the bart process by kathy kaufman and joe kordzi september 1, 2005 epa region 6

The BART Process

by

Kathy Kaufman

and

Joe Kordzi

September 1, 2005

EPA Region 6

Applicability

The CAA requires use of the BART Guidelines for powerplants 750 MW or greater.

States are encouraged to use the BART Guidelines for all source categories.

Part 1 - Identify the BART-eligible Sources

STARTIs the source BART Eligible?


No

Does the PLANT contain emissions units in one or more of the 26

source categories?

Yes

Source is notBART-eligible

Next Slide

The 26 BART Categories1) Fossil-fuel fired steam electric plants > 250 million BTU/hr heat input

2) Coal cleaning plants (thermal dryers)

3) Kraft pulp mills

4) Portland cement plants

5) Primary zinc smelters

6) Iron and steel mill plants

7) Primary aluminum ore reduction plants

8) Primary copper smelters

9) Municipal incinerators capable of charging > 250 tons of refuse per day

10) Hydrofluoric, sulfuric, and nitric acid plants

11) Petroleum refineries

12) Lime plants

13) Phosphate rock processing plants

The 26 BART Categories14. Coke oven batteries

15. Sulfur recovery plants

16. Carbon black plants (furnace process)

17. Primary lead smelters

18. Fuel conversion plants

19. Sintering plants

20. Secondary metal production facilities

21. Chemical process plants

22. Fossil-fuel boilers of more than 250 million BTUs per hour heat input

23. Petroleum storage/ transfer facilities exceeding 300,000 barrels

24. Taconite ore processing facilities

25. Glass fiber processing plants

26. Charcoal production facilities


Yes

For each UNIT

In existence onAugust 7, 1977?

andBegan operation after

August 7, 1962?

Yes

“in existence” means the owner/operator obtained all necessaryapprovals/permits and either has (1)begun, or caused to begin on-siteconstruction of the facility, or (2)executed binding agreements/contractsfor construction.

“In operation” is defined asengaged in activity relatedto the primary designfunction of the source.

Sources in operation before1962 but reconstructedduring 1962 to 1977 aretreated as new sources as ofthe time of reconstruction.

A modification doesnot change a unit'sconstruction date forthe purpose ofBART eligibility.

No


Next Slide


No


Visibility-impairingpollutants include SO2,NOx, PM, and optionallyVOCs and NH3.

Are the totalpotential emissions of any visibility impairing pollutant,

summed across all units,> = 250 tpy?

Yes

The collection ofemissions units is a

BART-eligible source.The source is subject to a

BART review for SO2,NOX, and PM.

Not pollutant specific atthis point.

"All units" are thosewithin the “contiguous oradjacent” boundary, andunder common control.

“Potential to emit” isthe maximum capacityof a stationary sourceto emit a pollutantunder its physical andoperational design.

Yes

Next Slide


Example: A stationary source has two emissions units, with the following potential emissions:

Emissions unit A Emissions unit B

200 tpy SO2 100 tpy SO2

150 tpy NOX 75 tpy NOX

25 tpy PM 10 tpy PM

Potential emissions of SO2 are 300 tpy, which exceeds the 250 tpy threshold. Therefore, the entire source is BART-eligible, even though the potential emissions of PM and NOX at each emissions unit are less than 250 tpy each.

Part 2 - Identify Sources Subject to BART

Yes

Demonstrate emissions from all

BART-eligible sources are notreasonably anticipated to cause

or contribute to any visibility impairment in a Class I area?

No

No Sources aresubject to BART

STOP

May be done pollutant bypollutant, or for all visibility-impairing pollutants todetermine if emissions fromthese sources contribute tovisibility impairment.

No More sources?

Check next source

Yes

Next Slide


Next Slide

No No

Determine if one or more BART-eligible sources canbe excluded from causing/

contributing to visibilityimpairment in nearby

Class I areas.

Consider SO2, NOx, PM(and optionally, VOC andNH3) emissions indetermining whether sourcescause or contribute tovisibility impairment.

Set a threshold forcontribution of achange of 0.5 dv

A larger number of sourcescausing impacts visibility ina Class I area may warrant alower contribution thresholdthan 0.5 deciviews.


Next Slide

Run CALPUFF foreach source

Use the Model Plantsapproach

Using a contribution threshold of0.5 dv, can exempt (1) a source of< 500 tpy NOx/SO2, if > 50 kmfrom a Class I area, and (2) asource of < 1000 tpy NOx/SO2 , if> 100 km from a Class I area.

You should develop a modelingprotocol, consulting with EPA and yourRPO. Consult EPA’s InteragencyWorkgroup on Air Quality Modeling(IWAQM) Phase 2 Summary Reportand Recommendations for ModelingLong Range Transport Impacts.

