Aggregation Issues Jesse Lovegren, Ph.D. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2015.
Post on 21-Jan-2016
221 Views
Preview:
Transcript
Aggregation Issues
Jesse Lovegren, Ph.D.
Air Permits Division
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2015
Presentation Sections
• Overview
• Site Aggregation
• Examples
• Project Aggregation
• Examples
Overview
• Clean Air Act programs applying to "major" sites/sources:
Site Aggregation: “common sense notion of a plant”
Project Aggregation: keeps applicants from improperly avoiding major NSR review
Site AggregationAffected Programs
• Major NSR: Modification to existing major source vs. new source;
• Title V: Applicability of program; and
• NESHAPs for source categories: Major source vs. Area source
Site AggregationSite Criteria
• Same industrial grouping;
• Located in one or more contiguous or adjacent properties; and
• Under common control
Site AggregationSame Industrial Grouping
• Grouping is 2-digit SIC code
• “Support Facility” concept
• Groupings not considered for NESHAP program
Site AggregationContiguous/Adjacent Properties
• Adjoining except for an intervening road, railroad, right-of-way, waterway, etc.;
• Properties located < ¼ mile apart; and
• Interdependent (can be > ¼ mile apart)
Site AggregationContiguous/Adjacent Properties
Oil and Gas Rules
• SB 1134 applies
• Proposed EPA rules:
Proposal 1: Defines “adjacent”; and
Proposal 2: Revises regional consistency regulations
Site Aggregation Contiguous/Adjacent Properties
Oil and Gas Rules
Site AggregationUnder Common Control
• Generally, operations under the same company;
• Evaluated at the highest point of the organization’s structure; and
• More complex business relationships require case-by-case determination
Example 1
Property A:
Crude oil & refined products storage
Property B:
For-hire storage; includes a boiler
Example 1Can They be Aggregated?
Properties A & B:
• Owned by the same company
• On opposite banks of a waterway and < ¼ mile apart at their closest point
< ¼ mile
Example 1Answer
• Common control
• Adjacent properties
• Property A belongs to: Group 5171 Property B belongs to: Group 5169
• Boiler is a support facility
Yes: Sites can be aggregated.
Example 2
Property A:
Soil/groundwater remediation facility
Property B:
Bulk fuels terminal
Example 2Can They be Aggregated?
• On contiguous properties
• Company B owns a share of both
• Shared electricity supply
Partly Owned by Companies A & B
Operated by Company B
Example 2Answer
• Not under common control
• Contiguous properties
• Property A belongs to: Group 4959 Property B belongs to: Group 5171
• Neither is a support facility
No: Sites cannot be aggregated.
Project AggregationApplicability
• Major NSR;
• Major modifications to stationary sources; a physical change with an emissions increase; and
• Projects sufficiently related or treated as a single physical change
Project AggregationOther Applicability
• Applies to evaluation of project increase only
• Source-wide netting comprises all contemporaneous changes at the source, related or not
Project AggregationProject Criteria
• Timing of applications
• Documentation: Funding applications; Consumer demand and projected
production reports; and Statements on plans of operation
• TCEQ analysis
Project AggregationWhen Is Evaluation Required?
• Two or more filed within a short time period; and
• Major NSR requirement avoided by separate treatment of projects
Example 3
Project 1:
PSD application for construction of marine loading dock & storage
Project 2:
PSD application for additional throughput
Example 3Is Further Evaluation Needed?
Project 1 & 2:
• Subject to PSD review for VOC (O3 precursor); and
• Increases for other pollutants insignificant even when projects considered together
Example 3Answer
• Can be considered part of the same physical change
• No major NSR requirements avoided
• Analysis for Project 2 may include emissions from Project 1
No further evaluation is needed.
Example 4
Project 1:
Permit for changes at 3 units at an aluminum reduction plant
Permit
3 Units Controls
Project 2:
Request to split into 3 separate reviews/permits
Permit
1 Unit
Permit
1 Unit
Permit
1 Unit
Example 4Should the Permit Be Split?
Considerations:
• Splitting permit = removal of control device
• Owner: “Projects were separate business decisions and economic justifications.”
Permit
3 Units Controls
Permit
1 Unit
Permit
1 Unit
Permit
1 Unit
Example 4Answer
• Previous owner statements treat the changes as one project
• Owner should not agree to emission reduction measures to avoid PSD review and then apply to discontinue reduction measures
Permit should not be split.
Questions?
top related