BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
IN THE MATTER OF:
NITROGEN OXIDES EMISSIONS FROM
VARIOUS SOURCE CATEGORIES:
AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE
PARTS
211 AND 217
)
)
)
)
)
)
R08-19
(Rulemaking - Air)
NOTICE
TO:
John Therriault
Assistant Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
James
R.
Thompson Center
100 West Randolph St., Suite 11-500
Chicago,
1L 60601
SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that I have today filed with the Office of the Clerk of the
Illinois Pollution Control Board the ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY'S ANSWERS TO PRE-FILED OUESTIONS
BY EXXONMOBIL OIL
CORPORATION and APPEARANCE, a copy
of which is herewith served upon you.
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
By:Opr_
Dana Vetterhoffer
u61v¥
Assistant Counsel
Division
of Legal Counsel
DATED: September 30,2008
1021 North Grand Avenue East
P.
O. Box 19276
Springfield,
IL 62794-9276
217/782-5544
THIS FILING IS SUBMITTED
ON RECYCLED PAPER
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 30, 2008
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
IN THE MATTER OF:
NITROGEN OXIDES EMISSIONS FROM
VARIOUS SOURCE CATEGORIES:
AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL. ADM. CODE
PARTS
211 AND 217
)
)
)
)
)
)
R08-19
(Rulemaking - Air)
THE ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY'SANSWERS TO PRE-
FILED QUESTIONS BY EXXONMOBIL OIL CORPORATION
NOW COMES the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency ("Illinois EPA"), by its
attorneys, and pursuant to the Hearing Officer'sOrder dated June 12, 2008, respectfully submits
the Illinois EPA'sAnswers to the Pre-Filed Questions by ExxonMobil Oil Corporation:
1.
On page 4 ofits Statement of Reasons, the Agency states that in October 2006, the
USEPA completed a review
of the NAAQS for particulate matter and, as a result,
strengthened the 24-hour standard (for PM2
.5). Is it the intent of the Agency that the
emission reductions sought under this proposed NO
x
RACT rule will result in attainment
ofthe strengthened 24-hour standard for PM2.5 in the Chicago area?
The Illinois EPA has not made a determination of the control measures needed to
attain the revised NAAQS for
PM 2.5 or ozone. The Illinois EPA anticipates that
the subject NOx RACT proposal will help to attain those standards.
2.
On pages 7 and 8 of its Statement of Reasons, the Agency states that States, such as
Illinois, with non-attainment areas classified as moderate or above for the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS were required to submit, by September IS, 2006, a SIP demonstrating that
sources specified under the CAA were subject to RACT requirements. Was the required
SIP submitted by the Agency to the USEPA by September IS, 2006?
No.
3.
Ifthe required SIP was not submitted by the Agency to the USEPA by September 15,
2006, when was it submitted?
This proposal
is intended to satisfy this federal requirement.
It
will be submitted to
USEPA
after the Illinois Pollution Control Board completes its rulemaking process.
4.
If the required SIP was not submitted by the Agency to the USEPA by September 15,
2006, what are the reasons why it was not submitted?
USEPA published its implementation
rule for 8-hour ozone in November 2005, less
than a year before NOx RACT rules were due. The implementation rule for PM2.5
was not published until
March 2007. The Illinois EPA has developed this proposal
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 30, 2008
as quickly as resources allowed.
It
should also be noted that the Illinois EPA's
process allowed considerable time for stakeholder review and comment.
5.
Are there SIP submittal dates for other federal rules that this proposed rule is intended to
address for which the Agency has not made the required submittal?
Yes.
6.
If so, what are those other federal rules, and what are the reasons that the required
submittals were not made?
The Illinois EPA has not yet submitted attainment demonstrations for the Chicago
area for 8-hour ozone and PM2.5. The Illinois EPA has also not yet submitted the
PM2.5 attainment demonstration for the Metro East area. These are federal
requirements that are satisfied in part by this proposal. These submittals are late,
in large part, due to the Illinois EPA's desire to address concerns expressed by
stakeholders throughout the development of these plans.
