# Appendix — Harrison v. PPG Industries, Inc. > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385006_0386%3A2 ## Record - **Collection:** Supreme Court brief - **Document type:** Appendix - **Published:** January 1, 1980 - **Citation:** 446 U.S. 578 ## Text APPENDIX Iu the Supreme Court of the United States OCTOBER TERM, 1979 No. 78-1918 ADLENE HARRISON, REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR, AND DOUGLAS COSTLE, ADMINISTRATOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, PETITIONERS —U PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT PETITION FILED: JUNE 25, 1979 PETITION GRANTED: OCTOBER 1, 1979 In the Supreme Court of the United Stairs OCTOBER TERM, 1979 No. 78-1918 ADLENE HARRISON, REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR, AND DOUGLAS COSTLE, ADMINISTRATOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, PETITIONERS —v.— PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT TABLE OF CONTENTS OF APPENDIX Page Relevant Docket Exntries ..............-------s-s-essssssssnsssssnenenenensnenenenens 1 Petition for Review Filed by PPG Industries, Inc., in the Court of Appeals ............---:-s-sscssssssesseeseseseensesesnenensasnenensnatansss 2 EPA letter, Milan C. Miskovsky (Attorney ) (Determination of Applicability of New Source Performance Standards) from William H. Megonnell, April 17, Seen te. 83° u..... 4 EPA memo to Kevin Healy (Determination of Applicability of New Source Performance Standards) from Jean E. Vernet, March 2, 1976 [p. 2-3] .....---------s-:sessssesestseesserestees 6 Letter to T. O. Taylor, PPG Industries, Inc., from Thomas P. Harrison, EPA, and enclosure, May 3, 1976 [p. 4-7].... 8 Letter to Thomas P. Harrison, II, EPA, from T .G. Taylor, PPG Industries, Inc., and enclosures, May 14, 1976 [p. RO) ces ccennccsccnssscnscastoniesensesennsnncenesnnnettinnnnacsnsaniouneemnscmnsonanseanenees 12 EPA memo to Paul Farenthold from Jim Veach, May 25, 1976 [p. 20) .......--csscscecesesseeesesnsnesneneesesssenensessntssasensaenenensens ie 23 —_——_ * The entire administrative record was included as a single ex- i hibit in the record on direct review, with the separately numbered pages indicated here in brackets. The administrative record is included in entirety, except as noted. See - 2s ii TABLE OF CONTENTS OF APPENDIX Undated hand written notes [p. 21] ............---.-------:sessseeseeeeeeeeees Letter to T. G. Taylor, PPG Industries, Inc., from Thomas P. Harrison, II, and enclosure, June 2, 1976 [p. 22-23) .... Letter to Thomas P. Harrison, II, EPA, from T. G. Taylor, PPG Industries, Inc., and enclosures, June 28, 1976 [p. | a necéeithusisssuliaaniedeabaliteesieudttuinaadpuntiocaaiabtceiaariaiat Letter to T. G. Taylor, PPG Industries, Inc., from oO. W. Lively, EPA, October 5, 1976 (2 — Letter to O. W. Lively, EPA, from T. G. Taylor, PPG In- dustries, Inc., and enclosure, November 12, 1976 [p. 45- BO) nn .nn.nw--nnncoeensenenaesnennnenceessncsensenssnensvennsnnsenseussanssnssasansenaeewanseneene Letter to T. G. Taylor, PPG Industries, Inc., from oO. W. Lively, December 22, 1976 [p. 51-52) ........-------------------e-e0+ EPA memo, to O. W. Lively (Determination of Applicability of New Source Performance Standards) from Edward E. Reich, December 29, 1976 [p. 53-54) -.........-----.------1----e--000-> List of attendees at meeting with sketch attached, March 10, 1977 [p. 56-66) -......n.-.n.n-n--.c.ccenceseceseceenenenensnsnessneasnensensnensasenees Letter to Howard G. Bergman, EPA, from George P. Cheney, Jr., PPG Industries, Inc., with enclosures, April 18, 1977 [p. 57-73] ...n.n.n.n.neceeneecccnscseseeseseseenencnensncnsnsonsssnensnsatnenensnsnsnsssesenes EPA memo, to Ed Reich from Howard Bergman, April 14, . 1977 [p. TA] -..-----c-----2o-e-c-ea-nnssncsnseennenceeaseencsnssncsssnssnscenensenenaces Letter to Howard Bergman, EPA, from Charles F. Lettow (Counsel for PPG Industries, Inc.) with enclosure, April 29, 1977 [p. 75-86) ......-....-.----..s-c-ceneeccnnsncsncncecessecsscsnneneanenssnees EPA memo to Howard G. Bergman from Director, Division of Stationary Source Enforcement, May 5, 1977 [p. 87- | ema Letter to George P. Cheney, Jr., PPG Industries, Inc., from John C. White, EPA, June 8, 1977 [p. 89-90] .................-.- Letter to Edward E. Reich, EPA, from Charles F. Lettow (Counsel for PPG Industries, Inc.), July 18, 1977 [p. 91- Onn nennnnnncnenccncecsnecenenesessesesaiessnsennn nnn Letter to Charles F. Lettow (Counsel for PPG Industries, Inc.) from Edward E. Reich, EPA, August 3, 1977 [p. 93].. EPA memo by Doug Farnsworth, August 17, 1977 [p. 94]... Letter to Charles F. Lettow (Counsel for PPG Industries, Inc.) from Edward E. Reich, EPA, August 18, 1977 [p. 95- | ana UU UTNE ann ee Letter to Adlene Harrison, EPA from James E. Wyche, PPG Industries, Inc., September 6, 1977 [p. 97] ..........-----------+-- Order allowing certiorari ...............-.........ccccssscssssscsnsesssssenscess bate staat 2 1 RELEVANT DOCKET ENTRIES [Title of Court Omitted in Printing] PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. Vv. ADLENE HARRISON, REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR, AND DOUGLAS COSTLE, ADMINISTRATOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY DATE PROCEEDINGS October 4, 1977 Petition for Review November 10, 1977 Order granting motion of Continental Oil Company to Intervene December 7, 1977 Certified list of administrative record filed May 10, 1978 Case Argued January 8, 1979 Opinion and judgment entered January 22, 1979 Respondents’ motion for extension of time to file petition for rehearing granted to February 5, 1979 February 5, 1979 Respondents’ petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc February 26, 1979 Order denying petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc March 6, 1979 Judgment as mandate issued 2 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. Box 1000 Lake Charles, Louisiana 70601, PETITIONER Vv. ADLENE HARRISON, as Regional Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency Region VI 1201 Elm Street First International Building, Suite 2800 Dallas, Texas 75270 and Douc.Las M. CosTLE, as Administrator, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 401 M Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20460, RESPONDENTS PETITION FOR REVIEW PPG Industries, Inc., hereby petitions the court for re- view of the orders and determinations of the Environ- mental Protection Agency (a) that two “waste heat” boilers, which are component parts of “Power Plant C” in the chemical manufacturing plant of PPG Industries, Inc. at Lake Charles, Louisiana, are subject to pro- visions of Standards of Performance for Fossil Fuel Fired Steam Generators, 40 C.F.R. § 60.40, et seq.; (b) that, pursuant to the Standards of Performance for Fossil Fuel Fired Steam Generators, PPG Industries, Inc. may fire in its waste heat boilers only a fuel which contains a sulfur content equal to or less than a sulfur level to be specified as a result of performance tests conducted in compliance with the Standards; and (c) that, pursuant to the Standards, PPG Industries, Inc. must install and 3 operate continuous opacity monitors in the stacks of the boilers in Power Plant C and also may be required to monitor and report on the sulfur content of the fossil fuel burned in the boilers. These orders and determina- tions were issued and entered on June 8, 1977, August 8, 1977, and August 18, 1977. They have not been pub- lished in the Federal Register. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Oliver P. Stockwell OLIVER P. STOCKWELL Attorney for Petitioner Stockwell, Sievert, Viccellio, Clements & Shaddock One Lakeside Plaza P.O. Box 2900 Lake Charles, Louisiana 70601 (318) 436-9491 /s/ George P. Cheney, Jr. GEORGE P. CHENEY, JR. Attorney for Petitioner PPG Industries, Inc. One Gateway Center Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222 (412) 484-2145 /s/ Charles F. Lettow CHARLES F. LETTOW Attorney for Petitioner Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton 1250 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 223-2151 Dated: October 4, 1977 [Certificate of Service Omitted in Printing] 4 April 17, 1972 Key Letter Mr. Milan C. Miskovsky Debevoise & Liberman Shoreham Building Washington, D.C. 20005 Dear Mr. Miskovsky: Your March 24 letter requested our advice regarding applicability of the Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources (40 C.F.R. Part (8), particularly the nitrogen oxide standards, to a General Electric combined combustion turbine and steam generating plant purchased by a member of General Public Utilities Corporation for addition to the existing Gilbert electric generating sta- tion in New Jersey. The combustion turbine facility clearly is not subject to the present Federal regulations, and both the combus- tion effluent and thermal energy from the turbine may be discharged to the atmosphere without being limited by the standards. There would be no logic, then, in per- mitting an owner or operator who chooses to use the exhaust heat, which otherwise would be wasted, in a waste heat recovery steam generator unit, with or with- out supplemental fuel. Accordingly, we agree that both the heat input and the emission contribution of the combustion turbine will be excluded in determining whether the steam generating plant complies with the standards. Compliance will be judged only on the amount of heat and combustion ef- fluents added by supplemental fuel used in the waste heat recovery steam generator, which is the affected facility. We appreciate the concise explanation and clarity of your letter. Please communicate with us whenever we may be of assistance. WILLIAM H. MEGONNELL Director, Division of Stationary Source Enforcement Sealed ae ec: Region II—w/cy incg Don Goodwin ” ” Bob Baum ee oor Bob Walsh (ils [Illegible material notations omitted in printing; italicized material is handwritten marginal notation] 6 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY DATE: 2 Mar. 1976 SUBJECT: Determination of Applicability— Chevron Oil Co., Perth Amboy, New Jersey FROM: Attorney-Advisor, Enforcement Proceedings Branch Division of Stationary Source Enforcement TO: Kevin Healy, Attorney General Enforcement Branch _ Enforcement Division, Region .I As per our telephone conversation of February 29, 1976, the following confirms our discussion of the appli- cability of New Source Performance Standards to new petroleum refining and storage facilities of Chevron Oil Co., to be located in Perth Amboy, New Jersey. BACKGROUND Chevron plans to construct new petroleum refining and storage facilities in Perth Amboy, New Jersey. A con- tract for construction of the off-plot facilities (storage tanks and vessels) was entered into in February of 1973. A construction contract for the on-plot (refining facilities, e.g. catalytic cracking units) was entered into on June 15, 1973. The source did an environmental impact study of the proposed facilities sometime prior to February 1973. It must be noted that the applicability date for NSPS for petroleum refineries and storage vessels for petroleum liquids is June 11, 1973 (date of FR proposal for these standards). Where construction of facilities was com- menced after that date, the facilities are subject to the applicable standard. DISCUSSION Clearly, the planned storage vessels at the Chevron facility are not subject to NSP since their construction da Citas ce Cada AREA LG tM at > 7 was contracted for prior to June 11, 1973 (i.e., in Feb- ruary 1973). The refining facilities, considered sepa- rately, would be subject to NSPS since the construction contract was entered into on June 15, 1973, four days after the proposal date of the standard. The company has claimed an exemption for the refining facilities based on the contract date for the storage vessels, arguing that the entire new construction is so integrated as to make the contract date for the off-plot facilities the “com- merce construction” date for the on-plot facilities. Storage vessels and refining facilities (e.g. catalytic cracking units, catalyst regenerators) are separate “af- fected facilities” within the definitions of 40 CFR Part 60. As such, they must be considered separate from each other for the purpose of NSPS applicability. Note that the definition of “construction” in 40 CFR § 60.2(g) means “fabrication, erection, or installation of an ch fected facility.” Thus, the date for commencement of construction, where the contract for construction rather than actual physical changes to the site is used, applies separately to each of Chevron’s contracts. The earlier contract date for the storage vessels cannot be used to “orandfather” the refining facilities as exempt from NSPS compliance. The date of the environmental impact study is irrelevant. Because other information was unavailable to us, this affirmative applicability determination applies only to the “commencement of construction” issue, and does not speak to the process or design capacity requirements of 40 CFR Part 60. /s/ Jean E. Vernet JEAN E. VERNET 8 MAY 3 1976 CERTIFIED MAIL— RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED #789717 Mr. T. O. Taylor Technical Manager Industrial Chemical Division PPG Industries, Inc. P.O. Box 1000 Lake Charles, Louisiana [Tllegible] Dear Mr. Taylor: On February 26, 1975 Conoco Oil Company notified this office that, as fuel supplier to PPG Industries, Conoco would have to switch from supplying natural gas to fuel oil for PPG’s fossil fuel fired steam generators at the Lake Charles, Louisiana plant. On March 21, 1975 a meeting was held in Dallas that was attended by rep- resentatives of PPG, Conoco, the Environmental Protec- tion Agency, and a representative of the Louisiana Air Control Commission. At this meeting the effects of the fuel switch in regard to the applicability of the New Source Performance Standards were discussed. On Jan- uary 19, 1976 we wrote you requesting information on the status of the fuel switch. In a letter dated February 2, 1976 you informed us that the Louisiana Air Control Commission approved PPG’s fuel oil permit application on July 9, 1975. Under the provisions of the Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 1857 et seq., the Administrator of the En- vironmental Protection Agency has promulgated Stand- ards of Performance for New Stationary Sources [40 CFR Part 60]. Among the new and modified stationary sources to which Standards of Performance apply are fossil fuel-fired steam generating units [40 CFR Part 60, Subpart D, a copy of which is enclosed]. Facilities covered by Standards of Performance are subject to notification and recordkeeping requirements [40 CFR 60.7, a copy of which is enclosed]. 