Calculate daily visibility valuesfor each receptor as the changein dv compared against naturalvisibility conditions. Use EPA’s‘‘Guidance for EstimatingNatural Visibility ConditionsUnder the Regional Haze Rule,’’


Do any single sources contribute tovisibility impairment ?

Yes

No

No Sources aresubject to BART

STOP

Those BART-eligiblesources are subject

to BART

Next Slide

Part 3 – Determine the BART Controls

For Each Emissions Unit

Establish BART for eachpollutant

Is the sourcealready controlled?

Yes

No

List all available control optionsfor that pollutant

Use information sources similar toPSD, as listed in the Guidelines(70 FR 39164)

A control technique is consideredavailable, if it has reached the stageoflicensing and commercial availability.

Next Slide


List all available control optionsfor that pollutant

Is the controlMACT?

Yes

The control canbe BARTNo

Is the controlNSPS, BACT, or

LAER?

Is the control the latest, best?

Yes

Yes

No

No

Next Slide


More pollutants?

No, allpollutantscovered

Yes

Is the sourcealready controlled?

The control canbe BART

Next SlideList all available control options

for that pollutant


Eliminate technicallyinfeasible options

Document technical infeasibility byexplaining, based on physical, chemical,or engineering principles, why technicaldifficulties would preclude the successfuluse of the control option on theemissions unit under review.

Control technologies are technicallyfeasible if (1) they have been installedand operated successfully for the type ofsource under review under similarconditions, or (2) the technology could beapplied to the source under review.

Next Slide


Evaluate technicallyfeasible alternatives

Use a common method of comparison, e.g.,pounds of SO2 / million Btu heat input, orpounds of NOx / ton of cement produced.

Take into account the moststringent emission controllevel that the technology iscapable of achieving.

Some latitude to consider specialcircumstances pertinent to thespecific source under review,

Next Slide


Analyze impacts of theBART determination.

Next Slide:

The Five Factors


Estimate the costs ofcontrol

(1) Clearly identify the emission units beingcontrolled - specify a well-defined area orprocess segment within the plant. In somecases, multiple emission units can becontrolled jointly.

(2) specify the control system designparameters. See the Guidelines for potentialsources. The value selected for the designparameter should ensure that the controloption will achieve the level of emissioncontrol being evaluated.

(3) Develop and document estimates ofcapital and annual costs and supplydocumentation.

(4) Identify average and incremental costeffectiveness (C/E) for each option. SeeEPA's Cost Control Manual


Analyze and reportenergy impacts

Determine whether the control technologyresults in energy penalties or benefits andquantify to the extent practicable.

What is the energy consumption/tonsemissions removed? Are locally scarcefuels involved? Are there economic impactsof using different fuels?


Analyze non-air qualityenvironmental impacts

Identify any significant or unusualenvironmental impacts (e.g., haz wastegeneration, waste water, land use, etc.)

Identify, quantify, and assess the effects ofthese non-air environmental impacts.


Consider the source’sremaining useful life

Can be a part of the cost analysis if < thecontrol cost amortization period. If so, (1)use the remaining useful life in the costcalculations, and (2) use a permitcontingency for best control if source doesnot shut down as planned.


Determine visibilityImpacts in the BART

determination

Stastes have flexibility in setting absolutethresholds, target levels of improvement, orde minimis levels since the deciviewimprovement must be weighed among thefive factors, and are free to determine theweight and significance to be assigned toeach factor.

De minimis values must not be higher thanthe PSD applicability levels: 40 tons/yr forSO2 and NOX and 15 tons/yr for PM10.These de minimis levels may only be appliedon a plant-wide basis.

Next Slide


For Each Emissions Unit

Establish BART for eachpollutant

More sources?

Yes

No, all sources covered

STOP

Select a bestalternative

Presumptive controls for >200 MW EGUs

• SO2: 95% control or 0.15 lbs/MMBtu.• NOx:

• In NOx SIP call area, extend use of controls to year-round.

• Outside NOx SIP call area, current combustion controls

• 0.2 – 0.45 lbs/MMBtu, depending on coal and boiler type

Presumptive NOx emission limits

Dry-bottom wall-fired (75 units subject to presumptive limits) Bituminous 0.39 Sub-bituminous 0.23 Lignite 0.29

Tangential-fired (110 units subject to presumptive limits) Bituminous 0.28 Sub-bituminous 0.15 Lignite 0.17

Cell Burners (27 units subject to presumptive limits) Bituminous 0.40 Sub-bituminous 0.45

Dry-turbo-fired (4 units subject to presumptive limits) Bituminous 0.32 Sub-bituminous 0.23

Wet-bottom tangential-fired (3 units subject to presumptive limits) Bituminous 0.62

the bart process by kathy kaufman and joe kordzi september 1, 2005 epa region 6

Documents