STEP 6 - Propose BART <include justification for BART proposal> <include proposed compliance schedule> <Insert Summary of the Impacts Analysis Table 15 below> Nitrogen Oxides s STEP 1 Identify All Available Retrofit Technologies STEP 2 Eliminate Technically Infeasible Options STEP 3 Evaluate Effectiveness of Remaining Technologies STEP 4 Evaluate Impacts and Document the Results Impact analysis part 1: Costs of compliance Impact analysis part 2: Energy impacts Impact analysis part 3: Non-air quality environmental impacts Impact analysis part 4: Remaining useful life STEP 5 Evaluate Visibility Impacts Page 4 of 8

5 Table <9>. Post-control Rates for Unit <insert > Max 24- hr Max 24- hr PM2.5 Max 24-hr % reduction <increase > Max 24-hr % reductio n <increa se> <Note that collateral reductions/increases in other pollutants may result application of a given control technology> Table <10>. Post- Parameters for Unit <insert > Flow Rate at No. exit (acfm) Easting (utm)) Northing (utm) Height of opening ground Base elevation of ground length/ width,or diameter Exit Gas Temperature (degrees F) Table <11>. s - Visibility Modeling Results Combined Class I Area with Greatest Impact exceed ing decivie w STEP 6 - Propose BART <include justification for BART proposal> <include proposed compliance schedule> <Insert Summary of the Impacts Analysis Table 15 below> Particulate Matter () s STEP 1 Identify All Available Retrofit Technologies STEP 2 Eliminate Technically Infeasible Options STEP 3 Evaluate Effectiveness of Remaining Technologies STEP 4 Evaluate Impacts and Document the Results Page 5 of 8

6 Impact analysis part 1: Costs of compliance Impact analysis part 2: Energy impacts Impact analysis part 3: Non-air quality environmental impacts Impact analysis part 4: Remaining useful life STEP 5 Evaluate Visibility Impacts Table <12>. PM Post-control Rates for Unit <insert > PM Max 24-hr Max 24-hr PM2.5 Max 24-hr % reduction Max 24-hr Emissi ons % reduction (Note that collateral reductions/increases in other pollutants may result application of a given control technology) Table <13>. PM Post- Parameters and Visibility Results for Unit <insert > PM Technolo gy No. Easting (utm)) Northing (utm) Height of opening ground Base elevation of ground length/ width,or diamete r Flow Rate at exit (acfm) Exit Gas Temperature (degrees F) Table <14>. PM s - Visibility Modeling Results. PM Combined Class I Area with Greatest Impact Page 6 of 8

7 STEP 6 - Propose BART <include justification for BART proposal> <include proposed compliance schedule> <Insert Summary of the Impacts Analysis Table 15 below> (Add a new section for each emission unit evaluated or groups of units evaluated together) Page 7 of 8

8 Table <15>. Unit <>: Summary of the Impacts Analysis for,, s C. S. Evaluated Energy impact s? Performance Level (percent pollutant removed) Baseline Rate 1 (tons/year) Expected Reductions (tons/year) Current Rate (lb/ hour or lb/mmbtu) Expected Rate (lb/ hour or lb/mmbtu) Total Annualize d Cost ($) Average cost effectiveness ($ per ton of pollutant removed) Incremental cost effectiveness ($ per ton of pollutant removed) Collateral Increase in other Pollutants? Non-Air Quality Environmental Impacts 2 Greatest change in modeled visibility on % day baseline 3 1 Report the baseline emissions as described on page 12 of Attachment 2. 2 List non-air media impacted. 3 Calculate the difference between baseline visibility impact and controlled visibility impact for each modeled year. Report the value of the difference in for the year with the greatest difference. For example, if visibility impact was reduced by 0.43 for a given technology, report that improvement as Page 8 of 8