9 A fuel switch from natural gas to fuel oil is probably a modification within the meaning of 40 CFR 60.14 (a copy of which is enclosed) unless the exception of 40 CFR 60.14(e) (4) applies. It is necessary for you to provide us information that will demonstrate whether or not the fuel switch is a modification and whether or not you come within the scope of 40 CFR 60.14(e) (4). Ac- cordingly, pursuant to the authority granted in Section 114 and subject to the sanctions of Section 113 of the Clean Air Act (copies of which are enclosed) you are hereby required to complete Enclosure 1 to this letter. The completed Enclosure 1 is required to be submitted within twenty (20) days from the receipt of this letter to the Environmental Protection Agency at the follow- ing address: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region VI 1600 Patterson Street Dallas, Texas 75201 Attn: Enforcement Division Any change in the information so reported must be reported to the same office within five days after such change occurs. This continuing requirement to provide notification of change in the information covered by this letter remains in effect until expressly terminated in writing by this office. In accordance with Section 114(c) of the Clean Air Act and the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. Sec- tion 552, information provided to the Environmental Protection Agency in this report will be available to the public, except that upon a showing satisfactory to the Agency by any person that a specified portion (other than emission data), if made public, would divulge methods or processes entitled to protection as trade secrets of such person, the Agency will consider such informa- tion confidential in accordance with the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1905. However, any such confidential in- formation may be disclosed to other officers, employees, or authorized representative of the United States con- cerned with carrying out the Clean Air Act or when 10 relevant in any proceeding under the Clean Air Act. If you feel that you can justify confidential treatment for any of the information supplied, you should provide a fully detailed explanation for each specific item of in- formation at the time that you respond to this letter. Whether or not you regard part of the information re- quested as confidential, you are required to furnish it in response to this letter. Questions regarding your compliance with the New Source Performance Standards should be addressed to Mr. James Veach, Attorney, Enforcement Division, at (214) 749-2142. Sincerely yours, Original Signed By THOMAS P. HARRISON, II Director Enforcement Division (6AE) Enclosures 1. Enclosure 1 2. 40 CFR 60.7 3. 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart D 4. 40 CFR 60.14 5. Sections 113 and 114 of the Clean Air Act ec: Mr. James F. Coerver Technical Secretary Louisiana Air Control Commission P.O. Box 60630 New Orleans, Louisiana 70160 bee: Bill McNally, (6AEA) 6AEL: JVeach:ma:X2142:R1135 :4/29-76 JV 4/29 6AEL JC 6AEA [Illegible] Collings Doyle When info on increase in pollutants comes back we may still have to call/write whether company caiculations/ projects whether an increase will occur. bec: George Stevens, DSSE [italicized portions appears as handwritten notations in record] ee ee P Bi Miaciridicirmernirs 2 11 Enclosure 1 Required Information to be Submitted Provide the following information for each fossil fuel- fired steam generating unit of more than 250 million British thermal units per hour heat input, the construc- tion or modification of which was commenced after Au- gust 17, 1971. 1. List each steam generating unit that has changed or will change from burning natural gas to burning fuel oil and the date of each change. 2. If any of the steam generating units listed in number 1, above, were designed prior to August 17, 1971, to accommodate the use of fuel oil, provide docu- mentation of such designed use for each such unit. 3. List the changes that were or will be made to each steam generating unit that allows it to burn fuel oil, and the date such changes were or will be begun on each such unit. 4. Provide all available information and documentation on the change in emission of any pollutant from each unit as a result of the fuel switch from natural gas to fuel oil. 12 [PPG Emblem] PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. Industrial Chemical Division P.O. Box 1000 Lake Charles, La. 70601 T. G. TAYLOR Technical Manager May 14, 1976 Certified Mail—Return Receipt Requested Mr. Thomas P. Harrison, II Director—Enforcement Division (6AE) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region VI 1600 Patterson Street Dallas, TX 75201 Re: Enclosure I, Thomas P. Harrison to T. G. Taylor, May 3, 1976 Dear Mr. Harrison: We believe that all answers and documentation to the four questions raised in your Enclosure I are found in PPG’s application to the Louisiana Air Control Com- mission dated May 26, 1975, for fuel oil burning in our complex. A copy of this document was forwarded to you last year by the LACC. For your convenience, however, those sections containing answers to your Enclosure I questions are reproduced and included herein. The fuel oil permit application covers two situations. The first situation is that we must convert some of our exist- ing combustion equipment from gas to oil feed due to supply problems. Since all of the equipment to be con- verted was originally designed for fuel oil feed and in operation prior to 1971, the fuel switch is a modification within the meaning of 40 CFR 60.14. This conversion is now partially completed. The second situation covered by our permit is the con- struction of a new power facility to combust either gas 13 or oil. This new facility was designed and equipment was ordered in 1970. Numerous problems delayed the start of construction until late last year. [handwritten and illegible marginal notes omitted] The monitoring devices required of a new emission source are being incorporated into the design of this facility. Startup of this unit is still a year in the future; conse- quently, you have not directly received information on the unit. Sincerely yours, /s/ T. G. Taylor Technical Manager edh Enclosure 1 Required Information to be Submitted Provide the following information for each fossil fuel- fired steam generating unit of more than 250 million British thermal units per hour heat input, the construc- tion or modification of which was commenced after Au- gust 17, 1971. 1. List each steam generating unit that has changed or will change from burning natural gas to burning fuel oil and the date of each change. 2. If any of tlie steam generating units listed in number 1, above, were designed prior to August 17, 1971, to accommodate the use of fuel oil, provide documentation of such designed use for each such unit. 3. List the changes that were or will be made to each steam generating unit that allows it to burn fuel oil, and the date such changes were or will be begun on each such unit. 14 4. Provide all available information and documenta- tion on the change in emission of any pollutant from each unit as a result of the fuel switch from natural gas to fuel oil. Reply to Enclosure 1 (1) Units 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 at Powerhouse A, and Units 2 and 3 at Riverside Powerhouse will be modified to accept fuel oil as well as natural gas. Units 1 and 2 at Powerhouse C will be constructed to combust nat- ural gas and/or fuel oil. This information is con- tained on pages 2 and 2A. (2) All Powerhouse A and Riverside boilers were origi- nally designed for either gas or fuel oil operation. Predicted performance data and certified construc- tion drawings are presented in Appendix IV with Exhibits A-F. Note: Powerhouse A boiler heat releases are less than 250 MM Btu/hr. each. (3) The fuel oil system for all boilers is still under con- struction. Page 5 contains a brief description of the oil system; page 2A shows the chronology. Exhibit V explains the mode of operation of the new units. SK-7333 is a schematic of the oil system. (4) The EIQ submitted in association with the permit application and dated 3/17/75 presents the new emission data predicted from each boiler as a result of fuel oil combustion. A page 6 from the EIQ is presented for each unit. Show ownership and use of adjoining property on map section or list below. List any residential areas near the plant or establishment and give distance from the plant or establishment: See Exhibit I Plant Layout/Land Allotment Location of Power Plant Stacks Fuel Oil Permit PPG Drawing 32A-6022-F.0. » el 15 3. LOUISIANA AIR CONTROL COMMISSION EMIS- SION INVENTORY QUESTIONNAIRE. A completed Emission Inventory Questionnaire (copy attached) is required. If a new 6 page questionnaire for this location has been previously submitted, give date of submission February 1975. A completed “revised” Emis- sion Inventory Questionnaire must also be submitted with this application. The Emission Inventory Questionnaire must be completed showing the entire emissions of the facility after modifications and/or additions, with max. concentration calculations under worst ambient air condi- tions. Estimated starting date of construction: Power Pits. A, B, C (See Pg. 2A) Estimated date operation will begin: See Page 2A. Old Facility: Power Pits. A & B Operating Addition: No New Facility: Addition: Yes “Give a brief description of proposed action and attach such information as flow diagrams, schematic diagrams, drawings, ete. needed to convey an understanding of the processes involved in the plant or establishment.” Power Pit. C Due to the notice of curtailment of our natural gas con- tract by one of our suppliers, PPG is required to use fuel oil for a major percentage of their fuel needs. Seven boilers now in operation using natural gas will be con- verted to burn fuel oil. The chlorine expansion, Permit 290, has two new boilers that will burn fuel oil and/or natural gas. Therefore, nine boilers will be converted for the burning of fuel oil. They are as follows: (1) Power Pit. A—Nos. 9, 8, 7, 6, 5. No. 5 boiler will be a spare for outages of boilers #9 through 6. Stack numbers are the same as boiler numbers. (2) Power Plt. B (River- side)—Nos. 8 and 2. The No. 8 boiler stack is being raised to the same height as No. 2, 150 ft. Stack num- SS PHD tn vee 16 bers are 12 and 11, respectively. (3) Power Plt. C—Nos. 1 and 2 with stack Nos. 6-73 and 5-73, respectively. The schematic showing boiler arrangements is as follows: Exh. II—Routing of fuel oil fed to boilers; Exh. IJJ— Plan View of Boilers Plt. A; Exh. IIJ-A—Plt. B; Exh. III-B—Plt. C; Exh. IV—Boiler elevation and _ stack heights Plant A, Boilers 1 thru 9; Exh. IV-A and IV-B— Boilers 2 and 3; Exh. 1V-C—Boilers 1 and 2. Five on-the-line fuel oil tanks are being installed, four for No. 6 and one for blending low sulphur fuel oil with the No. 6 fuel oil to maintain ambient air at acceptable SO, environmental levels. The fuel oil will be burned at a nominal rate of 9,692 BPD. Power Estimated Starting Estimated Date Plants Date of Construction Operation Will Begin Power Pit. A Boiler +9 December 1, 1975 January 26, 1976 Boiler +8 January 26, 1976 March 15, 1976 Boiler +7 March 15, 1976 May 3, 1976 Boiler +6 May 8, 1976 June 21, 1976 Boiler #5 June 21, 1976 August 9, 1976 #5 Boiler will be a spare for outages of Boilers +9 through +6. Power Plt. B (Riverside) Boiler #8 September 29, 1975 December 1, 1975 Boiler +2 December 1, 1975 February 2, 1976 Power Plt. C Boiler #1 January 1, 1976 Boiler #2 July 1, 1977 February 1, 1977 August 1, 1978 List the air pollution abatement measures that will be utilized to control the emissions from the sources for the plant or establishment. If no facilities are contemplated, list the steps which will be taken to prevent the emission of sufficient quantities of pollutants to result in undesir- able levels. Give the source and then the abatement method for each source. Please include information such 17 as drawings, manufacturer literature, specification, ca- pacities ad efficiencies needed for evaluation of such con- trol equipment and techniques used in controlling each source. Please include date that each estimated date operation will begin. Any information about the method used for abateing the source will facilitate the evalua- tion of the application. The new burners and soot blowers to be installed in the designated boilers will incorporate the latest technology to consume the liquid fuels as cleanly and efficiently as possible. The system is designed for 9,692 BPD of fuel oil. The typical rate of burning will be lower, resulting in lower SO, emissions than indicated in Appendix I— Ambient Air—Max. Conen. of Pollutants with 1 Wt. % S Fuel Oil. Expected plan of boiler operations is given in Appendix II. Boiler sizes are shown as Appendix III as MM BTU/Hr. In order to continuously meet the primary standards for SO., the following will be done: 1. Monitor ground level SO, concentration as required by the LACC. 2. Extend the stack of our existing No. 3 boiler at River- side from 100’ to 150’. 