Current through Register Vol. 56, No. 18, September 16, 2024
(a) An applicant for a major facility permit renewal subject to this subchapter shall submit a technical feasibility analysis if the facility's current effective operating permit includes any equipment or control apparatus that meets the following:
1. The equipment or control apparatus was installed at least 20 years prior to the expiration date of its current effective operating permit;
2. The equipment or control apparatus was not subject to review under this subchapter in the 15 years prior to the expiration date of its current effective operating permit; and
3. The total emissions of any of the pollutants listed below from all equipment or control apparatus that meet the criteria at (a)1 and 2 above, comprise at least 20 percent of the facility's overall potential to emit that pollutant. All emissions shall be calculated based on potential to emit:
i. Fine particulate matter (PM2.5);
ii. Nitrogen oxides; and
iii. Volatile organic compounds.
(b) The applicant shall list each equipment and source operation that meets the criteria at (a) above, according to the potential to emit of each equipment and source operation, in descending order, for each applicable pollutant.
(c) The applicant shall submit as part of its EJIS pursuant to N.J.A.C. 7:1C-3, a technical feasibility analysis that addresses each equipment and source operation required to be listed at (b) above, beginning at the top of the list provided at (c)1 and 2 below. The technical feasibility analysis shall include the following, and utilize the "top-down" approach, as provided below:
1. A list of air pollution control technologies or pollution prevention options that may be applied to each equipment or control apparatus to reduce the pollutants identified at (a)3 above, which shall:
i. Include control applied to similar types of sources, innovative control technologies, modification of the process or process equipment, other pollution prevention measures, and combination of these measures; and
ii. List each measure in descending order of air pollution control effectiveness.
2. A proposal to reduce emissions of each pollutant that meets (a)3 above by applying the first listed or "top" measure in its list for each equipment and control apparatus, unless the applicant demonstrates that:
i. The top measure is technically infeasible, based on physical, chemical, or engineering principles, and/or technical difficulties that would prevent the successful application of the measure;
ii. The top measure would be unreasonable when comparing its air contaminant emission reduction benefits with its adverse environmental effects, such as effects on water or land, or HAP emissions;
iii. The total and incremental costs of the top measure are greater than the total and incremental costs of the proposed measure(s), which costs shall be calculated using the techniques in the latest edition of the USEPA's Air Pollution Control Cost Manual and that the extra costs, compared with the air contaminant emission reduction benefits resulting from the top measure, would make use of the top measure unreasonable; or
iv. The top measure uses fuels that are not reliably available, or that the energy consumed by the top measure is greater than the proposed measure(s), and the extra energy used, when compared with the air contaminant emission reduction benefits resulting from the top measure, would make use of the top measure unreasonable.
3. If the top measure is eliminated from consideration, the applicant shall evaluate each successive measure on the list, using the procedure described at (c)2 above, until the applicant reaches its proposed measure.
