FWS/ANWS-AR-AQ

December 4, 2008

Elliott Bickerstaff, P.E., DEE

Chief, Air Support Branch

Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality

101 W. Capital Street

Jackson, MS 39201

Re: 	U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Comments on BART determinations
provided by Mississippi Phosphates Corporation – Pascagoula Facility
Acid Plant Units #2 and #3 and Chevron Products Company – Pascagoula
Refinery 

Dear Mr. Bickerstaff:

The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is providing comments on the
Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) determination for the above
named facilities as they relate to the Mississippi Regional Haze State
Implementation Plan (SIP).  In addition, the FWS is providing comments
on the latest developments regarding the vacatur of Clean Air Interstate
Rule (CAIR) as it relates the Mississippi Regional Haze SIP.  

Mississippi Phosphates Corporation – Pascagoula Facility Acid Plant
Units #2 and #3

The FWS provided comments to the Mississippi Department of Environmental
Quality (MDEQ) on an earlier BART analysis for the Mississippi
Phosphates Corporation’s (MPC) Pascagoula Sulfuric Acid Plant in June
2008.  The revised BART submittal, dated September 29, 2008, was
responsive to those earlier comments.  MPC proposed that BART is a dual
absorption system using a cesium catalyst with an emission limit of 3.2
lbs. of SO2 per ton of 100% sulfuric acid that represents Best Available
Control Technology (BACT).  If the MDEQ agrees with this conclusion, it
must be so stated in the Mississippi Regional Haze SIP.  The FWS does
not challenge this conclusion and commends MPC’s efforts.  

According to the BART Guidelines, control technology for BART must
ensure compliance no later than five years from the date of final EPA
approval of the Mississippi Regional Haze SIP.  

MPC’s Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Major Modification
Application states that project completion will occur within five years
from the Summer/Fall of 2009.  The two dates are likely to be near each
other, but the MDEQ should require in the Mississippi Regional Haze SIP
that the control technology be operational five-years from the SIP
approval date.

In concert with the earlier FWS comments, MPC stated that it would
comply with a 10% opacity limit and a sulfuric acid mist limit of 0.10
lb/ton of H2SO4.  MDEQ should acknowledge these limits in the
Mississippi Regional Haze SIP.  However, a NOx emission limit was not
mentioned.  Other phosphate facilities reasonably meet a NOx limit of
0.11 – 0.12 lb/ton of H2SO4 product.  Such a limit should also be
addressed in the Mississippi Regional Haze SIP.

No dispersion modeling of this dual absorption system using a cesium
catalyst was performed, but if MDEQ declares this system to be “the
most stringent controls available” (i.e., BACT), then no such modeling
is required.

Chevron Products Company – Pascagoula Refinery

Regarding the Chevron Products Company – Pascagoula Refinery, there is
no evidence that the five-factor BART analysis was followed in selecting
the control technologies for the BART-eligible units under the EPA
Consent Decree.  However, since the EPA Consent Decree was signed on
June 7, 2005, before the BART Guidelines were promulgated on July 6,
2005, the equipment installed under the Consent Decree can be considered
as “baseline” for BART purposes.  In instances where the chosen
control technology is determined by MDEQ to be Best Available Control
Technology (BACT), the five factor analysis is not required beyond that
point.  A statement in the Regional Haze SIP should indicate that MDEQ
has determined that all controls installed and proposed as part of the
EPA Consent Decree are BACT, if that is in fact the case.  If some of
the Consent Decree control equipment does not constitute BACT, then
additional controls should be analyzed with the five-factor BART
analysis, even though MDEQ believes, without analysis, that the cost of
such controls might be too expensive.    

NOx control of various process heaters using ultra-low NOx burners was
dismissed as being too expensive.  Retrofit Selective Non-Catalytic
Reduction (SNCR) has been successfully applied to refinery process
heaters achieving NOx control efficiencies in the 40-50% range4.  This
alternative should be included among the BART alternatives and should
undergo a five-factor BART analysis.



Clean Air Interstate Rule Vacatur

Since FWS last provided comments on the Mississippi Regional Haze SIP,
the court has issued an order vacating the CAIR rule.  FWS is concerned
that portions of the Mississippi Regional Haze SIP relied on the CAIR
rule to establish the level of control for affected sources.  Because
CAIR has been vacated, the BART determinations have become the primary
method for establishing the level of pollution control.  FWS asks that
MDEQ review the Regional Haze SIP, and where appropriate address how
BART control strategies will be implemented in the absence of CAIR.  

Again, we appreciate the opportunity to work closely with the State of
Mississippi and compliment you on your hard work and dedication to
significant improvement in our nation's air quality values and
visibility. 

Sincerely,

Sandra V. Silva, Chief

FWS Branch of Air Quality

cc:	Kay Prince, Chief Air Planning Branch

US EPA Region 4 

61 Forsyth Street, S.W. 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960

Michele Notarianni

US EPA Region 4

61 Forsyth Street, S.W. 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960

Annette Sharp, Executive Director

CENRAP

10005 S. Pennsylvania, Ste. C

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma  73159

Pat Brewer

VISTAS Technical Coordinator

2090 U.S. 70 Highway

Swannanoa, North Carolina 28778

Jon Andrew, Chief Southeast Region

National Wildlife Refuge System

1875 Century Center

Atlanta, Georgia  30345

Kenneth Litzenberger

Project Manager

Southeast Louisiana Refuges

61389 Hwy. 434

Lacombe, Louisiana  70445

James Burnett

Refuge Manager

St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge

P.O. Box 68

St. Marks, Florida  32355

 See 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix Y The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
finalized it’s BART Guidelines on June 15, 2005, and published the
preamble and final rule text in the Federal Register on July 6, 2005. 
The rulemaking action added Appendix Y to Part 51, titled “Guidelines
for BART Determinations Under the Regional Haze Rule.”  See Section
I.E.3.

 Ibid., See Section IV.D.STEP 1.9.

 Ibid., See Section IV.D.

4 Assessment of Control Technology Options For Petroleum Refineries in
the Mid-Atlantic Region—Final  Report, Mid-Atlantic Regional Air
Management Association, January 31, 2007, p. 2-18.

Mr. Bickerstaff		  Page   PAGE  4 

	

