1. Status of RMRR or learning the definition of “routine”…
A&WMA New England Workshop
Tree Raine, ERM
October

2. What is RMRR Major modification is defined as: There are exemptions…
“any physical change in or change in the method of operation of a major stationary
source that would result in a significant net emissions increase of any pollutant subject to
regulation under the Act.” 40 CFR §52.21(b)(2)(i)
There are exemptions…
“routine maintenance, repair and replacement (RMRR)”
[40 CFR §52.21(b)(2)(iii)(a)]
Title of Presentation (Insert > Header & Footer to edit)

3. RMRR Updates… or not Timeline and Change Proposed in December of 2002:
Finalized in mid-2003
Stayed by the Court in December, 2003
Vacated by the Court in March, 2006
Contrary to the plain language of the Act, which defines a modification as: any physical change in, or change in the method of operation of, a stationary source which increases the amount of any air pollutant emitted by such source or which results in the emission of any air pollutant not previously emitted.
1999 Enforcement Alert:
“the ‘routine maintenance, repair, and replacement’ exemption was meant to cover frequent, traditional, and comparatively inexpensive repairs to maintain existing equipment”
Focused on misuse of the exemption
2003 pre-amble: “Ever since EPA's promulgation of its original Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) regulations in 1980, EPA has defined “modification” in its NSR regulations to include common-sense exclusions from the “physical or operational change” component of the definition, including an exclusion for RMRR. Today, we are proposing two categories of activities that will in the future be considered RMRR activities: activities within an annual maintenance, repair and replacement allowance and replacements that meet our equipment replacement provision criteria.”

4. How this fits into the NSR Applicability
Physical or operational change?
No Modification
Step 1 No
Yes
Does any regulatory exemption apply?
No Modification
Step 2
Yes No
Is emission increase from proposed project significant?
Project Not Major
Step 3 No
Yes
Can Project Net Out
of Major NSR?
Project Not Major
Step 4
Yes No
Subject to Major NSR

5. NSR: Modification Applicability
Therefore, three possible “off-ramps” for avoiding major modification status
Exemption (preferred by sources-no calculation)
Non-significant emissions increase (proposed project is a modification, but project emissions increase is not significant)
Significant emissions increase for project, but source can “net out” of being major 5 5
© COPYRIGHT 2009 ERM

6. Looking at Step 1 – Physical and Operational Changes
Generally, EPA has a very broad definition of Physical Changes or Changes in the Method of Operations (PCCMO). Most projects are PCCMOs
Excludes Routine Maintenance, Repair and Replacement (RMRR)
Exemptions for Certain Increases in Capacity or Availability if they can be accomplished with no PCCMO
One of the most misunderstood NSR concepts
Non-routine maintenance is a PCCMO
Replacements in kind are typically PCCMO
Permit limit increases are PCCMOs
© COPYRIGHT 2009 ERM

7. Five Factor Test No one factor is deciding
Weight of factors not specified
Probably NOT routine if:
Nature: Involves replacement of several major components,
Extent: Significantly enhances the present efficiency and capacity of the plant,
Purpose: Substantially extends the plant’s useful economic life,
Frequency: Rarely performed on that unit (may be able to look to source category frequency), or
Cost: Is costly in both relative and absolute terms
An exception without definition hinders both industry and environmental groups. Regardless of the new regulatory meaning, the existence of a definition would add clarity and decrease risk for industry. If the five factor test is the standard, then EPA should codify it. Alternately, make the definition match the New Source Performance program.

8. Things to consider Questions to consider when considering “routine”
Will the project be done by in-house maintenance staff or outside contractors?
How long will the project take to complete? How long is your normal maintenance shutdown period?
Are the replacement components of the same design as the components they are replacing?
What was the expected lifetime of the unit when it was first installed?
Will the changes restore the unit to its original rated capacity?
Are the components being repaired/replacing the original components? How often are these changes made to the unit during its lifetime?
Where will the funding from this project come from (i.e. O&M budget or capital expenditure)?
should the question be whether all similar generating units at some point in their life undergo reheater replacement, or whether each individual unit in question must undergo reheater replacement multiple times in order for such work to be considered routine
In preamble: EPA is today clarifying that the determination of whether the repair or replacement of a particular item of equipment is “routine” under the NSR regulations, while made on a case-by-case basis, must be based on the evaluation of whether that type of equipment has been repaired or replaced by sources within the relevant industrial category.

9. Thank you Tree Raine Principal Consultant ERM - North America
Boston, MA