BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
IN THE MATTER OF:
AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL.ADM.CODE 225:
CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM LARGE
COMBUSTION SOURCES (MERCURY
MONITORING)
)
)
)
)
)
)
R09-10
(Rulemaking - Air)
NOTICE
OF FILING
To:
John T. Therriault, Assistant Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
James
R.
Thompson Center
Suite 11-500
100 West Randolph
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Persons included
on the
ATTACHED SERVICE LIST
PLEASE
TAKE NOTICE that we have today filed with the Office of the Clerk of the
Pollution Control Board
POST-HEARING COMMENTS
OF MIDWEST GENERATION,
LLC.
Dated: March 5, 2009
Kathleen C. Bassi
Stephen
J. Bonebrake
SCHIFF HARDIN, LLP
6600 Sears Tower
233 South Wacker Drive
Chicago, Illinois 60606
312-258-5500
Fax: 312-258-5600
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, March 5, 2009
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
IN THE MATTER OF:
AMENDMENTS TO 35 ILL.ADM.CODE 225:
CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM LARGE
COMBUSTION SOURCES (MERCURY
MONITORING)
)
)
)
)
)
)
R09-10
(Rulemaking - Air)
POST-HEARING COMMENTS OF MIDWEST GENERATION, LLC.
MIDWEST GENERATION, LLC, by and through its attorneys, SCHIFF HARDIN LLP,
and through the written testimony
of Scott Miller filed on January 30,2009, through Mr. Miller's
appearance at hearing on February 10, 2009, and through outreach discussions with the Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency ("Agency") at various times both before and after the proposal
was filed with the Board on October 3, 2008, has actively participated in this rulemaking.
Midwest Generation generally supports the proposal as it has been amended and as reflected in
the Agency'scompilation
of its recommended revisions to the proposed amendments to 35
Ill.Adm.Code Part 225, Subparts A and B, filed with the Board February
19,2009 ("Revised
Proposal"), and encourages the Board to adopt the Revised Proposal with one additional change
indicated below.
Midwest Generation appreciates the Agency'songoing willingness to discuss various
issues associated with the Illinois mercury rule, 35 IlI.Adm.Code Part 225, Subpart
B. The
experience
of both industry and regulators in controlling mercury emitted from large coal-fired
electric generating units is, relatively speaking, in its infancy. As has been the case with other
pollution control programs, the control
of mercury emissions and monitoring mercury emissions
will evolve and improve over time. Cooperation between industry and the regulators is essential
-1-
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, March 5, 2009
for us to achieve the best control most efficiently and economically. Because this is an evolving
area
of pollution control, Midwest Generation looks forward to working with the Agency and the
Board in the future as our experience and knowledge indicate areas
of improvement to the
program.
Midwest Generation encourages the Board to adopt the Revised Proposal with the
additional revision to Section 225.2940)(2) indicated below. However, there are certain areas
and issues relative to this rulemaking that deserve particular attention here.
Stack Testing and Monitor Availability
In
this rulemaking, the Agency proposed to add Section 225.239 to the rule to provide for
stack testing as the means for demonstrating compliance with the mercury rule through June 30,
2012. Midwest Generation has had approximately two years' experience with continuous
mercury emissions monitoring systems ("CMMS" or "CEMS"). As
Mr. Miller stated in his
testimony and in response to questions at hearing, Midwest Generation, today, cannot comply
with a monitor availability requirement
of75%. Transcript, p. 71 (Feb. 10,2009)1, as proposed
to be amended in the Joint Motion to Correct Transcript (Mar.
5, 2009).
In
fact, in response to a
question from the Board'sMr. Anand Rao regarding Midwest Generation's current percentage
of
monitor availability, Mr. Miller testified, "So I'mzero percent today." Tr. p. 75. Mr. Miller's
written testimony described the numerous problems with the CMMS. He stated, "During our
first year
of operation of the CMMS (2008), almost every major part on one or more of the
CMMS have failed." Miller Testimony,
p. 14 (Jan. 30,2009). Dominion'sDavid Nuckols
described similar pervasive problems operating CMMS in both his written and oral testimony.
I
Future references to the Transcript of the February 10,2009, hearing will be indicated.
as "Tr." followed by the page number only.
-2-
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, March 5, 2009
Because of the significant amount of time that CMMS are not available - that is, they are having
difficulty passing all the quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) tests, such as the integrity
test and daily calibration error tests necessary for measurements from the monitors to be
considered valid data or a quality assured monitor operating ("QAMO") hour - Midwest
Generation supports the Agency'sproposal to add Section 225.239, as set forth in the Revised
Proposal, to the Illinois mercury rule and encourages the Board to adopt Revised Proposal
Section 225.239.
As Mr. Miller indicated at hearing, Midwest Generation will likely utilize the
stack testing provisions
of the rule while running the CMMS in parallel as diagnostics and trying
to improve the percent availability
ofthe CMMS so that they will meet the 75% availability
requirement by July 1,2012. Tr. p. 75.
