Lydia
Wegman/
RTP/
USEPA/
US@
E
PA
05/
03/
2005
05:
38
PM
To
Kathy
Kaufman/
RTP/
USEPA/
US@
EPA
cc
Subject
Fw:
BART
information
­­­­­
Forwarded
by
Lydia
Wegman/
RTP/
USEPA/
US
on
05/
03/
2005
05:
37
PM
­­­­­

Jeff
Holmstead/
DC/
USE
PA/
US
To
Lydia
Wegman
04/
27/
2005
06:
53
cc
PM
Subject
Fw:
BART
information
Here
is
the
first
of
4­
mails
I
sent
to
Art
last
night.
I
will
also
forward
the
other
three.

­­­­­
Forwarded
by
Jeff
Holmstead/
DC/
USEPA/
US
on
04/
27/
2005
06:
48
PM
­­­­­

Jeff
Holmstead/
DC/
USE
PA/
US
To
Art
Fraas,
Paul
Noe
04/
26/
2005
09:
39
cc
PM
Bill
Wehrum
Subject
BART
information
Here
is
the
list
of
the
additional
information
I
wanted
to
have
before
deciding
how
to
proceed
with
the
final
BART
rule:

1.
List
of
all
BART­
eligible
EGUs
in
non­
CAIR
states,
sortable
by
annual
SO2
and
NOx
emissions.
2.
List
of
all
BART­
eligible
non­
EGUs,
again
sortable
by
annual
SO2
and
NOx
emissions
3.
An
analysis
of
how
many
of
these
units
are
located
in
states
that
are
required
to
develop
SIPs
for
PM2.5,
8­
hour
ozone,
or
both.
4.
An
analysis
of
the
impact
of
using
a
$
2,000/
ton
cutoff
as
a
decision
criterion
­­
i.
e.,
what
would
be
the
cost
and
emission
impacts
of
requiring
all
reductions
that
could
be
achieved
at
a
marginal
cost
of
$
2,000/
ton
or
less.
5.
A
projection
of
the
sources
that
would
likely
be
covered
if
the
visibility
part
of
the
applicability
test
looked
at
the
95th
or
98th
percentile,
instead
of
using
the
worst
visibility
day
in
the
last
5
years.
6.
Possible
modeling
approaches
that
would
support
a
simple
cut­
off
for
smaller
NOx
sources
that
don't
really
affect
visibility.

I
now
have
items
1,
2,
and
3
and
will
email
them
to
you
tonight.
I
should
have
the
other
items
by
COB
tomorrow
(
although
item
5
will
still
be
somewhat
preliminary).

I
am
hoping
we
can
get
back
together
soon
(
maybe
tomorrow
or
Thursday)
to
discuss
this
information
and
how
it
might
guide
our
decisions
here.
Bill
will
work
to
set
up
a
time
that
will
work
for
everyone.