3. Install storage capacity and equipment so that fuel oil blending can be accomplished to provide environ- mental acceptance of fuel oil during adverse SO, levels of 365 ug/m* in ambient air. Blending will be accomplished using a low sulphur fuel oil with the No. 6 oil. 4, Supplier’s letter of intent of February 5, 1975, to fur- nish fuel oil that can be blended with 1 wt.% S fuel oil whenever monitors detect that an emergency SO, condition exists, is Exhibit V. 5. We plan to design foundations and structure of new boiler stack at Power Plant C—#1 and #2 so that they may be extended. LACC-AFAOE-Rev. 1/20/73 18 APPENDIX V POWER PLANT C COMBINED FLUE GASES FROM GAS TURBINE AND WASTE HEAT BOILER BURNING GAS OR OIL PPG Industries asks that the calculation of emissions rate from its two boilers at Power Plant C, now under construction, be done for normal operating conditions when determining compliance with EPA regulations. Following are the reasons for the request: Abstract PPG Industries is constructing a combined cycle power- steam generating plant at its Lake Charles, Louisiana, chemical complex. Under normal operation, the flue gas from a gas turbine generator exhausts directly into a waste heat boiler where additional fuel is fired. The flue gases from both units are inseparably mixed and emitted through a single stack to the atmosphere. Both units have heat releases greater than 250 MM BTU/hour. PPG is requesting that it be allowed to consider the total heat release from both units when determining the emissions rate from the stack to the atmosphere. PPG has acquired a permit from the Louisiana Air Control Commission to construct this plant; however, the permit is based on total gas firing, a requirement that can apparently no longer be met by our fuel suppliers. Equipment Definition PPG Industries is constructing a combined cycle power plant to furnish its Lake Charles, Louisiana, chemical complex with both electrical power and process steam. Predicted maximum output after project completion in 1979 will be the following: 149 megawatts electrical power 466,000 pounds/hour 400 psig steam 730,000 pounds/hour 175 psig steam Ramu AS Hess = ee ee 2 - ‘ Ay oy t i 19 Equipment configuration will be two GE gas turbine gen- erators in parallel, each discharging its hot turbine ex- haust gases in its respective waste heat boiler. Additional fuel is supplied to the waste heat boilers to provide suffi- cient heat for steam generation to feed a backpressure turbogenerator. It is from this steam turbine that 175 and 400 pound process steam is obtained. No steam is condensed to produce electrical power. The gas turbines are designed to burn natural gas; the waste heat boilers can burn either gas or oil. The total heat input to one gas turbine plus one waste heat boiler is 1312.7 MM BTU/hour, of which 714.4 MM BTU/hour is supplied by the gas turbine. Operation Normal operation is described under Equipment Defini- tion; however, each unit may operate individually at a sacrifice to overall economy. The on-stream factor of all units operating continuously is 95%. Thus, any operat- ing configuration other than with both gas turbines, both waste heat boilers, and the waste heat generator on line is defined as an upset condition. Compliance with EPA Regulations Paragraphs 60.42, 60.43, and 60.44 of the Federal Reg- ister * (Vol. 39, No. 116—Friday, June 14, 1974) set forth the current emission regulations (particulate, SO., and NO.) being applied to boilers with heat released greater than 250 MM BTU/hour and burning fossil fuels. As previously described, our proposed combined cycle generating station fires natural gas in a gas turbine generator which is not normally vented to the atmos- phere. The hot flue gases are used to supply part of the combustion air and heat input to the waste heat boiler. These gases, then, combine with the flue gases from the supplemental fuel fired in the waste heat boiler and are vented together in a single stack. In view of this situa- tion, we are asking that the emission regulations be ap- plied to the total heat input to the system—not just the supplemental fuel heat input at the wase heat boiler. * Attached. 20 ’ | . § . ’ ITEM NO, $ EMISSION INVENTORY QUESTIONNAIRE (Revised 11/74) Face o of 9 (su... ahis page Ls to he used to record the data from one stack (or cther emission poir: only, — The as many times as there ave individual emission points, and use one page for each poirt. Noce that the nurters indfeate explanatory notes on pages 4 and 5., Foint scurce I Deseriptive mane Of the equiprent served Heighe of stack] Steck dlazeter, Stack gss es ID nurvery by this stack % above grades temperature 6-73 Peweornouse C No. 1 Boiler ORL. ft 15.75 ft Stack pas Flew | Stack gas} If thls stack serves a "poiler",, give |% of annual chrbughpuc of sate st oreecss | exit the type(s) of Fuel used and the hear | pollucants through this emic- congitions, not’ lwelociey ingus (ieee, fuel rate x heating value)| ston cotac (rozels 10%.) aL standasd #6 Fue el Oil etyse{s) of Fuel [Dee= | “ar- June | sepe- y : eta ee oiU/ine Ase fuel Feb ay Aus Nov 393,17 £27 /nin 31 ft/sec b pru/hr 2nd fuel, if any (25%) 25 7 25% 25% hone of Follucion!Conrrel Average. [Maximum | Annual Einnission Acc, chenge | Concenteacion in pollecant conczrol [aquipcent | emisstonlemission| emission jescimatien! or delece §ases enitrag the equiomeatiercicteacy race ° [rata rate n2tnod 7 cece 3 steck g i oe ee ee Ts los/he tons/yyr Brriteubutn matcer | COO $5.3 oes Pn 6. 5 Add ! AN2slsti f24 gulfer dlectite |. tev | 630.0; Tus. a “2347, Q 6 Change _! 158 poe (wey aizzoren diextds | 000 | _ | 457.8] 647.8 2925. 0. 6 Chance _| nvr acasoeas a SE ys | RS 5 _f Fitl in this catben mancucida { _Cv0 PE Re _ 23.6 23.4 103.3 : 4 Chance _! column only as + . J PRS _ . as 1. Teguiced by | ‘ieee. J oe eee eR : Sis 8 mates 3 nese 9, ; es J i Lae ot aR | af See | . : ITS : ecg » : t Tl sats stack fs stem equiewent vntie’? burns gurl, Give “slew cne Fuel er crs2-35 sacericis enaczing sete to iaeve the 4 of the socal fuel used by the Cqulpsentd; the unit seeviad by chis seszee.es ° which is used, either diveccly or indireetiy, Fer | “" CAnaysi 0 |. Mesfaun SNER Biting (or cooling) at the planc. (Chee., rig of Zuel/ process material T3232 _ hourls rsce to Heat ex cool the alz ia a room) Uf thts scack #6 Fuel Oil : 35,382 ive _6.5M cal /ne £5 not frei a fuel buzaing equipmenc, o¢ if fusi | ea fne {s. burned but none of the heat is intended to heat lyr neo or ccol aiz in a romn, enter a zero delow: : fi ae = ; Ive = 0 % "spece heat" : ivr /y- 3 eae -t——™ 21 5 ENISSION INVENTORY QUESTIONNAIRE (Revised 11/74) " Paee 6 of 9 (sud - This pase 45 to te used to reevrd the data from one akack Cor other emission pointe) only, Ves ’ : as many tires as there are individual emission polnts, and use one pase for each pot. Note that my mucters iniicate exploncetery notes on pages 4 and §. Foint scurcs | Descriptive mene of the equipment served tefghe of stack | Stack diaz meters | Steck gas exis iD nurter, by this stack . above grades temperature 5-73 - Fewerssus2 C No. 2 doiler 70 fe} 15.75 ft 3000- ---oo o— a . ———— ' nurse Yq, | S . Siack gas flew | Stack gas] If this stack serves a “boiles"),, give | % of annual chreughpuc of Normal oversee) rate at preeess | exit the tyse(s) of fuel used end che hese | pollucants throush chis emis-| ing cine of concitions, not l*veioctzy | ineut (f.e., fucl vate x heating value)| ston poine (rozels 100%) this oofar aL standard oS 2: | ne 2 of fuel [Dees] “are 1 oune- ) Sepe-| nretdaveteas | O°6.5.- WU CVs ue Ase fuel Foo way | acy 1 Nov G2y ‘vauklys 552,117 Ce?/mia 5) ft/seep 106 AYUsne 2d Fuel, if any |25%(25 2% | 25 % 25% | 241 2 15? bandied wame of Foilucion|Gontrel Average. [Maximuc | Annual Fisission Adc, change | Concentcation 1A roilucant ecenzrol jequirzent | emisslonleaission|emission Jesci:sation! or delete gases exiting che Jequipmaat{etiictancy] race rate rate nmstaod 4 cece g steck g 672 3g LI bali J lbs/he | tons/ye | e [particulars master | Ceo | 3.0 105.9] Zits ‘ee | Add 202 or/sta fe4 euisee Aeiide | 4 | 650,09 | 138.0). 6 | ___Crenge | 1S8_ FP (OLS aisrevon Atoutds OU ey | 657.8 | 667.8 | [6 Chonge | UAE ACATINIS 19 Ley we. | I fi | 1 Fill in this content mars ed de Le | : p F929 het SVEN LIVOSD LV OM to LOW~T ATA AIS TO Wad wr CITIOG wou D SIG STHACS , $19} 10g 04 | PPPd 1:10 Jans Jo QHOWoYyrS —. H) 4iqtyxg d erga ee ed rey 7 on a a 16 ieee Oro Peg "I eae 4 Peg 90 d' BP re mrery 9 407 Y) grb nore — | pene sgnng” ET ee ey OPI ET PIR PLO OP OY Ld Vea art ig rrr add pp OTe eel i) POE O Fe it vi S ee COVA yr cnU WY _ ad iy Ee hati we ih i ae ies om wet ¥ heap rise «enon -ae CoO, ae asad a cpl *- i - “7 pro eS a 2 ‘=, -e as F idle 7 Pa 4 re id (UY OT Vr ree “é of) eA a f y “Cs ae } G16 A - re o— - . .f rs © . : : ibaa: "te ia Ae S ; Ca) - GION AA VOr} . LOL wn ,o¢-/ — LAy\ wu si “tp rs eon od fF 101g ‘ ’ ° j toy FO aSaa AD (? jer ee ree { 2 ag ore ee Pe“ ve rp rv AO Sw yvyro A a b Pn -_—- ete rf i. Y Sa ae a i ¢ # fo ive pe vi he arcs © FIM) I+ y rt ead on ony _s Same? ptioe pore: C27 .~ = : , : C2) SO) ps 4) ¢ x . - 2 Vt Ww | b x : LAB i és ted Gf avrg = 4 ‘AM @ Os oMit si¥) & W101 Vy ITtNW 4g 454 IGT OK % a. 7 QO" Wed WZ wt a! 72D tx “4 a iy 4556 ms, c. tet feo “NCS c23:Se HeWwSI 7 Men H PLA i=) 7 _—* — & = 2 a32tj-; * ig Vibe PDR Rein=°t £245 io) @oa Sh iow 2D 5282291493 i al Wea 2 ef - S OO} S307 at34 WuCe en Sr SR te 12 sad nee : i ae a a |} DBI S¥4N § 494 DINO a~'ee: "0 yan: — os | of 7 ; WOLIVIOVS é ya 0 ~ 74 7) - } ° : VIZUSCERO Cie HY" ee th 4-7 : ; Biv W 3s%S.Ca 2 $ “er Stor: 2 ee “a2 Wi Oh ey emt sv “eel oT i CFs: S¥D a3 7 oA 13% in 5 ee 2 i 347151834 138] z E fee? Ws Ss r BP pee Cig 83754 cit]5% ae oes 3 at ey ™ | ei Ge 7 ae sizej)e S b a Shae ‘woes ). 2 eo [XOESN'M OW A214 12 AY viv 9. Ys €D #312 Woes dt ’ A'S yee $S97 13743 435 Teer ide SF BHA i i Sere ; Sis At FOILS 22M 5 t ~~ ve = hd : GEG \ Sesame |! 4 "t'9°6 C20 ated ic ma | - = OP Zz L ‘7 ; } ¥UL794 EID ‘7 “ese. s "ef" = + : - z : 6° OK SO? sé ae: Sp Otfd * sa. GIR yuje} Pre ’ hd A ED.v 7624 DH BATICET” Y SO. we, ae ‘ Lee OIG wy: on 7 Ky CMTASST By) Min: 503] OF | oS ' a W 7 ONEDABD Ese! H 533 sims Y wee | Bee | | pts tureschd ehival a Pei2ivxo | Mis | — | owiz L. ema eel | WOD3 ONESDLWI VIz¥Y of ae | , af | oie ' j MY SWIATIT SOD Ws! = iY W101 FES, : : ; MOS OMAN GeO amu! _ g sect | SSL JZao +: TS ike Kb TD ls im a boyl A ray Y 4 i 7 MUS SHHCIS) euim we) . oe ; ss 8235 Misti 6502), » an 3411} Cs Ge. A Tara 6S % ws3 GAS BV ASiCt 2438 1S in| OFS 5c A [eo B30: AI B3S Nims BL bal Wevosee9 fi Uc? ‘of ae r4yure «Sar ay si5 wale) 727) 27 Me ney | | | yale PO } wif : H ONIAE?) SYD Kult a 1in0)| ; Fe mm fF ‘ i of AT ul = ppesae —_— — ; = Ss : ‘a 7 ~ : bees j ; WHITE SOON INID, 1735) pare is Aa o> “[Bawsfis B34 355 WI “On'ScH9"e am... o = By WA 1% Ow PW3) BIV SS3D42 re iA val” f ssri2|e ee 4 NO’) cP ' BH *WONEVeMO O97 Dr Bite Culm “ee BPS POI LEA a Tr | Wig 49 Baas ya mal | aes | aaah 2444! ral boy Yl Se | ' SH/ad wm Wj lw ets SIMS, ‘ = JINFaLOseId WlLIIC2e3 G} Civis BY TING Vv “WOILCDISOSd Di VEY+D SI Siwdive “CHF OD KCDIIMG HICIGVD Bud 4B SIVIDELSS? 4C GIWMD ALVDIVE 49 CPLD3L9%G SI WOF*5M 035412998 AKIMGITOI Iwd + 34 OL St ONN “OD KODTIM G HIODEKS J4: sf = F2ADiw! Jme CL WAUAIMIS133 F505H%e BIHLd ae 74 30 “SydMi0 Of 14 805 O35 £O ‘Lave WI BO 31CrmM Wi “ORie. «©6000: 039NGCHe}w IO OL 1G" SI oLt AWHL NTHLIONOD «©6499 O38901 $s! ave 7 ‘TOD XO * ADOIGVE 2H1L 4 ttmdshus %. ‘ oD dem twee wet Hate i 3 “4. ‘ a) a .* . “kiddo Tit *aA0qe0 e = : : a .° & . 03 porsdjyou (tL 108 n) Auvdwoy 94439919 Leudusy yo $u943030Nb Le ae ; ay Ut Pats }2ads 3Nq ‘4apug aseyoung S1U3 UL SUd}Ss WO Auy | °° Y i > os : *a]LS $,19u07SN2 . ySourou BurprspLes Olqyssacse 03 4YyGya4, Aeaod °*573 *Sculqun3 c.*, it . weays *suozeususd ‘sautqunz seb. yj0g 40} aACG? Sad}ud UY, boss ie O°sog*sezSl$ | - = = UOLQELL@Asu, JO. LOLSpAusans” peopuysoz $2209 sotud- we Lect TBs oe: — S}UL “Sx{UPS *Z perc} Aq peudis pue *O761 °9 4eC—aACiy paqwep | ew Ot es eit, MATES (°AdU) S=SZEZ-Lpe # UOLIeION *Z°°D UO pazst{ Weinss 4syI0 Jo |. Joe Te 2 Ts pub SapuOSsasse. yA dzapczoa eq OF *uazen Gurpecs Hisd zt fe ere FN eS ian - * put 43,¢§ dO} peuSisap suajood Yyzin *4ozoususd snsuouyours a ero sD ‘SORWRA YpndUL qucys gsi “S310A CO3"EL “t:4u.COD"E *ese Yd & pA ef Ay ae os *31)949 O9 £409924 Yemod gg° SYN) 000s ty pey_ood 3 Poy uta at aoe Site ob LPs. aqapdmog .*bisd-oz O *4u/¢ CDOTZL2 - IsNeyx3 fig 092 0] sae | ES pre ' 2] au/d 000% esy © vOLqoeAgxg Opjocojny *bYSd 099 O “Suse COOTOLY: [a7 Re SAE] ety a a ee a opaecaaay, eet - bare - Pare. :SU0¢3:0009° 40]U Bie sence bc 33 aS RD ER eR TE Eo“ aguong page baie fa "2 egg’. %: ous Buyoutoy: a) oy. pazys cuygina anaes Syst esetisg roe p ee L€ . 