7.
On page 8 of its Statement ofReasons, the Agency states that its regulatory proposal aims
to achieve NO
x
reductions in Illinois from a number of source categories, while providing
reasonable flexibility for the affected sources. In addition, proposed Section 217.152
requires affected sources to comply with the emission limitations to be established by the
proposed rule by May 1, 2010. Please identify and specifically define the "flexibility" in
the proposed rule that would enable an affected source to meet the May 1, 2010
compliance date?
Pages
8 and 9 of the Statement of Reasons highlight the compliance option provided
in the proposal which allows emissions averaging. Certain exemptions to the
requirements are also discussed. These options were included based on the
suggestions of stakeholders.
8.
Again, the Agency'sproposal provides, in Subsection 217.152(a), that compliance with
the requirements ofSubparts D, E, F, G, H, and M is required beginning May I, 2010. Is
it true that,
if the required SIP had been submitted by the Agency to the USEPA by
September 15, 2006, the USEPA would have allowed up to 30 months for compliance to
be achieved by the start ofthe first ozone season after the required SIP submission date?
Yes.
9.
When does the Agency anticipate submitting the rules proposed here as a SIP revision to
USEPA?
The Illinois EPA will submit these rules to USEPA after the Board has completed
rulemaking on this proposal.
2
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 30, 2008
10.
In
light ofthe anticipated date for submittal ofthis SIP revision, and the proposed
compliance date
of May 1, 2010, how many months would be allowed for compliance to
be achieved
by affected sources?
The Board determines the schedule for completing the rulemaking process.
The
I1Iinois EPA can not predict how much time will be available for compliance after
the rulemaking is completed.
11.
How does the Agency expect an affected source to meet this compliance date ofMay 1,
2010, especially if the affected source must install control equipment to meet the
proposed emission limitations?
The I1Iinois EPA acknowledges
that the compliance deadline is imminent, and may
need to be amended in some cases.
It
should be noted that stakeholders have been
aware
of this proposal for several years and had the opportunity to plan for
compliance by the proposed deadline.
12.
Has the Agency planned for any expedited preconstruction permitting efforts for affected
sources that may require construction permits to install control equipment to meet the
proposed emission limitations?
By statute, the I1Iinois EPA
is required to issue or deny "minor" construction
permits within 90 days. 415 ILCS 5/39. Currently, the I1Iinois EPA
is processing
permit applications
of this type, i.e., those addressing installation of controls without
significant emissions increases, in an average
of 50-60 days. The increase in the
number of permits expected due to this rulemaking may expand these times
somewhat, however, companies seeking such construction permits can help insure
quick
turnaround by keeping their applications focused only on the controls
necessary to comply.
13.
Has the Agency considered whether the delay in submitting a regulatory proposal to the
Board, which also results in delay
of submittal of the SIP revision, and still maintaining
the May
1, 2010 compliance date, will result in undue hardship for affected sources that
must plan, design, purchase, construct, and test the specialized control equipment
according to strict OSHA and industry standards?
It
is not the I1Iinois EPA'sintent to cause "undue hardship for affected sources."
The Illinois EPA
is willing to discuss with stakeholders approaches to alleviate
"undue hardships" posed by tight compliance deadlines.
It
should be noted
however
that USEPA requires that RACT controls be implemented "as
expeditiously as practicable." As mentioned, stakeholders have been aware of this
proposal for several years
and have had the opportunity to plan for compliance.
14.
If so, what factors were considered by the Agency and what rationale was used to
maintain the May I, 2010 compliance date?
As the questioner has pointed out, RACT controls were to have been implemented
by May 1, 2009. The Illinois EPA has proposed a later deadline in recognition
of the
3
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 30, 2008
fact that we were late filing this proposal with the Board. The May 1, 2010 deadline
is intended to ensure
that controls are in place before the 2010 ozone season.