Deletion
of Temperature
Correction
Midwest Generation also particularly encourages the Board to adopt the deletion
of the
requirement for temperature correction in Section 225.294(g)(4) as included in the Revised
Proposal. The deletion
of the temperature correction in Section 225.294(g)(4) would allow for a
reasonable implementation
of the sorbent injection requirements of the Combined Pollutant
Standard ("CPS") as our understanding
of the most effective design of sorbent injection systems
evolves. This revision allows sources to increase the amount
of time and space in which flue gas
is exposed
to sorbent without unnecessarily imposing an increase in the amount of sorbent that
must be injected. Midwest Generation believes that this amendment more faithfully reflects the
Agency's understanding
of the effect that injecting sorbent at a rate of 5 lb/macfhas on removing
mercury from the flue gas stream. For these reasons, adoption
of this amendment to the rule
would provide a significant improvement to the rule.
-3-
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, March 5, 2009
In conjunction with the removal of the temperature correction factor from Section
225.294(g)(4) for all units except those equipped with sorbent injection prior to a hot-side
electrostatic precipitator ("ESP"), the monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting
of "flue gas
temperature at the point
of sorbent injection" should be removed from Section
225.294G)(2)
for
all units except those injecting sorbent prior to a hot-side ESP. This particular point was not
identified during the discussions that addressed Section 225.294(g)(4), but this correction
corresponds to that revision. Midwest Generation suggests the following revision in Section
225.294G)(2):
Section 225.294
***
Combined Pollutant Standard: Control Technology
Requirements and Emissions Standards for Mercury
j)
***
2)
After the first 36 months that injection of sorbent is required, it
must monitor activated sorbent feed rate to the EGU, flue gas
temperature at the point
of sorbent injection if the unit is equipped
with activated carbon injection prior to a hot-side electrostatic
precipitator, and exhaust gas flow rate from the EGU,
automatically recording this data and the sorbent carbon feed rate,
in pounds per million actual cubic feet
of exhaust gas at the
injection point, on an hourly average;
Midwest Generation encourages the Board to adopt both
of these revisions to the
proposal.
Coal Sampling
and the Adding an ASTM Method
The Agency has addressed coal sampling in several provisions of the Revised Proposal
and has offered clarification in some instances regarding coal sampling.
-4-
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, March 5, 2009
The Agency has proposed to incorporate by reference at Section 225.l40(h)(7) ASTM
D6722-0l, "Standard Test Method for Total Mercury in Coal and Coal Combustion Residues by
Direct Combustion Analysis (2001)," to the list
of methods for determining the amount of
mercury in coal. Midwest Generation supports this addition and urges the Board to adopt this
amendment to the mercury rule.
The Agency clarified at the February
10
th
hearing that companies may use weighted
averaging in determining, on a monthly basis, the amount
of mercury in the coal burned.
See
Mr. David Bloomberg'stestimony, Tr.
p. 21. Midwest Generation believes that weighted
averaging will provide a more accurate report
of the amount of mercury in the coal burned.
However,
it
was not clear from the rule that such averaging will be allowed. Mr. Bloomberg
clarified that it is.
Midwest Generation supports the Agency'sproposal to reduce the frequency
of coal
sampling to monthly from daily for CPS units where the units have not been opted in to the 90%
reduction requirement.
See
Section 225.265(a)(l)(A).
Approved Sorbents from Calgon
The Agency proposed to add two sorbents manufactured by Calgon to the list of
approved sorbents in Section 225.294(g)(2). Midwest Generation appreciates the Agency's
willingness to codify its approval
of these two sorbents, Calgon Carbon'sFLUEPAC CF Plus
and Calgon Carbon'sFLUEPAC MC Plus, and urges the Board to adopt that amendment.
-5-
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, March 5, 2009
Matching Inlet Mercury Emissions to OAMO Outlet Emissions
In Section 225.290(b)(3)(F), the Agency proposed to allow the option of utilizing the
inlet mercury emissions based
on coal sampling that matches in time the QAMO hours of the
outlet mercury emissions when calculating the percent mercury reduction. Midwest Generation
agrees that this is a more accurate method for calculating mercury emission reductions and urges
the Board to adopt this amendment.
Retroactive Noncompliance Under Section 225.239(g)(2)
The Revised Proposal has addressed Midwest Generation'sconcerns regarding
retroactive noncompliance under Section 225.239(g)(2) by limiting the period
of time during
which a company relying
on stack testing as its means of demonstrating compliance could be
found noncompliant as a result
of a failed stack test. That noncompliance, as now provided in
the Revised Proposal, is limited retrospectively to the more recent
of the first day of the quarter
in which the failed stack test occurred, the last day
of certified CEMS data demonstrating
compliance,
or the date on which a significant change occurred that would require retesting and
continuing until compliance is demonstrated. This approach to determining noncompliance is
acceptable to Midwest Generation for this rule. Midwest Generation, however, emphasizes that
the approach to determining noncompliance specified in Section 225.239 is not necessarily the
means
of determining noncompliance for other pollutants where stack testing is the method for
demonstrating compliance, and Midwest Generation'sacceptance
of the approach set forth in
Section 225.239(g)(2) should not be construed as expressing a position regarding such other
pollutants or circumstances.