78/00°020"8E$ Se, eer + Seg Sto “2 puppanarg “a Mate? mer eat at i: fa pavbis pue olesi- 6 pe sp iGcos-1S Zh °Czy COLILZCHD Je SP . ‘ dod se ee 3 Seb “ana! ” voyzeLLe3 au 40 uo}3022 +40 je}puyoa4 fs eS ° *. . QUgLAeg JO Sua) 024 . A . - are am . Ne ces _— ¢ oe. eee ae : . 424 2 es a ce Oa es SS aS 8 ? ef = @- — ‘Jopuo aseysund jo o2ep 40730 SUZUDW SALS%} ULLAL ScuULqung seb . . ae. oe ° - - ° ° é i Paw ss le") eaBeenoo unopyreeq epnysuy qou seop ‘SUL . *SOUEUSJULEW [CMUOU 112 40} UOG2| pues UOPZoOcCasu!r ApuqucH _ SUORZDdOUEP LCopuyooz Supedas uo szued Weaod pinsr edpud syL - - . *Bqep Burgededo Lepowssod eyz [tqun Meseysand cyq Aq eprw 89 03 SATY YOU SECP ZOTUqUCD SOUZUSZULEW SYR LO USiSLoOSp SLUL *udp}eusdO LOLIUTUOD YO S2ep Suz WOAL SPCLUSITY AO/puce WOGeL 40 UOLZL[LISD UO poSseg 3D2UAUOD SY JO WeTA YS4i4y SY2 AGze Jeak yoeod sbueys 03 220fqns Og p_Nc unoy pours wed cs°eLs syL *SSa] “oO Sunoy QOCL Mod ues DLO pure Lans Sed peunzeu *dd,AUSS peo, oseq uo peseq }LuN usd unoy pouls usd cGy°eL§ 40 3S09 e 38 a2ep Guiqeusdo jepousuwod syz uo Bupuurbeg seurcunz seb, ay} UO 320U2UOD SduUeUSzULCY SunoYy ODNSOY ‘4AeOA SAS & YOLeu UO ydaoce 03 4ybiu sy3z SeAudSau ,waseydund, “Sul *‘Satuysnpuy Odd “O00*OSS$ 30 Bd1Zd © 203 | Byz 40} 40z04 eurds -0 aseyound 0}, 346 j4. ay} sey Acseyound ayy a5lud NO1lid!i¥I530 ALILNYNO mwralt ‘9 L ” VIA ans ; Srwss ’ «oa | 3iv0/'OM NONLWLONO mane AwdAITEG G2A0ND AUSAITAO OBeINoIe AstLON MIOKO WEeUtA ONimMetsNO? w20¥0 40 biva ' On AwinoNM BIGHON 2ONWHD On MONLIGINOSs a@ O7109"088 nd y 40 2 abeg , er 100-92 ON Y¥30H0 J ; @;: ‘ @zzSt ‘Vd ‘HOUNESLUId (Cnty “4N3O AVMILYS 3NO yz oa , ~ NOISIAIA WOIWIHD S3'ULSMINE A 0 36 =" Ryyquew ‘uo pus Ayydwoud anpeyss wozzonpoud yz1A saseydund |- . “SPLAQud [LP uo_tas © ‘uadn poprsep.sue sopgrgueno yndyno +, 4 SAL “CLL Sacqmandes Aq Seujcim 62 eh CpYs ay hiltia eee: oe te hy seen ce RS Se ames Sg et oF ' eg a ee ye i ge Senn, SE ene oe ihe ak, Sats Seka ke ae, To. + SEUZ ABZSURUZ MO UB}SSt-03. 2YySp4 Sy} SaAddSed 4OSEYRNG | m4 r ry . ay ak aan oo" te . . “ 4 ‘ ‘ozEp dn-3ue4S 40240 AVDA CUO 4O pOJucd wv 4OJ SUO}3CI4449EdS 3c 03 poutnbou se SqucWoIe{ dou UO SUOLZLppe pur SUuOLzZe40z[e YINS DSUIdKD WO $Z}-30 D7ALLE OF UOZZCHLGO OYyz Sey 4DLLOS OYL Le ee _—. W@SJS [Cul 4OIse SuZUSY gL PCcdyus oq [LLM SuLgeNn? Urs}s Paes ae ies ee Oe _ *Seurqun2 se6 (2) cmQ-40} = 201/000 OS1$ ps2dxo 02 YOU pur suLqun} CrEZS wCy GIO*C1S 40 “Qunouwe Sy} ul Shucyd peuoraippe ue 402 S575} OS USeuN SE/6L *1 aune 03 “OLud 2ng *4/GL SL ACY 45958 LePAQ SStyoung SLYy SPOUT} OF BWYyHLu Sy. aAeYy L {CYS Loscyound sux “szeuLeusz {Leys sepunoucy wsyTO Sy 03 Aqued wey71d 40 SucrzebL_qo LLe@ uns yotun so quenfed ucda *g09SLZS 4O zuUNOwe cz UL BHueys uoL2euLuua2 e Yates Acd 1 [Cus ueseyound Sucpsg sseydAng Spy} azZeuLudg OS LLeYyS woseyound JL zeyY Suercuc *pspLaoud D 100-292 “QLNID AVAGLVD 3NO 3) 4A _. worstaia qwouw3Ho UO, A ee NOlid /UISIG ALIrsvNO __| weait Pg ee) eee eo ++ hic a VIA 4iH3 enw. 20 | 3avG/ ON NONLWLONO o3ane AwBAINIC G210NO AUBAITI0 aswinoze Astson IOUS TwEUIA On!merswO? =30u0 40 Biva ‘OM Amnon ' wetennn Bouvl> On wOriisinoas ae crsssnete ° S31NJSMINI b 30 € abed ne : ZZzSt “Vd ‘HOUNSSLId 7.) ps ON 432040 p. a Lion 430 ‘ uopnoy uog Coyutg “3 y siceiainin “ec pn 203 “OL6L * LL daquonoy 40 4Jépso Legian SyImA sue (wAoyS Se Sdtdod JO NOEL UE . ~ pays }uang “9 Aew yoea sO atqponpoudau ({) 9ug)- ‘ Qucudinbs eaoge sy}: azeuddo |. . _ pur “‘upequpcu en ab Aagssaoou e}ep uayzo Auy : ee i ae - ge yberp Buluiy -.. tag S ape Let S[enuew uolzeopugny] . .. * saoqad usH StL Syued oueds pspuswwosay - °930 Suequmu -, JO roquts pue suru ‘Baty GuLaeag Aq np “. Cnn: “gaat es 22 °2L 95 21¢a ot soja? focus fea weseyoend 243 pr ecn USZPLS AOPIL TULZ ojqcyvosts © uruzti pipet sy GypoSa104 -2Y2 U2pPA Aydeo9 02 ylOn Sy coTpcSu wo/pur Apaza You seop “29LLSS SYZ J] “*yeuLGLuo cyz se uoreeppegsuL cy 4O S2cp ey3 UO HULBUETIIIS AZUOULCA EUGS ALWLD LLEYS YUSusoepcou LO *udLQROLILpOW *ALedat ysns uxez *uaseyound 02 waAsoszeun 4so0d CU 3e spew &q (LCys Auessoocu eq 0} punos squowooejdos zo *sv0oize40318 *subecou Avy *4suty Seucoa ueAsyorun AuadAtrep 49232 suqUOW 91 40 dn-3ue}s worst ueeX suo 20 pOfucd e-40} SJDDJSp 30 Sous 3q 03 dp YysuetnO; ‘and eee AO aoe aoquesenb LL hd ey) sSuyureq Bulpnyout sSurmeup Ay quasse pue 3SiL S4ueg f _$u0} 3974359} SOURUdzU} es pue masanrey tt UOLZeLECBSU]T ; eo te, soar tan a “SOAAND SSUPTICLOg -. a. ee ee Oa ee “squad sinh ny a inset if. ne Ao oag eee Be . | ee Se 0 a 2 OR Bag Sn “eit. i we Pe. GE raiqussod so gos su usp Luis JoLLa8 cot: Re cee Seo We oe ae tee ee eae ae a Ca Bn SAN BS a ei oe poeta ie . ’ = ge RP 5 | Pits i eee ie he ee . | da}ueaeny | 2oiud >arae NOTLATESSIO 7 ALliNWnO hear i a E. oe et | ‘ ¥. = — ay ® ‘ \. oil VIA aims. eruss ' eo. 31v0/'ON NOMLWLOND wane AWSZAITSGC G3L0NO AwBAINIO Salita AsILON WIGO WVEEIA ONIME HOD wIcwO 40 Biva On auinons 2 B2IEHON BOUWHD ‘OM NOMISINOIY ae oxserncye b 10 p obeg ; SHYLSNIMI Pp : Z22S1 ‘Wd ‘HOYUNESLLId —ee fe ee alah JAN39 AVMALYD INO ft lot. . NOISIAIQ. TWOIWW3HO Vv °- ee,er,” 1eubis PamsOuIny) oO oO VONEINLGD UOH}INIPEUOD OFABR P UOIG: "Qos . SPMHUGIYS [FF HO BALENIUOED Me perry ‘A8 Bumred AQ peuedwosse jou SO PaPlAVe ot iM FUND ~nG Pa AM ee ae me |) DONE SP SILER Bh RM DOID FO AOELEETED PR REDD BHEE AACHS FLPUS FeTEHING serseleyy AIG 18 2us2Ust JessENpUY “ouUy ‘Sa}4;ENPU] Hdd 404 queby sy Sunsy *puUGWAIUS OT11980D Aje;siCWwo? Due ANViu IT6“LLT’SS 307 “LET ‘YT 200390 ‘poqUp quoweczby 3O07QU0D zod se woqsks AQOTVS YZTA O19TUwWos DOTAENBADOV pus TZOZVAZOUNY UWoOAsAS ZuUdj] OyseA OQZOTAMUOD pue TTeQGUL ‘JoNnAzQsUOD TTtys pue jo uoTzOTUuoD puv uoTZeTTv_AsuL UOTFONAPBUOD OYR AZOZ YOM GYR wrogzzoed pue quoudtnbo pug z0qeT ‘sTVFz20RWY Ysfusang *SLOTdSIU IIV NI NYGAOD OL LIVYLNOD “A INO LNANLINWOD UOT Uuduo ASYioOUAd “PLGT ‘PT 2090990 UO Wor;sON por” “4 Aq ZUuOWeoRTd TeqIOA BUATZUOD “ELLLEF Tesodoxzg PUR PLGT ‘OT 2240390 pure ‘Gz zoquozdog PIP TIPYL-SNS “ON UOFQRIOND “*our “*A°D UF poqtzosep ATTeozuyooy sv pue €L/TC/B pozep T-cLp-ti AtFnbuLl zno yA potuzuanz uoTssessod 2znod ust Z-ZLpy UoTReOT }TOOdS *dz09 UOFZONAAQSUOCD START 3 woSeLY ‘prod URFA BOUrPAODOV UT Oq TTeVUS HbuTMoTTO;s ou T-C-¥88T-9 — = eo Arsedord Vinw bulpey yo tine es Odwi | (Z Sbed uo ponuFzUo) “5 ) Ui OT/TT ae CTOOET 307 T a™id4 10104 8214g NUN vuor;idysa8e0q "wun Aiwern 80Z°O8TE-T “ON 96,0u5 SOuTeD °aA *L S-2Lb-N . VW. INSWHOVLLV NI GILVSIONI INV ° AMNION "ON Aunout SNOILONUYLSNI JDIOANI S¥d~E 4O SLSISNOD Y30HO SIHL 320R23uU0D Az0g *SWY3aL 23 FSG0L -s'0's LOSOL euelsinoy ‘saseyD 9487 ys proy uzoy3n OS PFQIMTOD uofzdo x2nox VIA dIHS NOISIAIG TWIIWIHD TWIUASNGNI “DN! ‘SIIULSNGNI Ddd'O4 JtHs 7L6T ‘HT 10Q0390 31va . O£€TOL VI ‘SUeoTIO AON OuUDAY SOTALYD °3S SSoOT 3T-OOTE/#88TO onnoay BuTpT Tug yoooury uyor Gos aoe ‘oul BbutTAvouTFhbuq voftysnquoyp OL ‘ZDN3ONOZS3NNOD ONY SU3dvd]- “IddIHS ‘S3Oy +I ‘SIDIOANI T1V J wWV3ddv 15°.) WYIBVINN JA08V ETOSET wget ‘on . LOZLL YNVISINOT ‘3JOHNOW : . ¥30N0 3ISVHOUNG 1331S NOSNOVE LOGE — Z9LL XOB‘O'd qd UOISIAIG joo;wau) jOrysnpuy “uy ‘salysnpul Ogg Joy jUaBYy sy Bury dOD 3114 °1d4390 ASVHDHNG UONS: OP UOIPNISUOD SIAUH PY UIT ‘UOF ve6 Ad WON 39 uot °C Avis uUYy} A04VT OF BpPwoy uumyptod ‘ GLOT ‘eT tfadv ehuyATzg ugyq z07NU's Of ROUTYCD puv oToaueD SL6T ‘PT yor] Jquowobuewzzy uvyy A0RUT oN wrIOJAUTd posodozg SL6T ‘LT Azvnzaqoayz puohoT pue UNNQ IIZVYT of wexzbefg yooTg {~ozrzzu0D enssr 3erTA SLZ6T ‘Lt Axenzqog—-- ‘Q: woburzay quowdtnby uvYyy ZozIeT ON SAVFTFUNY pure AzVaTTog SL6T ‘et Arenazqog qeoys ueyuy TOZVT ON Axrcwmmms usoudtuby” ae. uoTtI9eg VL6T ’LZ toquoSeq ZOzFwoucoy, HSufpnpour ‘aes UBQZ 4Z9RVT ON = =§=6shupaerzq Sufproy ze,[ fog *YLZ6T ‘PT 29qQ0350 Suyeq przeMe yZourqyUOD Jo o3ep oy uodn poseq ‘uojep BupHoTToOZ ayW 073 uo" -dtubo jo AzDATTOp ONeU pue sbufaexrzp ystuzngs ai 03 soothe BbuprzsouThug uopysnquog :Ar9AT Ted *quMUD0ZHY YoerRZUOD JO ¢-z vheg oss :uOTRETVOSY * zy soTey TeuoThsy UIOASOAYANOS :uz3¥ 9O0LL XL ‘UuozsSNO] ONnUsAY puoUNjoTY PEELE ‘our BSupxzsoutbSuq uofysnqwog tSMOTTOF Se posserppe og 03 ST A9pz0 Sty Jo syZoodse [TreporsutuoSS 942 OF SAFRZRTOT ddUopUcCdsUuUAzAOS [Iv °z ° zoheuey 300forzg :u33y $6090 LO ‘2tOsputm ; peoy TItH 3oedso0zq OQOT ‘our Supzssutbuy uorqzenquos {SMOTTOF SU P¥SsdIppe oq OF ST ZOpxO sTuy O23 pezVTer soUdpUuodSYZIOD TROTUYDOZ TTIW ‘T O44 104 e144 NUN | vordsssseg ‘ : : wun Aywuerg LSE es — ——————————— "3¥3080 SIHL JO 39Vd LSY¥Id SHL NO G3NIVLNOD SNOILIGNOD ONV SWH3L 3HL AS $193dS3U T1IV NI G3NY3A09 38-O1 ONV Y30HNO G3YH3SWNAN 3AO08YV 3HL JO LYVd V G3YU3SGISNOD 38 OL SI SIHL PLOL “¥1 a0qojz0Q0 ~~" 8T-O0Te/baatD ON V.bew CLOSET v paal ON Od *Sul “bhufzvoutbuq uoyxysnqusc,) *O8 z a6eg ° | - UOISIAIG ;O2IWaYs Jolysnpuy roar “Duy ‘SatsysNpUl Odg 104 yuaby sy Bury od 31s ‘1a30 asvHouna —«d HOKEAON MoIajouoy SIAVG Y UCB: ‘UO qd 40 "uG, JPUSWYS2AZQY pPosoToUD oY UO uaMoys Se 6 WOAl MeN Aq psoetdaz BF pur poAZoTop St 10pz0 OgelyoAng sty} JO Opys oszdaox O43 UO vEuYysing JO suoTZTpuCD zo 6 WoT, 9LET “GT Xequasag yovrxz3u05 8¥U2 AOpun pextnboy GLY AVWZLT ON UOTIO92T [Te gO UOFQoTdUI)OD 42O-TFOE xrOZ 9LGT ‘GT 29qQuoAon Apwoy zTuUH pu juoudtnbg UPY AOVVYT Off ZorsrQUOD TIe 03 AZ2AF TOA “osj0e2y uTbeg 03 AzessodeN sToueg TTem | SL6T “ZT zO0qussaq 493CN pue suqny, z0T Tog ULYZ TAVZBYI ON YsBumag - AuswdtUuS TeTATuLr shutmerzq {tw SL6T ‘82 ATug soZeTduwoa yotyn suezbetq ucyz r03e7 on UOFR20uUUOD [Tvruze3zxg ; SL6T ‘et Atne - swerzbetq uzyy zAa3e7 ON Sufaty ArejZUSUSTY onssf Teuyg SLGT ‘Ss Aew - RZuvWoHuRzTIy jUSUdtTNbg ueyyz zr0Re7 oN AxeFTTxny pue IIT FO" -= S244 18204 e244 NUN voldpssseg | uwn Aweng a ied ee | So SS a oa eee eT _ ——_—_ ee SS OS ‘H30¥O SIHL JO 39Vd LSUI4 JHL NO G3NIVLNOD SNOILIGNOSD GNV SWH3L 3HL AS S193dS34 T1V Ni G3NY3A09 38 OL ONY ¥304O G3u38SWAN JAOSV 3HL JO LYVd VY G3HZOISNOD 38 OL SI SIHL ¥LET “PT a0q0730 neg : —ST=UDTE/ FEETO— ON -u,bay ETOSET wreg, CN Od ‘OUI ‘Gufzoo0uThuy uoyzzsnquog a6eg j € ° , ; UOISIAIG JO2!WaYs jOlysnpuyy q “Jul ‘S@lysSNPUl Odd 104 yuoby sy Bundy 99 3114 ‘143q asvHouna WON. “10D MOHMI}OUOD OIAVG Y UOS™" “UO. Ge? Vit ESSE’: 41 LAKE CHARLES PLANT PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS RE: Specification K-2365 Construction of New Power Plant At Lake Charles, Louisiana February 16, 1971 1. DUE DATE ! Bidder shall submit his proposal as soon as possible but not later than April 2, 1971. i 2. PROPOSAL : Bidder’s initial proposal shall consist of the accom- panying Proposal Prices and Proposal Data Forms, properly filled out. Ten (10) extra copies of these } forms are enclosed for Bidder’s use. 3. PRICE INFORMATION The main price shall appear only where called for in the Proposal Prices and shall not appear elsewhere in the proposal. Any alternate prices shall be given on a separate price page and shall not be included with Bidder’s technical or other nonprice data. 4. BID DOCUMENTS A. The following are attached hereto and comprise the Bid Documents: a. Specification K-2365, including all drawings, | standards and supplements referenced there- in. b. Exhibit A—General Terms and Conditions. e. Specimen Contract Agreement. B. Bidder shall notify PPG Industries immediately | of any apparent omissions or conflicts noted in 4 42 the Bid Documents, and which affect any prices. If any conflict appears between job sepcifica- tions and standard specifications, the job specifi- cations shall apply. C. Any contract or purchase order resulting from these Bid Documents will incorporate the terms and provisions of said documents. It will be as- sumed that Bidder agrees to the provisions of said documents, unless exceptions are specifically and clearly listed in his bid. All such exceptions must be listed together and specifically identi- fied as Exceptions. Bidder’s printed terms and conditions are not considered specific exceptions. 5. INTENT OF CONTRACT DOCUMENTS A. The intent of the Specifications is to provide general conceptual guidance to establish opera- tional requirements or standards. The Contrac- tor is expected to develop, from engineering data and economic studies, the plans and specifi- cations for, and construct a modern, efficient power plant consistent with the requirements es- tablished in the Contract Documents. B. It is the intent that Bidder’s proposal shall be based on furnishing all domestic materials. Local or Louisiana suppliers should be used where competitive. If Bidder wishes to offer any materials or equipment of foreign manu- facture, he shall designate these as such and list the savings to PPG Industries in each such category. 6. EXAMINATION OF SITE A. Contractor shall have visited the job site during Bid Period to familiarize himself with condi- tions under which the WORK is required to be done. 43 B. Contractor shall carefully examine the site of WORK and the adjacent premises, and shall conduct the necessary investigations to inform himself thoroughly as to the facilities for han- dling the equipment at the site and difficulties involved in the completion of all work C. Contractor’s plea of ignorance of existing or foreseeable conditions which will create difficul- ties or hindrances in execution of WORK is not acceptable as excuse for any failure on part of Contractor to fulfill in every detail all require- ments of Specification and/or drawings. Fur- thermore, Contractor’s plea of ignorance not ac- ceptable as basis for any claim whatsoever for additional or extra compensation. D. Bidders are requested to attend a prebid confer- ence and tour of the project rite. Please call Mr. F. E. Landry or Mr. W. Stagg at PPG Indus- tries no later than March 5 at area code 318 Phone 882-1200 for further information regard- ing the time and meeting place. 