Delaying implementation
of emission reduction can adversely affect air quality,
which could potentially cause the non-attainment area to be bumped-up to a serious
classification. ExxonMobil has previously expressed to the Illinois EPA its desire to
avoid
bump-up of the Chicago area's non-attainment classification, so it is
important for industries to respond quickly to the requirements of this proposal.
IS.
Did the Agency consider the complexities involved for affected sources in meeting the
May 1,2010 compliance date?
In most cases, the IllinoIs EPA believes that sources can comply with the proposed
emission limitations with relatively simple combustion modifications
or post-
combustion controls. The Illinois EPA acknowledges
that compliance may be more
complex for some industries.
16.
Has the Agency considered extending the compliance date beyond May 1, 201O?
The Illinois EPA has considered proposals for later compliance dates made by
certain industries, in particular petroleum refineries
and glass melting furnaces.
17.
Did the Agency consider, in proposing a compliance date ofMay 1, 2010, that certain
industrial sectors have planned maintenance cycles
of3 to 5 years (or more)?
The Illinois EPA
is aware that petroleum refineries have planned maintenance
cycles
of 3 to 5 years. ExxonMobil has been aware however, ofthe Illinois EPA's
intent to propose specific NOx reduction strategies affecting refineries for several
years,
and had the ability to plan compliant emission reduction measures within its
normal maintenance schedules.
As noted in Question 8, USEPA'sschedule allowed
no more
than 30 months for implementation, which is less than the 3 to 5 year
maintenance cycle mentioned here.
18.
Has the Agency considered and calculated the economic impact to Illinois and the region
of an unplanned shutdown for industrial sectors that have such planned maintenance
cycles?
No.
19.
If so, what has the Agency determined to be the economic impact ofthe potential
inability
of affected sources to attain compliance in the amount of time anticipated to be
available under the proposal?
The Illinois EPA believes
that the control measures needed to comply with this
proposal
are readily available and are economically reasonable. The Illinois EPA is
willing to discuss options with affected industries to avoid unanticipated cost
burdens should they occur.
4
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 30, 2008
20.
Have any affected sources told the Agency that they cannot meet the May I, 2010
compliance date without an unplanned shutdown?
ExxonMobil and CITGO, both petroleum refineries, have expressed concerns about
the compliance date.
21.
If so, has the Agency considered alternative options for such affected sources that are
unable
to meet the compliance date?
The Illinois EPA has considered other options, and remains willing to discuss
options to address specific concerns.
22.
Has the Agency determined, even with unplanned shutdowns, whether it
is technically
feasible for all affected sources
to meet the May 1, 2010 compliance date?
The Illinois EPA believes it is still technically feasible for most affected sources to
comply by
May 1, 2010,
if
they start planning now.
23.
In proposed Section 217.158, the Agency has proposed that an owner or operator of
certain affected emissions units may demonstrate compliance with an applicable
requirement through an emissions averaging plan. However, Subsection 217.158(a)(1)(A)
ofthe proposal allows the inclusion in the averaging plan of emission units that
commenced operation on or before January
1, 2002 (as well as those emission units that
commenced operation after January
1, 2002 ifthey were replacements for emission units
that commenced operation on or before January
1, 2002). How did the Agency set the
January
1, 2002 date as a cutofffornew emission units allowed to be covered by an
emission averaging plan?
USEPA has established 2002 as the base
year for planning purposes for
implementation
of the ozone and PM 2.5 NAAQS established in 1997. States are
required to demonstrate continued progress towards attainment beginning in that
year. The Illinois EPA is seeking emission reductions from emission units that were
in existence in 2002.
24.
What factors did the Agency consider in establishing the January
1, 2002 date?
See response to Question 23.
25.
Did the Agency consider allowing emission units that commenced operation after
January 1,2002, to be included in the averaging plan?