-6-
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, March 5, 2009
Midwest Generation encourages the Board to adopt Section 225.239(g)(2) as presented in
the Revised Proposal.
"Optimum Manner"
During the course
of this rulemaking proceeding, Midwest Generation had some
questions regarding the Agency's application
of the provision requiring that units subject to
Section 225.294(g) in the CPS inject sorbent in an optimum manner. The Agency has clarified
the issue both in discussions with Midwest Generation and through Mr. Jim Ross' statement
on
the issue at the February 10'hhearing. Midwest Generation seeks no further clarification or other
action from the Board regarding "optimum manner."
Additional Correction to the Transcript for the February 10, 2009, Hearing
Midwest Generation was one
of the joint movants requesting the Board to correct the
transcript
of the hearing held February 10, 2009, in the Joint Motion to Correct Transcript filed
March
5, 2009. One section of the transcript, however, could not be corrected through that Joint
Motion to Correct Transcript. In this particular instance, too many words were missing to
support a mere correction
of the transcript.
Page 71, lines 13-21
of the transcript should read as follows:
MR. MILLER: The regulation allows continuous monitoring
lIftd
availaeilit),
aHa
or STAG stack testing options, the first two and a half years of
the program and then post July
I'"
2012, the availability is calculated on a rolling
basis. I
think
Chris meant as
of today, I don'thave any monitors at 75 percent
availability. We have attempted to install
II
monitors for all our units in the
state wile
is and when done with the project we should be meeting the 75 percent
availability monthly rolling no matter what the average. •
••
-7-
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, March 5, 2009
Midwest Generation requests that the Board consider these lines of the transcript as
corrected above.
Conclusion
Midwest Generation supports the proposed amendments to the mercury rule and
encourages the Board to adopt the Revised Proposal, including the additional revision to Section
225.294(j)(2)
set forth above.
Respectfully submitted,
MIDWEST GENERATION,
LLC.
by:
~Jb~u;.~
one onts a'.f!!feys
Dated: March 5, 2009
Kathleen
C. Bassi
Stephen J. Bonebrake
SCHIFF
HARDIN
LLP
6600 Sears Tower
233 South Wacker Drive
Chicago, Illinois 60606
312-258-5567
fax: 312-258-5600
kbassi@schiffhardin.com
-8-
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, March 5, 2009
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, the undersigned, certify that on this 5
th
day of March, 2009, I have served electronically
the attached
POST-HEARING COMMENTS OF MIDWEST GENERATION,
LLCupon
the following persons:
John
T. Therriault, Assistant Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
James
R. Thompson Center
Suite 11-500
100 West Randolph
Chicago, Illinois 60601
and electronically and by first class mail, postage affixed upon persons included on the
ATTACHED SERVICE LIST.
/J/
.
-~.
Kathleen C. Bassi
Kathleen
C. Bassi
Stephen
J. Bonebrake
SCHIFF HARDIN, LLP
6600 Sears Tower
233 South Wacker Drive
Chicago, Illinois 60606
312-258-5500
Fax: 312-258-5600
kbassi@schiffhardin.com
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, March 5, 2009
Timothy Fox
Hearing Officer
Illinois Pollution Control Board
100 West Randolph, Suite 11-500
Chicago, Illinois 6060 I
foxt@ipcb.state.i1.us
SERVICE LIST
(R09-IO)
John
J. Kim
Charles E. Matoesian
Dana Vetterhoffer
Division
of Legal Counsel
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
1021 North Grand Avenue, East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276
john.j .kim@illinois.gov
charles.matoesian@illinois.gov
dana.vetterhoffer@illinois.gov
S. David Farris, Manager, Environmental,
Health and Safety
City
of Springfield, City Water Light
&
Power
201 East Lake Shore Drive
Springfield, Illinois 62757
dfarris@cwlp.com
Renee Cipriano
Kathleen C. Bassi
Joshua R. More
Schiff Hardin LLP
on behalf
of Arneren
6600 Sears Tower
233 South Wacker Drive
Chicago, Illinois 60606
rcipriano@schiffuardin.com
kbassi@schifThardin.com
jmore@schifThardin.com
David Rieser
McGuireWoods LLP
on behalf of Kincaid Generation, L.L.C.
77 W. Wacker Drive, Suite 4100
Chicago, Illinois 6060 I
drieser@mcguirewoods.com
Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, March 5, 2009