7. ADDENDA Addenda to the Contract Documents may be issued prior to the date of opening of the bids to clarify the documents or to reflect modifications in the de- sign or Contract terms. Each addendum issued by PPG Industries will be distributed to each person or organization to whom a set of the Contract Docu- ments has been issued. The recipient will acknowl- edge receipt of each addendum by signing and re- turning the receipt form distributed with the adden- dum. All addenda issued by PPG become a part of the Contract Documents. . LICENSING OF CONTRACTORS Bidders are advised that Act 233 of 1956 of the State of Louisiana requires that all Contractors and Subcontractors on. any contract amounting to $30,- CCCs 10. 44 000 or more, must be licensed under said Act before performing any work thereon, and must comply with the terms and provisions of said Act. The Contract covering the work hereunder will contain a require- ment to this effect and that any such licensing costs shall be borne by Contractor. PROPOSAL DISTRIBUTION Proposal must be made out in septuplicate and sent to: PPG Industries, Inc. One Gateway Center Pittsburgh, Pa. 15222 Attention: Mr. D. C. Rhodes Purchasing Manager, Central Engineering 1209 Allegheny Towers The envelope, addressed as below, must be sealed and identified as follows: PROPOSAL—CONFIDENTIAL LAKE CHARLES PLANT Specification K-2365 Construction for 1973 Power Expansion at Lake Charles, Louisiana QUESTIONS DURING BID PERIOD All questions should be directed to Mr. F. E. Landry or Mr. W. Stagg at PPG Industries in Lake Charles, Louisiana, Area Code is 318, Phone 882-1200. Post Office Box Number is 1000. y-E , ° POTIyoVds Sv UoZoOrDAY FOG oUF MOTOG PasEq{ sv :y,, renz ‘seB T2anyeu pue see Asneyuxs actqing ses Bvjuang voum aoyusazend ou3 uyzA SQuepzoz5e UZ Urojztad O2 poUZrsep 9q [{vUS IfZUN Zuzserzoves weoys oUL (7) ‘ :spshyouy “ong °q ge . ‘QouzUaIUTOW pur AIT {aQyssaI09 _ Asea acy pasuerzze aq preys yuowdindo szajeaysadnssg "IUTY AZzeysd ae, -Sip cund paady AzaazTIoq ay worz wayeq aq [IeUs sherds t23B80ULOdNS|ap 103 ta2em Ajddng ‘uorzeys seqezaysaeinsop AqtoOed2o {INJ ec apntourz Ileus susudinba aut *3 666 03 aanzeaaduay wrads IUFT TTeys yosus Aajeayszacnsap Aq qdaSxs PATTOAZUODUN 9q [{PYS ainqraaduaz u2aIg (QT) or: *kyyo2d29 UnWT Xow . qe udd [ paaoxa.jou [[eYS AZT IOq woIzZ weojs Uy 2z2A0-K2220 wNUIXeH (6) Ps = 22t30e2d UsISOp pevs pure suorqwywyT | rete FAIY YIM aoUEpz0j0e UF ° . pue (,,¥,, Tanz se3 yeanjeu a 303) sadeuany [[eM103eM ; ; 103 2u/33 no/n3g Coo'€e Ss lhddilaatc dada, 4 &q paw AdqTzT{ JE9Y) DIeUANZ UT JSVITIA Avay enuZxeHN (9) *znoy ted weaqs sqft te [onz ueSozpky pues u 203 o°H ‘ut 91 eee gerernere eye SuzysazvzausaG “eo 339 : DYI 30 S3azed [10 UCNoOrU DodURIETS 232 sc3 puc azz jou unxzxey (q) ¢) w “AYTpPyUMyY DATANTOL squVd Tod pue somMirset=Dy SNOFIVA YU STONS VIAoUe Duy 2utsn ucdn peseq soucwtoy.tod auTqsn2z sr pyzood“y Aczt EG-E€ Weng 99S asses 46 R ° "ADFAIIAS JIouvAans =") pure vot wawAdsul AT Loy wRdIIg Ss, 2O3SeIZUOD JY Wolry UOLII0dSUT Pla sof/puy doys jo stzoda2 wiep gRsy Ysuany [Leys Az0JZIVIAUOD 2893" dI,3;3209 "ulvA0T Aéw jeya sapod ,eo0] pur a3e36 22430 uate Ayyiny Ayduoo oste eus pue “saa, 10g AINE” - [T WwOtI2WS fAPOD [OSSIA ArNssaag pue A91}o" AWSY YI JO SJuUsUBItNb|a. arqesryidde ay YIM AduUYDI0907 IDzAIS UT podweye - apod pue ‘pa Iso] ‘paIoArIsuod ‘paustsap aq TVS SUITMaNDUI paYstuUang Sadueuajandce pue Surdrd [le pue ‘zuaudzndd ayy ssquowoayznbay apog ev ad ‘ . 20392042 TeNda ou uozI2IN343s8 -UOD pue uStsap paepuc3s Aue 29A0 voUdpos0zd axeq SzUILOAINdI2 Tuzmoryos ayy *AIY{[ICe [aa yeuorqerzado pue *‘AduatosyJJa ‘aouewrozzad Auc Guroszsyz2oes yroyyza’ PUB SUOTILITIIIOdS DsDYI JO YwdIUT aU. saadwW Ss? sPZ30SUT uttsap piepueys - $,22aNJIeJNuew ay. YITM aouPpIz0902 UT dq [Tes stun Burqer2UDs wears ous ‘ >UOTZINAYsSUOD pue USIseqd [e1vUID °g *4,00L JO xOgpuim aus Cursajus 410 yo ainyosradaay ay} pud ssoUiNg eu4 #D 41D SS9DKXB ZO] jO WhUIUIW D UO pasog au/; .000'SZ9 jo Ayipodn> © aary TLeYs ‘adTALVS UT sAaUING [2 YIIA ‘ouole [any H %9S pue s#3 jeanjeu uo Surjeszado vaum yrun Suzyqesauaz nvoqs yoeg *92 ar "J,.00T pur J,0Z worareq Azna Aow danzerzaduay szyy ang 2,001 pte) Dansweaedwus3 232 349} =e UO roscq 3G Trzr4E 9329 oO OWVILMeFAe d *q i,0T snutu zo sntd 4,585 coesooeoagnyesocwal rays 2zaIvsy2adns: (¢) a eet ae ee eee oF eee Ps TaZTKoUoIa LOI; Gozp aanssaad {rao0y-(y) O°H ur 91 cose goocecoserercererersee nr 2301 ¢uU0d - J ysnozy 2 souejeysoI aze pug svg (¢)” 46SLZ C CSREES SESH SCORERS ES ES SOC ee auy wols saanjeszadway s23 3yxd pa. QaAroOmIQ (7) 34/41 000’SZ9 sete ee ceeeecceeeeerenseeeenseky rorde9 andjno weajs 2zaqwayazodns snonur3vog (1) trac: Weeet 24,972 JO PAanzeasdwoq zaqyempoaz e@ puo Ch %OS pur jaucuiatdcdns se3 yeanqeu yaya stoi UT IAAneyxs auzqin3 ses jo agn Yo paseq paaquerzend aq [[eYS aoucMLOjzI1ad jo SwdIT SuImo[[OJ JUL °e . ° SQoOUyMAOT2Z92 praquerzsznyg °*g ‘a : - + (OTE 29S) ames ‘4909 pue : (soT@G 29S) - 1409 pue eysd ezsd ¢z0°ST ° *q799I OTQND voT{TFU! 29d Jinzsyou ScO°ST 32 *2eS5 38 °3es Jo aspumod oT jo umypucu v OABY TTIA GT TRL °304 33 no saad 33 Nd 2ad¢TTyx0oTSBD00 - szp BUOg 29 TITH ¥ ToMt ATICAION *aLON nig SSsOL n3g COL . quUds{LOD 3WeH 00°00T oo°00T ; . " [oIoL ' §0°0 ee IT ,45 " aueaday 4d H [Ing v I> 4 “*quog * aunjo, quacazag ‘stskyeuy seg Sir CIPUr PPV 47 Oz1 . ozt (49d) °**-Z0[3Ne Aorvaytadns 03 ; wnip wosy coup ainssdud weoig °b ° ¥ * JOICEM ena ia atte tig e : s0°vk ( y "219 *sadusng *S$zdnp Yydonotyy V ; DIULIS SIA ste puc SoH pezoy vd ; 0$°9 °- ite 00°S a eee {€) °- oe. * Ges c'9 00°9 ttt" tt *KOq sawing pue sausng (2) 0g* , aa ee es ee ee (t) e 4 . 2(A97EM "UL) BDUETSLSAad dly °O ; SSL Sue ; ” ; : : “4 ¢ ay POREOSTODEN PRESS 9S ESOS (¢) — 2S'O ° END wawawiy (ex) ago - ti » OSC = veereresyzezs pue ues ‘S2909 (2) | ° : S0°E - | SL£°9 lee eeerreres= 48152 1HOuOIa pug aTRIAodaAs fua_Log fadeuany (L) | 2(4@2RM *UL) AdUERSESOM seg °U ° * enim ‘ %, Peeves sovosessos sO5DU INS pue . 51°98 | = ee Suayzesyssdns ‘aaepoq. — plun Gurzesauad weazs Aaualsisjy: “i 088" 426 OSb* 109 (H4/E35S) Tern Wn tang 326 punqen *E | 0 — (4ye***qargno saa, tog ye QO) 2uUd9NSg «= es tain oA tg Aug) SOL AGB eRe (8) T' JDLQNE 4S, L0g Be CO) QuaDMag “Ff - VY 0$2 : 00¢ “gg? °° *AOZpWoUOrD Buyataq (fp) as é 089 dg’.* 402 pHOUeI9 Buysazuz (¢) : Scett ae Sib't dg” * “Maz eaydaans Gupacay (2) Sibtz _ SLLtz do’ “dapeaygadus Gupzowuz (lt) ~ | oe eas Ay Vases Lauenh ZA0Ge , UO PpISeG) SANIeLOswIy SCD "h "yupy se}eg adurwtoLued “H eg ae *4U0) "VIV YOLVYINID WYZLS UVIH BLS¥A -*L an —. mn ean . LedNIeH UFEH = LRANIEN Y BSpeycy Bursts sry YSo2.ty eupqeny seo: 47th PL nS at — - Lusmoredstawy Ad : , SYsjz KNW Onvsn Y 48 90 30 C0 JYNSSIYd TWIOL OCH» HI¥9 LOd'. “by 90- i oe Zivd LY3K §=«ANdINO NO SdC¥I 3YNSSIUd 40 193IH9% “f MO 9L32 LYIW ONY MOTIYIY “ANdINO KhntxyH NO 3Y0. EMAIL LIINI HOSSZEdHOD JO 199443 °2 ZOVFHSIY JAUMI ND NOILIZVYOD JCALILIY *I sPocscesscchecccgecssestsstees ch rechsessectecegsssbsessp-ssets IN3ID Sd “pererge . ene . “oF theeeh- nat eee s: pits eesitis: ee. = . Soest teeta rH Aon spipertipisiisst: ‘Jo€ AD ZYNITYIZNIL ISAVHXD JSV2USHI a aces Uhh ir ae th i att Isnveyd CH» —— ee oye —- INMINOVOLYUINsY oe ee ee od 1304) 02H,» “SISTHSEY JAEND *$310N terre . ee i ed ee store oreee — tee ee + oe weed teed Deen oe A ddd Medd et teed it te te oP OG ee eR owes ne me ee eer Y 4-9 ain nn ae -° “*e erweleee ? EEE et eet Poe ee STsilitbitieits: Sigisisprssipess: Te iittoITH repiisipersspeie: sihss +]: oviYurs & Teg RH JENIVEs4aN aL i YOSS J8dH09 mol § 5 coe same SHHST ET “* “*-* “*7-* eet pia eet wee e “* Sah Meat Aeaaiedid Melita died ert: | Ae Reet Rael Btetet Seeteted Gee es eee eebaseshosecboascbeses Si} ee ee Se ee CKEDASES THES’ ~ - G “A348 bL-SI-1 :31¥0 AVS “HY 249 0! * 27259 g%*S°C99 096'0! oso 000'09 00¢ 19 S10 AAVIH “UO BLVTHASIO -xS¥9 TyENIvt ViSd Lbi JBUNSSIYd JDIVLINOd"A Hd 009'¢ Q33dS LavYHS N91S30 aOld UI¥ H9ISIO ‘ ‘ 6S —> UST 000 $06 I YH/N18- (AHI) .NOILAHNSNOD 1394 N9ISIO YH-AN/NLE il (AH1) JLVY LY3H NOISIO ul indino n91S39 AX Jo 6S IYNLYYIdWIL 191NI HOSS2YAHOD JINTALO443d QILVHILSI INIGUML SYD AY =: COED 12829 T3CCH JTLIID WYINId yr MHS D0 a ae a | . SWAULTAS Lrattixs EP ESTES ASAVHXR BNIBYUNL 1b SBERGEM « ee re ae SESS late 49 Oct. 5, 1976 NSPS CERTIFIED MAIL—RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED #819271 Mr. T. G. Taylor Technical Manager entered CDS 10-6-76 PPG Industries, Inc. GOB P. O. Box 1000 Lake Charles, Louisiana 70601 Dear Mr. Taylor: Your letter and attachments of June 28, 1976 have been received and reviewed. Based on the information in that letter and your earlier submittal of May 14, 1976, we have determined that the Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources [40 C.F.R. Part 60] apply only to the two waste heat steam generators of Powerhouse C located at the Lake Charles, Louisiana plant. The applicability of the New Source Performance Stand- ards (NSPS) is determined solely by the facts applicable to the specific facilities for which NSPS regulations have been issued. It is not considered relevant for NSPS pur- poses that the gas turbines for Powerhouse C were or- dered in 1970. The purchase order you submitted on the waste heat steam generator showed that the unit was ordered on October 14, 1974. Because the contractual obligation to construct the steam generators was after the date of the proposed regulations for fossil fuel fired steam generators, August 17, 1971, the waste heat steam generators numbered 1 and 2 of Powerhouse C are sub- ject to the provisions of the Standards of Performance for Fossil Fuel Fired Steam Generators, 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Subpart D (a copy of which is enclosed). The two waste heat steam generators are subject to the notification and recordkeeping requirements of 40 C.F.R. 60.7 and the performance tests requirements of 40 C.F.R. 60.8 (copies of which are enclosed). 50 If you have any questions concerning this matter, you may contact Mr. Gary Bernath of my staff by letter or by telephone at (214) 749-7675, Sincerely yours, ORIGINAL SIGNED BY O. W. Lively Acting Director Enforcement Division (6AE) Enclosure a/s cc: Mr. James Coerver Technical Secretary Louisiana Air Control Commission P. O. Box 60603 New Orleans, Louisiana 70160 bee: DSSE, Washington, D. C. JV 6AEL.JVeach :maX2142 :9-30-76’ JC JF GOB JD 6AEL 6AEA 6AEA 6AEA Collins Bernath Fahrenthold Doyle 10/1/76 10/1/76 10/1/76 10/4/76 [Italicized material appears as handwritten notations in record] 51 [PPG Emblem} INDUSTRIES 0520 00004 (318) 882-1200 FTS 687-4181 PPG Industries, Inc. Industrial Chemical Division P. O. Box 1000 Lake Charles, La. 70601 T.C. TAYLOR Technical Manager November 12, 1976 Mr. O. W. Lively, Acting Director Enforcement Division U. S. Environmental Protection Agency First International Building 1201 Elm Street Dallas, Texas 75270 Dear Mr. Lively: We had hoped to discuss with you in person some of the points raised in your letter dated October 5, 1976. Since this meeting has been postponed, we respectfully request you to reconsider the matter of the two waste heat steam generators of Powerhouse C for the reasons given below. If you agree, a meeting may not be necessary. We contend that the gas turbine purchased in 1970 is relevant with respect to the waste heat boilers. Actually, this purchase was part of a commitment, including design and engineering, to a total power/steam generation pack- age for our new chlor-alkali production facilities, Unlike commercial power plant installations, which pro- duce only electric power, Powerhouse C had to be de- signed to satisfy the power and steam requirements of the chemical complex it would serve. A reliable source of both steam and power is essential to chlorine plants where electrolysis of brine and concentration of caustic 52 by evaporators are major process steps. Due to the vari- able requirements for both power and steam within the process units, flexibility was a key ingredient in the de- sign of the new powerhouse. PPG selected as the most efficient method of satisfying the required power/steam balance a combined-cycle system consisting of two gas turbines exhausting into two eupplementally-fired waste heat boilers, the steam from which would be used to drive one turbogenerator, which, in turn, furnishes steam for the caustic evaporators and other process steam users. (See Sargent & Lundy Dwg. M-105, dated 1-26-71, at- tached. ) On November 11, 1970, PPG issued the attached purchase order (267-001) to General Electric Company for the two gas turbines and turbogenerator. Item 3, the turbo- generator, would be completely useless without the steam generators (waste heat boilers) that were subsequently purchased. The turbines and boilers will operate as one unit and each was designed in conjunction with the other. The fact that the waste heat boilers were pur- chased separately and at a different time was dictated by the long delivery time of the turbines and generator and by the need for efficient utilization of capital. The purchase of the gas turbines and turbogenerator in 1970 represents a commitment of $9.4 million, covering two-thirds of the equipment purchased in the combined- cycle power plant. Thus, we contend that, with the design engineering and substantiation as evidenced by the above- stated purchase order, all committed prior to August 17, 1971, for the construction of a combined-cycle plant, PPG “commenced” a continuous program of construction which excepts Powerhouse C from Part 60, New Stationary Sources Regulation. If you have further questions, we believe that a confer- ence in person would best expedite this serious misunder- standing. Please direct your inquiries to me. Thank you for your courtesies and prompt attention to this matter. 