Proposal
Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality
December 1, 2017
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tiers
ED 002061 00163089-00001
Technical Concerns with Proposa
Concerns with durability of a SIP approval based on errors in ADEQ's analysis of the five statutory BART factors
- ADEQ must take into account the remaining useful life of the units proposed SIP disregards Entergy CTUC date and instead delays it
W Bl DFGD WB2 DFGD
$5,420 $5,387
$4,599 $4,571
* As proposed in SIP ** CTUC in 2030 and amortization start in 2021
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tiers 8&9
ED 002061 00163089-00002
CTUa a C Date ProposedI Iby EAja
EAI has identified CTUC date of 2028 for both White Bluff units:
- Comments on Proposed FIP (8/7/15) - Petition for Administrative Reconsideration of FIP (11/23/16) - Motion to Stay FIP, 8th Circuit (2/8/17) - Opening Merits Brief, 8th Circuit (2/17/17) - Updated Five-Factor Analysis (provided as CBI) (8/18/17)
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tiers 8&9
ED 002061 00163089-00003
Proposed SIP conducts an incomplete Q/D analysis and singles out Independence for further evaluation
Conducting source-specific four-factor analysis is not required for first planning period, is contrary to the state's arguments on the FIP, and could undermine the challenges to the Regional Haze rule revisions
State may also consider other factors in addition to four factors
-- Not limited to a BART-type analysis
Entergy's proposed cease-to-use-coal date must be considered in the Long-Term Strategy
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tiers 8&9
ED 002061 00163089-00004
While a source-specific four-factor analysis is not required, the proposal conducts one for Independence and thus explicitly considers cost-effectiveness of controls
-- Proposed SIP disregards proposed CTUC date submitted by Entergy in September 2017, this suggests a 30-year RUL for the units
INI DFGD IN2 DFGD
$4,252 $3,925
$2,853 $2,634
Artificially low value based on EPA FIP cost estimates
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tiers 8&9
ED 002061 00163089-00005
Proposed SIP compares 30-day average actual S0 2emission rates to existing 3-hour average permit limits
- Limits:
1.2 Ib/MMBtu (White Bluff)
0.93 Ib/MMBtu (Independence)
- Due to natural variability in coal sulfur content, in order to ensure compliance with applicable short-term (3-hour) limits, Entergy must necessarily achieve long-term (e.g. 30-day) average emission rates well below the applicable short-term limit
- Proposed SIP draws improper conclusions from this comparison of data with significantly differing averaging times
Suggests that plant is currently utilizing low-sulfur coal as an existing control, when actual 3-hour average data indicates maximum emission rates approaching limit
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tiers 8&9
ED 002061 00163089-00006
Technical Concerns with Proposa
Example: White Bluff Unit 1 Data for 2014-2016 Limit = 1.2 lb S0 2/MMBtu
# of 3-hour Average
Values Equal to
S0 2 Em ission Rate Given Rate (2014-
(Ib/M M Btu)
2016)
0.1
2.0
0.2
8.0
0.3
73.0
0.4
1829.0
o.s
5962.0
0.6
7418.0
0.7
3151.0
0.8
605.0
0.9
126.0
1
25.0
1.1
4.0
1.2
0.0
C um ulative % o f all Values Less than or Equal to Given Rate
(2014-2016)
0 .0 1 % 0 .0 5 % 0 .4 3 % 9 .9 6 % 4 1 .0 0 % 7 9 .6 3 % 9 6 .0 4 % 9 9 .19% 9 9 .8 5 % 9 9 .9 8 % 1 0 0 .0 0 % 1 0 0 .0 0 %
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tiers 8&9
ED 002061 00163089-00007
Technical Concerns with Proposa
3-hr vg S2 Rate (b/MMBtu)
# of 3-hour Average Values 2014-2016
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
S02 E f ^ i^ a t e (Ib/MMBtu)
7 ED 002061 00163089-00008
EPA has published a significant Technical Support Document (TSD) based on revised nationwide CAMx modeling for all Class I areas
The Sierra Club submitted comments to EPA on the proposed Phase I SIP approval which purportedly show that NOx emissions from White Bluff and Independence contribute to ozone nonattainment in St. Louis
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tiers 8&9
ED 002061 00163089-00009
EPA 2028 Preliminary Modeling
- EPA conducted preliminary visibility modeling for 2028 (end of second planning period) with intention of informing the regional haze SIP development
- The modeling predicted 2028 future visibility impairment including domestic anthropogenic, domestic natural, and international anthropogenic and natural sources
- EPA also conducted source apportionment modeling for multiple source sectors including Biogenic, Fugitive, Agricultural, Marine Vessels, Non-point, On-road and non-road mobile, oil and gas, EGUs, non-EGU point, etc.
The visibility analysis was conducted using the draft modeling guidance released consistent with the Regional Haze Rule (RHR) revisions, including
- Use of most impaired days vs. the 20% worst days in calculation of the predicted 2028 visibility
- Updates to the glidepath by updating the baseline worst conditions to reflect the 2000-04 most impaired days
- Updates to the glidepath by updating the 2064 end point to most impaired natural condition
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tiers 8&9
ED 002061 00163089-00010
EPA's modeling predict that the 2028 future visibility impairment at the Caney Creek Wilderness Area and Hercules-Glades will be above the "updated" glidepath
The predicted future visibility impairment for the Upper Buffalo Wilderness area and Mingo will be less than one deciview below the updated glidepath in 2028
The source contribution analysis indicates that for all Class I areas, Electric Generating Units (EGU) sector was the primary anthropogenic source contributor followed by non-EGU point source sector
However, for the Caney Creek and Upper Buffalo wilderness areas, IC\BC was the primary source contributor with contribution significantly higher than the EGU sources
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tiers 8&9
ED 002061 00163089-00011
Revised Glidepath for Caney Creek
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tiers 8&9
11 ED 002061 00163089-00012
Caney Creek Source Contribution
ERA 2023 Preliminary Modeling Source Contribution Caney Creek Wilderness Area
16 ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 14
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tiers 8&9
ED 002061 00163089-00013
Revised Glidepath for Hercules-Glades
Entemi
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tiers 8&9
ED 002061 00163089-00014
Hercules-Glades Source Contribution
EP 2023 Preliminary Modeling Source Contribution Hercules-Glades Wilderness
lb ................................................................................ 14 .......................................................................................................................................................................................
Entemi
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tiers 8&9
ED 002061 00163089-00015
Revised Glidepath for Mingo
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tiers 8&9
ED 002061 00163089-00016
Mingo Source Contribution
EP 2028 Preliminary Modeling Source Contribution Mingo
16 ..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tiers 8&9
ED 002061 00163089-00017
Revised Glidepath for Upper Buffalo
Uniform Rate of Progress and 2028 Projected Progress Upper Buffalo Wilderness Area
Haze Index (dv)
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tiers 8&9
ED 002061 00163089-00018
Upper Buffalo Source Contribution
ERA 2028 Preliminary Modeling Source Contribution Upper Buffalo Wilderness
16 ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 14 .......................................................................................................................................................................................
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tiers 8&9
ED 002061 00163089-00019
Low Sulfur Coal is not an "existing control" for BART or RP
Replacement SIP reliance on 4 factor analysis is problematic
Long Term Strategy should include CTUC dates
EPA & NGOs continue to push forward Obama-era Regional Haze Program
Numerous technical and legal deficiencies could be cured through re-proposal of the Replacement SIP
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tiers 8&9
ED 002061 00163089-00020