1

Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction (SSM)

Permitting and Documentation on Response

to EPA’s Proposed Rule

2

What is SSM? ˃ SSM = Startup, Shutdown, or Malfunction

Does not include periods of maintenance SSM event = period during which there are exceedances of the

applicable emission limitations and thus excess emissions

˃ Start-Up: Setting a source in operation. Generally characterized by unstable emissions

˃ Shutdown: Cessation of operations. Includes all activities such as degassing, depressurizing, etc.

˃ Malfunction: Sudden and unavoidable breakdown of process or control equipment

3

Three Categories of Emissions ˃ Normal – Production operation

emissions

˃ Planned SS – Startup and shutdown emissions during operations that are predictable and planned

˃ Unplanned SS/Malfunction/Emission Events – Other emissions that not authorized such as acts of God, accidents, malfunctions, unexpected emissions during SS, and non-compliant operations

Permitted

Permitted in Some Cases

Not Permitted

4

EPA’s Position on SSM ˃ The NAAQS does not care about type of emissions

˃ SIP must protect the NAAQS

˃ SIP requires enforceable Emission Limitations

“limits the quantity, rate, or concentration of emissions of air pollutants on a continuous basis …” (40 CFR 49.152)

˃ EPA plans to eliminate practice of reporting “Planned” SS

events and claim “Affirmative Defense” (i.e., exemption from emission limits and elimination of monetary fines)

5

EPA’s Treatment of SSM SSM Emissions

Planned SS

Unplanned SS/Malfunction

Seek “Affirmative Defense” (no guarantee!)

“Injunctive Relief”

Considered “Normal Operations”

Must Meet Emission Limits

Future Permitting (e.g., TX)??

6

2013 SSM SIP Call - Introduction ˃ EPA’s response to Sierra Club’s June 2011 petition

˃ EPA’s conclusion

CAA does not allow emission limit exemptions during Planned SS Excess emissions during “Planned” SS are violations

(not allowed to claim “Affirmative Defense”) Excess emissions during “Unplanned” SS are also violations

(but can potentially claim “Affirmative Defense” but no “injunctive relief”)

˃ EPA proposes to fix SIPs for 36 states

˃ Rulemaking has impacts on all 50 states due to clarification/revisions to EPA’s SSM policies

7

2013 SSM SIP Call - Actions

Agency Sierra Club?

EPA SIP Call? Affected Rule Issue

ADEQ Y Y R18-2-310(C ) AD for Planned SS MCAQD Y Y Rule 140 Sec 402

PDEQ Y N N/A N/A PCAQCD N N N/A N/A

˃ May 13, 2013 – Comments were due to EPA on ˃ May 2014 – EPA finalizes revised rule ˃ Q4 2015 – AZ to revises SIP with new rules

˃ Future rulemaking for “Planned” SS still expected in all

jurisdictions

8 2013 SIP Call - Details (1 of 2)

˃ Clarified old 1982, 1983, and 1999, and 2001 SSM policies

˃ No Affirmative Defense (shield from monetary penalties) for Emissions during “Planned” SS

˃ “Special limits/control measures/techniques” during SS

˃ Define “Affirmative Defense” criteria (borrows from SSM provisions in recent MACT rules)

9 2013 SIP Call - Details (2 of 2)

˃ Sample “Affirmative Defense” criteria includes Violation caused by a sudden, infrequent, and unavoidable failure Violation could not have been prevented/not part of recurring pattern Repairs made as expeditiously as possible Violation frequency, amount and duration were minimized Bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life/personal injury All actions in response to violation were documented Written root cause analysis has been prepared (NEW) Submit written report with all supporting documentation (NEW)

˃ Bottom Line – Develop procedures to differentiate between

“Planned” SS and “Unplanned” SS

10

˃ EPA will Provide additional guidance on Planned

SS events Plans for more enforcement action for

SSM events

˃ Companies need to start

Identifying Unplanned SS vs. Planned SS Better manage malfunctions (develop “root cause” analyses) Demonstrate compliance with limits during Planned SS

♦ Develop redundant systems for planned SS (e.g., additional RTO) ♦ Deploy temporary control equipment to meet limits (e.g., carbon canisters)

2013 SIP Call - Impacts

11

˃ Texas was “first out the gate” on this issue (2006)

˃ Permits all startup, shutdown, and maintenance (MSS) events

˃ TCEQ developed MSS specific MSS Best Available Control Technology (BACT) MSS Modeling

˃ Conclusion

All TX sources have MSS compliance requirements Ambiguity around “Affirmative Defense” has been removed

SSM – The TX Approach

12

SSM & Major NSR Permitting (1 of 2)

˃ Under Major NSR Emission Increase = Projected Actual Emissions (PAE) or Future PTE – Baseline Actual Emissions (BAE)

˃ BAE should Include historic SSM emissions Adjust downward to exclude any non-compliant emissions

˃ PAE should project SS emissions

(cannot project malfunction, so assume same as baseline)

Compare to program applicability thresholds

13

˃ May result in permit conditions that limit “planned” SS Annual number of tank landings = 2 Annual turbine startup hours = 90 Duration of startup event = 4 hours

˃ Most sources generally track SSM with sufficient detail for

Emission inventory / TRI purposes Major NSR calculation purposes State and federal Excess Emissions reporting

˃ Bottom Line – Some Major Source have SS in their permit &

minor sources are heading that way

SSM & Major NSR Permitting (2 of 2)