53 Sincerely, T.G. Taylor T. G. Taylor edh Attachments ec: G. P. Cheney J. F. Coerver (Italicized material appears as handwritten notations in record] 54 [PPG Emblem] INDUSTRIES One Gateway Center Pittsburgh, Pa. 15222 Order No. 267-001 Requested by Requisition No. Charge Number F. E. Landry CE-001 G.O. 267 Affirming Verbal Order Inquiry No. Date of Order Below See Reply 11-11-70 Notify Required Delivery Quoted Delivery F. E. Landry As Below As Below Rhodes Quotation No./Date FOB See Below Factory/Frt. Allow ! Terms Ship VIA See Below Best Way General Electric Company Industrial Sales Oliver Building Mellon Square Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Atten: Mr. H. E. Finke Quantity Description Price 2 General Electric heavy duty MS 7000 Series | combustion gas turbine generator units, each unit consisting of the equipment listed on the G. E. Quotation No. 341-78254 dated October 30, 1970, and signed by Howard E. Finke (Rev. 11-12-70) $7,656,600.00/ Lot Technical direction of installation for the gas turbines as per quotation No. 4251- 70007 dated 9-15-70 and signed by M. I. Cleveland $38,020.00/each General Electric steam turbine sized for the following conditions: Inlet conditions: 1250 psig—960°F. Auto- ( , Matic Extraction 216,000 #/hr. @ 600 psig. 55 Automatic Extraction—483,000 #/hr. @ 260 psig. Exhaust—217,000 #/hr. @ 120 psig. Complete with hydrogen cooled 44,000 KVA, .85 power factor, 60 cycle, 3 phase, 3,600 RPM, 13,800 Volts, 158 short circuit ratio, synchronous generator, with coolers designed for 95°F and 125 psig cooling water. To be complete with accessories and other equipment listed on G. E. Quotation # 341-73254-B (Rev.) dated November 6, 1970, and signed by Howard E. Finke. This price covers technical supervision of instal- lation $1,786,805.00/ Lot All prices above for both gas turbines, generators, steam turbines, etc. cover freight to accessible railsiding nearest cus- tomer’s site. Any omissions in this Purchase Order, but specified in the quotations of General Elec- tric Company (“seller’’) referred to above, will apply. PPG Industries, Inc. “purchaser” reserves the right to accept or reject a five year, 40,000 hour, maintenance contract on the gas turbines beginning on the commercial operating date at a cost of $13.75 per fired hour per unit based on base load service, natural gas fuel and one start per 1000 hours or less. The $13.75 per fired hour would be subject to change each year after “the first year of the contract based on esca- ji lation of labor and/or materials from the _ date of commercial operation. This decision on the maintenance contract does not have to be made by the purchaser until the com- mercial operating date. The price would cover parts or repair, tech- nical direction, monthly inspection and labor for all normal maintenance. This does not include breakdown coverage. The purchaser has the right to purchase a spare rotor for the gas turbines within twelve months after date of purchase order, for a price of $590,000. 56 Terms of Payment Eighty percent upon shipment from seller’s factory, fifteen percent thirty days from date of shipment and five percent upon com- pletion but not later than 180 days from date of shipment, provided that sellers shall have fulfilled all provisions of the Purchase Order as far as possible up to the time specified. Cancellation The purchaser shall have the right to termi- nate this Purchase Order by written notice to seller on or before May 1, 1971, if pur- chaser’s Board of Directors have not there- tofore authorized the construction by pur- chaser of a 1500 tons per day chlorine caustic soda plant facility at Lake Charles, Louisiana, and the requisite power gener- ating facilities therefore, or if the plant facility thus authorized shall not require gas turbines; provided, however, that if purchaser shall so terminate this Purchase Order, purchaser shall pay seller a termi- nation charge in the amount of $21,000, upon payment of which sum all obligations of either party to the other hereunder shall terminate. The purchaser shall have the right to terminate this Purchase Order after May 1, 1971, but prior to June 1, 1971, under sam terms, for an additional charge in the amount of $10,000 for steam turbine and not to exceed $150,000/Lot for two (2) gas turbines. Delivery Seller will ship the gas turbines by Septem- ber, 1972. The steam turbine will be shipped 18 months after final steam output quanti- ties are decided upon. Seller will provide purchaser with production schedule promptly and on a monthly basis thereafter. Transfer of Ownership Purchaser reserves the right to assign or transfer this Purchase Order in its entirety to a third party, without any additional cost or penalties whatsoever to purchaser or such 57 third party assignee as a result of such assignment; provided such third party as- signee shall undertake to construct and own the power generating facilities requisite to purchaser’s said chlorine-caustic soda plant facility. Performance and Material Warranty The seller has the obligation to make at its own expense such alterations and additions or replacements as required to meet specifi- cations for a period of one year after start- up date. Guarantee The seller will guarantee materials or equip- ment and workmanship to be free of defects for a period of one year from start-up or 18 months after delivery whichever comes first. Any repairs, alterations, or replace- ments found to be necessary shall be made at no cost whatsoever to purchaser. Each such repair, modification, or replacement shall carry same warranty commencing on the date of the installation as the original. If the seller does not remedy and/or replace the work to comply with the foregoing re- quirements within a reasonable time after written notice, the purchaser may remedy and/or replace it at sellers expense. Seller will furnish as soon as possible: Copies Title 7 Certified dimension prints 7 Performance curves 7 Installation, operation and mainten- ence instructions 7 Parts list and assembly drawings including bearings identification by Bearing Mfg. name and symbol or number, etc. Recommended spare parts list with prices Lubrication manuals Wiring diagrams Any other data necesary to install, maintain, and operate the above equipment Aaa 4 58 (One (1) reproducible of each may be furnished in lieu of copies as shown) Confirming verbal order of November 11, 1970, to: J. J. Broussard, H. E. Finke, Don Govdon, Jack Hull 4pproved Nov. 11, 1970 L. W. Wilcox [Italicized material appears as handwritten notation in record] i na a 5 TE LE Ta i 59 LA O S 20-04 NSPS DEC 23 1976 Mr. T. G. Taylor Technical Manager PPG Industries, Inc. P.O. Box 1000 Lake Charles, Louisiana 70601 Dear Mr. Taylor: We have reviewed your letter of November 12, 1976 concerning the two steam generators of Powerhouse C. As we stated in our letter of October 5, 1976, the ap- plicability of the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) depends solely on the facts relating to the types of equipment for which NSPS regulations have been issued. The regulations apply to a facility the construc- tion or modification of which is commenced after the date of publication of any standard (or, if earlier, the date of publication of any proposed standard) applicable to that facility. The information you have provided shows that the commencement of the construction of the two steam generators was after the publication of the pro- posed regulation for fossil fuel fired steam generators. Even though you may have ordered equipment before the date of the proposed regulations that would be com- pletely useless without the steam generators, that action is irrelevant to determine the applicability of the regula- tions to the two steam generators. We hope that this discussion makes it clear why the two steam generators are subject to the provisions of the Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources, 40 CFR Part 60. If you still desire to have a meeting discussing this de- termination, please contact Mr. James Veach of my staff by letter or by telephone at (214) 749-2142. 60 Sincerely yours, Original Signed By O. W. LIVELY Acting Director Enforcement Division JV12/6 6AEL:J Veach :ma:X2142:11-76:Retyped :12-6-76 JV12/6 6AEL Collins 6AEA Bernath JF Fahrenthold 6AEA 12/17/76 ec: Mr. James F. Coerver Technical Secretary Louisiana Air Control Commission P. O. Box 60630 New Orleans, Louisiana 70160 bec:DSSE [Italicized material appears as handwritten notation in record] DS Sa Vane Seen) 2S ee 61 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY VI Bila File Code 12-29-76 MEMORANDUM: SUBJECT: Determination of Applicability to NSPS Subpart D. FROM: Director, Division of Stationary Source Enforcement TO: | O.W. Lively, Acting Director Enforcement Division (6AE) This is in response to your memo of December 7, 1976, requesting a determination as to whether a waste heat recovery boiler used to produce steam would fall under NSPS for fossil fuel fired steam generators. Section 60.41(a) defines a fossil fuel fired steam gen- erating unit to be “a furnace or boiler used in the proc- ess of burning fossil fuel for the purpose of producing steam by heat transfer.” Since the boiler in question is not used in the process of burning fossil fuel, but rather in the process of waste heat recovery, it is our determination that the boiler in question would not be a fossil fuel fired steam generator as defined under NSPS, Subpart D. If you have any further questions on this determina- tion, please contact Craig Cobert (202) 755-2564 of my staff. /s/ EER Edward E. Reich [Italicized material appears as handwritten material in record; concurrence and routing notations and date- received stamp omitted in printing] 62 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY DATE: Dec. 7, 1976 SUBJECT: Request for Determination Relative to Subpart D, NSPS FROM: O. W. Lively, Acting Director Enforcement Division (6AE) TO: Ed Reich, Director Division of Stationary Source Enforcement (EN-341) This is to request that you render a determination of applicability to NSPS, Subpart D, for the following situ- ation. A power generating station is operating gas and oil fired turbines. The exhaust from the turbines is routed to a waste heat recovery boiler where it is used to produce steam. However, no combustion of either the exhaust gases or supplementary fuels occurs in the boiler. The heat input to the boiler as a result of the exhaust gases is in excess of 250 MM Btu/hr. The question of applicability arises from a reading of Section 60.40 and 60.41(a). The former states that Sub- part D applies to each fossil-fuel fired steam generating unit (of appropriate size). Section 60.41(a) defines a steam generating unit to mean a boiler “used in the process” of generating steam. What we have is a boiler “used in the process” of generating steam, although the combustion of the fossil fuel takes place in the turbine unit rather than the boiler. We feel this situation to be of sufficient novelty to re- quest your determination. Should you need additional information, you may contact Gary Bernath of my staff at (214) 749-7675. [Handwritten notations omitted in printing] | }S ( sr | wy Tayo WT — Md Oy?" T'S | “[ af me9 LEoy ' yang Syry 7 Pre basayz 31 9UGIP) | Vol WRPORLe ~ Yolol.'nesasne Lf , wy heaead Seve Sug ‘4 JJ? ( yn? OF bye je ! TOG VdT OH oF “79°92 WI Dd A? VIF | “eg en See 4£2G/ 'O/ >"? / 64 fl aa “ee » Cooeen ; pom ah Tepemge Poo 2a: VY At Lo eo ome (2° g a wt: ae ge wre sees i eo . | ” / is dies i om w 2 ww 2£2e9 PH oo a ad A | | ; : F | : ae = oo Res A; : ie Te 4 / LET PO a 5 er See. 65 [PPG Emblem] INDUSTRIES PPG Industries, Inc./One Gateway Center Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222/Area 412/434-2145 GEORGE P. CHANEY, JR., Assistant Counsel April 13, 1977 [Received EPA Region VI, 1977 Apr. 14 AM 9:07, Enforcement Division ] Mr. Howard Bergman Director, Enforcement Division Environmental Protection Agency Region VI 1600 Patterson Street : Dallas, Texas 75201 Re: Request for Determinations under 40 C.F.R. § 60.5. Dear Mr. Bergman: By this letter, PPG Industries, Incorporated, (“PPG”), seeks a determination that construction of two “waste heat” boilers, components of “Power Plant C” at PPG’s Lake Charles, Louisiana works (“Lake Charles Works’’) was “commenced” within the meaning of Section 111 (a) (2) of the Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 1857c-6, prior to August 17, 1971, the date of proposed “new source” emission regulations for fossil-fuel fired steam generators. Alternatively, PPG seeks a determi- nation that the regulations for fossil-fuel fired steam generators do not apply to waste heat boilers such as those being installed at the Lake Charles works. This request for determinations is submitted pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 60.5 (captioned “Determination of construction or modification”’). Power Plant C is a fully coordinated power generating system, composed of two gas.turbine generators (produc- . 