No. Units that commenced operation after 2002 are not eligible for emissions
averaging because emissions from such units are in addition to the emissions
already existing in 2002. As mentioned in Question 23, the Illinois EPA
is seeking
net reductions from 2002 emission levels.
5
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 30, 2008
26.
Is it true that certain NSPS, non-attainment NSR and PSD regulations may require NO,
emission control measures that are equal to or more stringent than the proposed emission
limitations here?
Yes, so
it is not necessary for new units to use averaging to comply with the
proposed limits.
27.
Is it true that certain affected sources may have installed, pursuant to such NSPS, non-
attainment
NSR and PSD regulations, NO, control measures that are equal to or more
stringent than the proposed emission limitations here?
Yes.
If
such units were included in an averaging plan with units that existed in
2002,
then the existing units may not need to reduce emissions. This is counter to
the objective of achieving Reasonable Further Progress between 2002 and the
attainment year, 2010.
28.
What factors did the Agency consider in excluding emission units that commenced
operation after January 1, 2002, from inclusion in the emissions averaging plan?
See
response to Question 27.
Respectfully submitted,
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
By~;;/$~
Dana
V
etterll
~
Assistant Counsel
Division
of Legal Counsel
DATED: September
30,2008
1021 North Grand Avenue East
P. O. Box 19276
Springfield, IL 62794-9276
2I7/782-5544
6
THIS FILING IS SUBMITTED
ON RECYCLED PAPER
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 30, 2008
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
IN THE MATTER OF:
NITROGEN OXIDES EMISSIONS FROM
VARIOUS SOURCE CATEGORIES:
AMENDMENTS TO
35 ILL. ADM. CODE
PARTS 211 AND 217
)
)
)
)
)
)
R08-19
(Ru1emaking - Air)
APPEARANCE
The undersigned hereby enters his appearance as an attorney on behalf of the
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency.
Respectfully submitted,
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
By:.L:~~~===::::::::=-
ohnI. Kim
Managing Attorney
Air Regulatory Unit
Division of Legal Counsel
DATED: September 30,2008
1021 North Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
217/782-5544
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 30, 2008
STATE OF ILLINOIS
COUNTY OF SANGAMON
)
)
)
)
SS
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, the undersigned, an attorney, state that I have served electronically the attached
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY'S ANSWERS TO PRE-
FILED OUESTIONS
BY EXXONMOBIL OIL CORPORATION and APPEARANCE,
upon the following person:
John Therriault
Assistant Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
James
R. Thompson Center
100 West Randolph St., Suite 11-500
Chicago, IL 60601
and mailing it
by first-class mail from Springfield, Illinois, with sufficient postage affixed
to the following persons:
SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY,
Q>d
Dana
...,~
Vetterhoffer
tkz'2~
Assistant Counsel
Division
of Legal Counsel
Dated: September 30, 2008
1021 North Grand Avenue East
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
(217) 782-5544
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 30, 2008
SERVICE LIST 08-19
Timothy J. FoX.
Hearing Officer
Illinois Pollution Control Board
100
W. Randolph St., Suite 11-500
Chicago, IL 60601
Virginia Yang
Deputy Legal Counsel
l11inois Department ofNatural Resources
One Natural Resources Way
Springfield, IL 62702-1271
Katherine D. Hodge
Monica T. Rios
Hodge Dwyer Zeman
3150 Roland Ave.
P.O. Box 5776
Springfield, IL 62705-5776
Matthew Dunn
Chief
Environmental Bureau North
Office
of the Attorney General
69 W. Washington St., Suite 1800
Chicago, IL 60602
.
Kathleen C. Bassi
Sheldon A. Zabel
Stephen
J. Bonebrake
SchiffHardin LLP
6600 Sears Tower
233
S. Wacker Drive
Chicago,
IL
60606-6473
Alec M. Davis
General Counsel
Illinois Environmental Regulatory Group
215 E. Adams St.
Springfield, IL 62701
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, September 30, 2008