66 ing electricity) and two “waste heat” boilers (producing process steam). The first of the gas turbines will begin operation by the end of April of this year, and the com- panion “waste heat” boiler is projected to go on line in June. The second set of such units (turbine plus “waste heat” boiler) is scheduled for start-up in the third quar- ter of 1978. The determinations sought by PPG are essential to clarify tentative findings contained in a letter from Mr. O. W. Lively, Acting Director, Enforce- ment Division, Region VI, dated October 5, 1976, which findings have been the subject of continuing subsequent correspondence and discussion. Should it be determined both that construction of the “waste heat” boilers of Power Plant C was not “com- menced” until after August 17, 1971, and that the new source regulations for fossil-fuel fired steam generators apply to such “waste heat” boilers, PPG by this letter seeks an interpretation of the regulations as applied to the “waste heat” boilers. Because of the manner in which the standards of performance are written (explicit for- mulas set out allowable emissions where specified fuels are used), they cannot be readily applied to the “waste heat” boilers. The regulations would in some way have to be adapted to take into account the fact that only part of the heat used is created by the firing of fuel within the boilers themselves. To aid in your consideration of this request, two memo- randa are appended. Appendix A is a statement of the facts relevant to the determinations sought by PPG. Ap- pendix B is a memorandum prepared by counsel based on those facts analyzing the relevant provisions of the Clean Air Act and implementing regulations. The long and short of the matter is that the present regulations for steam generators seem to have been con- strued to prevent, or at least to tend to prevent, the possibility of “recapturing” waste heat, a very desirable goal from both an energy conservation and economic standpoint. On the other hand, if the turbines were operated independently of the boilers, i.e., if no attempt were made to use the waste heat from the turbine exhaust in the boilers, full compliance with the EPA standards 67 of performance could be achieved. This anomaly is espe- cially troubling to PPG since the design of and course of construction for the combined turbine-“waste heat’’ boiler units was set in 1970, well before the advent of the standards of performance. Very truly yours, /s/ George P. Cheney, Jr. GEORGE P. CHENEY, JR. Assistant Counsel emr Attachments ec: Edward E. Reich Director, Division of Stationary Source Enforcement Environmental Protection Agency 401 M Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20460 [Italicized material appears as handwritten material in record] 68 APPENDIX A MEMORANDUM OF FACTS This memorandum sets out circumstances surrounding the design and construction of a new power plant at the Lake Charles, Louisiana works (“Lake Charles works’) of PPG Industries, Inc. (“PPG”). The purpose of this new power plant, known as “Power Plant C”, was and is to generate electricity and process steam for the manu- facture of chlorine and caustic soda at the works. A. Design Work PPG became engaged in the overall design and construc- tion of Power Plant C in 1970. The design established at that time called for the construction of two gas tur- bine generators (producing electricity) and two “waste heat” boilers (producing process steam). The “waste heat” boilers, as their name suggests, were designed to recapture the turbine exhaust gases from the gas turbine generators. The boilers would do so by using the heat within those exhausts, which would otherwise be waste- fully dissipated into the atmosphere, for the generation of steam. The costs associated with the generation of electricity in Power Plant C were such that the project could not have been contemplated without having built into it a capacity to make fruitful use of the heat cast off by the gas turbines. Based upon the design specifications for the “waste heat” boilers, 38.3 percent of the heat used to generate steam within the “waste heat” boilers will be supplied by the exhausts from the gas turbine generators. The re- mainder of the heat used by the “waste heat” boilers will be produced by the firing of fuel oil or gas within the units themselves.! * Taking on. of the boilers hy itself, 598 MM BTU/hr is to be provided by the firing of oil, and 371.2 MM BTU/hr is to be pro- vided by the “waste heat” from the exhaust from one of the turbines. ee 69 B. Contracts The gas turbine generators were ordered in Novem- ber, 1970. The specification book for the whole of Power Plant C was completed by the end of February, 1971. Once the design of the gas turbines was determined and orders for them were placed, there were very few design options as to how the “waste heat” boilers could be built to accommodate the turbines. In fact, insofar as the quality of emissions might be affected, only three possible methods of firing the “waste heat’ boilers ex- isted: (1) front firing, (2) tangential firing, and (3) gas recirculation. The design actually chosen by PPG—tan- gential firing—minimizes the amount of nitrogen oxides passed by the system into the atmosphere. Thus, once the design of the gas turbines was settled and the turbines were placed on order, PPG could not have constructed “waste heat” boilers with emission characteristics more favorable than those actually constructed, while the eco- nomics of the system as a whole absolutely required that some form of “waste heat” boiler be built. C. Construction Work Some early work on the site of Power Plant C (level- ing, cutting trees, general site preparation, etc.) was carried out in the summer of 1971. Further construction was not conducted immediately. In addition to the fact that the turbines had not been delivered, PPG encoun- tered serious difficulties in securing a long-term supplier of fuel. Both matters were resolved, but the resolution of them took time. 1. The first set of turbine-boiler units. In October of 1974, the purchase order for the first of the two “waste heat” boilers was issued to Combus- tion Engineering, Inc. The foundation for the first of the “waste heat” boilers of Power Plant C was poured on September 18, 1975, and the actual assembly of this boiler began on February 1, 1976. The foundation for the first of the gas turbine generators was poured beginning on 70 November 19, 1975; the assembly of this gas turbine began on April 8, 1976. The first of the gas turbines was accepted from the contractor on February 23, 1977. This turbine is ex- pected to begin operation on- or about the first week of May. Acceptance of the first “waste heat” boiler is an- ticipated on or about May 15, 1977, and actual start-up of this boiler is expected around June 1, 1977. 2. The second set of turbine-boiler units. The foundation for the second of the gas turbine gen- erators ordered in 1970 was poured on February 15, 1977. It is anticipated that this second gas turbine will be in operation by mid-1978. The order for a “waste heat” boiler to be associated with this second gas turbine generator was placed on June 16, 1976, and the founda- tion for this second boiler was poured on December 22, 1976. Operation of this “waste heat” boiler is expected in the third quarter of 1978. D. Projected Operating Characteristics On the basis that 1 percent sulfur No. 6 fuel oil will be fired in the “waste heat” boilers, the amount ‘of sul- phur dioxide discharged by those boilers will be 0.67 lbs. per million BTU of heat from all sources used in the “waste heat” units themselves, and 0.50 Ibs. per million BTU of heat introduced into the electricity and steam generating system of Power Plant C as a whole. Projections for emissions of Nitrogen oxides from the combined turbine “waste heat” boiler units are uncertain. However, on the basis of the engineering work completed to date, the total amount of nitrogen oxides discharged under gas turbine inlet conditions of 75° farenheit and 60 percent relative humidity by the “waste heat” boilers should be approximately 0.39 lbs. per million BTU of heat from all sources used in the “waste heat” boilers.? 2 The “waste heat” in the turbine exhausts entering the boilers should contain approximately 0.63 Ibs. NOx per MM BTU. The amount of nitrogen oxides discharged by the “waste heat” boilers attributable solely to fossil fuels fired within the boilers themselves 71 This is equivalent to approximately 0.29 lbs. per million BTU of heat introduced into the system of Power Plant C as a whole from all sources of energy. Were the exhausts from the gas turbine generator al- lowed to pass directly into the atmosphere without being recaptured by the “waste heat” boilers, they would be ex- pected to contain 0.835 lbs. of nitrogen oxides per MM BTU of heat derived from fossil fuel combustion within the turbine generator. /s/ George P. Chenep GEORGE P. CHENEY, JR. Assistant Counsel PPG Industries, Inc. One Gateway Center Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222 (412) 434-2145 Dated: April 12, 1977 [Italicized material appears as handwritten material in record] is expected to be roughly 0.24 Ibs. per MM BTU derived from such fossil fuels. The NOx discharged by the “waste heat” boilers per MM BTU from all sources entering the boiler is: X = (598.3) (0.24 + (371.2) (0.63) =0.39 969.5 72 APPENDIX B MEMORANDUM OF LAW This memorandum first assays the statutory provisions and regulations applicable to a determination whether the “waste heat” boilers at the Lake Charles, Louisiana works (“Lake Charles works”) of PPG Industries, Inc. (“PPG”), are new sources within the meaning of the Clean Air Act. Then it turns to a consideration of whether the “waste heat” boilers are covered or affected by the new source standards of performance for fossil- fuel fired steam generators. Finally, this memorandum assesses the difficulties of application which arise if the new source regulations are deemed to pertain to the “waste heat” boilers. The factual basis for the discussion in this memorandum is contained in the accompanying Memorandum of Facts. Suggested determinations are set out in the conclusion of this memorandum. I. THE “WASTE HEAT” BOILERS OF POWER PLANT C ARE NOT “NEW SOURCES” WITH- IN THE MEANING OF THE CLEAN AIR ACT A. Power Plant C As A Whole Is Clearly Not A “New Source” Within The Meaning Of The Clean Air Act And Implementing Regulations Under Section 111(a) (2) of the Clean Air Amend- ments of 1970, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 1857c-6 (a) (2), the term “new source” means “any stationary source, the construction or modification of which is commenced after the publication of regulations (or, if earlier, proposed regulations) describing a standard of performance under this section which will be applicable to such source.” Under the EPA regulations, construction has “com- menced” if “an owner or operator has undertaken a continuous program of construction .. . or has entered into a contractual obligation to undertake and complete, within a reasonable time, a continuous program of con- struction... .” 40 C.F.R. § 60.2(i). Proposed regula- 73 tions for fossil-fuel fired steam generators were promul- gated on August 17, 1971. Well before that date, PPG had undertaken a continuous program of construction re- specting Power Plant C. The planning and design for Power Plant C were be- gun in the 1960’s. The order for the construction of the central facilities of Power Plant C, the gas turbine gen- erators, were issued on November 11, 1970. The specifica- tion book for the whole of Power Plant C was completed by the end of February, 1971. Site preparation work was accomplished in the summer of 1971. PPG thus established the course of construction in November of 1970 and that course has been continuous down to the present and will remain so until the entire system is complete. B. The “Waste Heat” Boilers Are Fully Inte- grated Parts Of Power Plant C, And The Course Of Their Construction Cannot Be Severed From That Of The Power Plant As A Whole As a matter both of design and economics the construc- tion of “waste heat” boilers could never have been con- sidered, and was not considered, to be a matter separate from the construction of the gas turbine generators or of Power Plant C as a whole. The design work for the turbines reflects the design criteria for the “waste heat” boilers, and vice versa. The Lake Charles works needs the new power plant both to generate electricity and to manufacture process steam for the production of chlorine and caustic soda at the works. The most energy-efficient way to accomplish these twin goals is to employ a design which recaptures the very considerable heat value in the exhaust gases from the gas turbine generators. “Waste heat” boilers provide the mechanism for this recapture. From both an economic and an energy standpoint, the project would not be feasible unless the “waste heat” boilers could be employed as a complement to the gas turbine generators. In short, once PPG was committed to building the gas turbine generators, it was not less committed to build the 74 “waste heat” boilers. Even though the actual order for the first “waste heat” boiler was not made to Combustion Engineering until October of 1974, PPG was bound to construct the “waste heat” boilers as of the time (No- vember 1970) it was committed to the purchase of two gas turbine generators. The “waste heat” boilers cannot be severed from the turbine generators upon which they depend. Looking merely to the October 1974 date on a written communication between PPG and Combustion Engineering as the sole basis for determining when con- struction of the “waste heat” boilers was “undertaken” (the term used in the regulations) by PPG, is, in the context of this integrated facility, very misleading. The undertaking was begun much earlier. The preliminary work and initial site preparation for all the components of Power Plant C were begun at one time; there was no separate program for constructing gas turbine generators apart from “waste heat” boilers. C The Decided Cases Do Not Warrant Treating The “Waste Heat” Boilers Of Power Plant C As “New Sources” The purpose for distinguishing “new sources” from other sources under the Act and regulations is to avoid undue burdens on those owners or operators who have no means of adjusting their existing facilities or their in- escapable obligations. Once committed to the construction of the gas turbine generator component of Power Plant C, PPG had (and now has) no choice but to press the project to its conclusion by constructing the necessary “waste heat” boilers. No design adopted by PPG could have reduced emissions below the levels associated with the current “waste heat’ boilers. Two recent judicial decisions bear on resolution of when PPG “commenced” construction of Power Plant C. In Montana Power Company v. Environmental Protection Agency, F. Supp. ——, 2 PCG { 40,065 (D. Mont., decided January 27, 1977), the court concluded that con- struction of a power plant had commenced prior to the effective date of EPA’s regulations for the prevention of significant deterioration, within the definition of “com- 75 mence” in 40 C.F.R. § 52.21(b) (7). In the Montana Power case, although actual on-site construction had not begun by the effective date, the court found that EPA had failed to give due consideration to the prior irre- vocable commitment of substantial funds and resources to the project and thus that construction had in fact “commenced” within the meaning of the regulations. On the other hand, another federal court recently de- termined that a coal-fired generating plant actually or- dered by a municipality after the promulgation of stand- ards affecting such facilities was a “new source” within the meaning of the Clean Air Act and regulations. United States v. City of Painesville, —— F. Supp. . Civil Action No. 76-234 (N. D. Ohio, decided J anuary 19, 1977). The court concluded that the City of Painesville, unlike PPG in the present situation, had entered into no binding commitment to build anything at all until after the date upon which the “new source” standards began to apply. The court further found that the City had actually changed the specifications of its coal-fired gener- ating plant in January of 1972, well after the August 1971 effective date for the regulations. The present circumstances are comparable to the facts in the Montana Power case, and differ considerably from the setting of the Painesville decision. PPG was fully committed to the construction of Power Plant C before the new source standards for fossil-fuel fired steam genera- tors were proposed. Second, in the Painesville case the court stresses the fact that no purchase of equipment actually made by the municipality prior to the promulga- tion of new source standards would have been “incom- patible” with a facility which complied with the new source standards. (Slip opinion, at 6.) By way of con- trast, in the present situation, PPG had by August 1971 committed itself to the combined turbine“waste heat” boiler design which is at odds with the new source stand- ards for boilers. Especially noteworthy is the fact that preclusion of use of the waste heat in the boilers would have no favorable effects whatsoever on the environment; the exhausts from the gas turbine of Power Plant C would then pass di- ee ee a ee re 76 rectly into the atmosphere with their full cargo of pol- lutants, and process steam would have to be generated entirely by firing fossil fuel. Additional reasons for avoiding such an unwholesome result, both environmen- tally and economically, will be reviewed in Part II below. Il. EVEN IF IT IS CONSIDERED THAT CON- STRUCTION DID NOT COMMENCE PRIOR TO AUGUST 17, 1971, A “WASTE HEAT” BOILER IS NOT A FACILITY COVERED BY THE REG- ULATIONS GOVERNING “NEW SOURCES” A. The Existing Regulations Are Not Structured To Apply To Steam Generators Fired By A Combination Of Fossil Fuels And “Waste Heat” The only regulations that could possibly establish emis- sions standards for “waste heat” boilers are those gov- erning “fossil-fired steam generators” in Part 60, Sub- part D, of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Reg»lations. Those regulations govern facilities that produce steam by burning “fossil fuel.” 40 C.F.R. § 60.41. But “waste heat” boilers are fired by a combination of waste heat and fossil fuel, and it is the special circumstances aris- ing from the combination which the regulations do not address. As promulgated, the regulations were not written to pertain to boilers relying in significant part on certain waste fuels. The standard for nitrogen oxides, for exam- ple, excluded from its coverage situations where new boilers were built for fuel consisting of “lignite or a solid fossil fuel containing 25 percent by weight, or more of coal refuse....” 40 C.FR. § 60.44(b). A recently proposed amendment to the regulations would, however, establish standards for emissions of nitrogen oxides from new lignite-fired steam generators. See 41 Fed. Reg. 55792 (December 22, 1976). In addition, the standards were amended on Novem- ber 22, 1976, to provide specific language bearing on fossil-fuel fired steam generators which also used wood residue as fuel (commonly called “hog boilers”). See 41 Fed. Reg. 51897-51400 (November 22, 1976). 77 These recent changes and proposed changes in the regulations clarify matters for those who wish to fire boilers with waste fuels. However, they do not address specifically the present situation where “waste heat”’ it- self is sent to the boiler. The regulations simply are not structured to apply to the present situation. B. The Existing Regulations Should Be Deemed Not To Apply To “Waste Heat” Boilers Where regulations are not written to apply to a special set of facts, the regulations should be deemed not to apply in circumstances where the special facts are present. See WAIT Radio v. Federal Communications Commission, 135 U.S. App. D.C. 317, 321, 418 F.2d 1158, 1157 (1969). The Agency has already adopted this. course of action in adopting the special regulatory provisions for hog boil- ers referred to above. Similarly, the existing regulations should be deemed not to apply to “waste heat’ boilers. Ill. IF THE REGULATIONS ARE DEEMED TO APPLY TO THE “WASTE HEAT” BOILERS AT THE LAKE CHARLES WORKS, THEY SHOULD BE ADAPTED TO TAKE INTO AC- COUNT THE FACT THAT ONLY PART OF THE HEAT USED IS CREATED BY THE FIRING OF FUEL WIHIN THE BOILERS THEMSELVES A. The Standards For Nitrogen Oxides Cannot Be Brought To Bear On The “Waste Heat Boiler The standards for nitrogen oxides in 40 C.F.R. § 60.44 cannot readily be applied to the “waste heat” boilers of Power Plant C, as they make no provision for the use of the exhausts from the gas turbine generators as a source of heat in the boilers.' The exhausts from the gas ‘Exhausts from gas turbine generators are at present unregu- lated by new source standards. Even if such standards for gas turbines should be promulgated, the gas turbine generators of Power Plant C would clearly not be “new sources” for purposes 78 turbine generators are not subject to emissions standards upon their discharge from the turbines themselves. In such circumstances equitable considerations suggest that passage of the turbine exhausts through the» “waste heat” boilers should no less receive similar treatment, i.e., be deemed to fall outside the new source standards of performance. Conceptually, one might consider carving up the nitro- gen oxides emitted from the “waste heat” boilers into two segments, one attributable to the “waste heat” com- ponent and the other to the oil-fired component. The nitrogen oxides attributable to the oil-fired component would, however, be difficult to regulate separably under the present standards because process and analytical limitations would prevent obtaining a precise and mean- ingful allocation between the two components of the nitrogen oxides emissions.? B. The Standards For Sulfur Dioxide Require Con- siderable Adaptation To Test Compliance Against “Total Heat Input”, As The Regula- tions Require The standards for sulfur dioxide of 40 C.F.R. $ 60.43 indicate that the sulfur dioxide discharged into the at- mosphere shall be measured against the heat derived from various fossil fuels. If these standards are nonetheless applied to the “waste heat” boilers, some very consider- able accommodations by way of interpretation must be made. Section 60.43(c) provides specifically that “[c] ompli- ance shall be based on the total heat input from all fossil fuels burned, including gaseous fuels.” The “waste heat” entering the boilers should be included in this “total heat input”, even though the actual “waste heat” input to the of such regulations. PPG could thus, if it chose, allow the exhausts from the gas turbine generators to pass freely into the atmosphere. It obviously prefers not to adopt such a wasteful course of action. 2 The same circumstances would prevent a meaningful and pre- cise allocation of the particulate emissions. 79 boiler is in the form of hot gases. These gases were the product of a prior combustion. This construction of the standards is supported by prior Agency decisions. As noted previously, recent amendments to the standards of performance for fossil- fuel fired steam generators enlarged their scope to in- clude facilities burning wood residues in combination with fossil-fuels. The preamble to this recent amend- ment makes clear that fuel mixtures can play a critical role in achieving compliance with the standards: Complying with the standard by firing low sulfur fossil fuel requires an adequate supply of fuel with a sulfur content low enough to meet the standard. However, it would be possible for the owner or opera- tor to fire, for example, a relatively high sulfur fossil fuel with a very low sulfur fossil fuel (e.9., natural gas) to obtain a fuel mixture which would meet the standard. The low sulfur fuel adds to the heat input but not to the sulfur dioxide emissions _and, thereby, has an overall fuel sulfur reduction effect. 41 Fed. Reg. 51397.( November 22, 1976) CONCLUSION Power Plant C at the Lake Charles works has been designed as an energy-efficient and economical supplier of both electricity and steam to an industrial process which needs both items. If deemed to apply, however, the new source standards for fossil-fuel fired steam genera- tors threaten to prevent use of the critical “waste heat” component of the feed to the boiler segment of the power plant. The complementary turbine-boiler aspects of the power plant should be considered in the Agency’s consid- eration of the request for determinations under 40 C.F.R. § 6.05. Specifically, PPG asks (1) that the Agency determine that PPG had em- barked upon a continuous course of construction 80 at Power Plant U prior to August 17, 1971, such that the new source standards for fossil-fuel fired steam generators do not apply; or alterna- tively, (2) that the Agency determine that the regulations for fossil-fuel fired steam generators do not ap- ply to “waste heat” boilers such as those being installed at Power Plant C. In the event that the Agency determines that the “waste heat” boilers at Power Plant C are subject to new source standards for fossil-fuel fired steam generators, the Agency should (1) conclude that the standards for nitro- gen oxides cannot meaningfully be applied to the emis- sions discharged by the “waste heat” boilers, and (2) measure compliance with the standards for sulfur dioxide against the total heat input to the boiler, as required, while construing total heat input ‘: include the “waste heat” charged to the boiler. Respectfully submitted, /s/ George P. Cheney, Jr. GEORGE P. CHENEY, JR. PPG Industries, Inc. One Gateway Center Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222 (412) 434-2145 /s/ Charles F. Lettow CHARLES F. LETTOW Joseph Isenbergh Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton 1250 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 April 12, 1977 (202) 223-2151 [Italicized material appears as handwritten material in record] -— —~ 81 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Apr. 14, 1977 NSPS Compliance Testing Original Signed by O. W. Lively, Jr. for Howard G. Bergman Director Enforcement Division (6AE) Ed Reich Director, Stationary Sources Enforcement Division (EN-341) PPG Industries, Inc. at its Lake Charles, Louisiana, plant is constructing two fossil fuel fired steam generators which are part of a combined-cycle power plant. Natural gas is burned in two gas turbines. The gases from the two turbines are fed into the two steam generators. In addition fuel oil is burned in the steam generators. The heat input from each turbine is about 679 million Btu. The fuel oil heat input to each steam generator is about 608 million Btu. The steam from the generators will be used to drive one turbo-generator which furnishes steam for the chemical complex. PPG has requested that the compliance testing be done while the steam generators are operating on fuel oil and the turbine gases. PPG is planning to use fuel oil with a sulfur content of 1% by weight. PPG estimates that if required to conduct performance tests while burning 100% fuel oil the steam generators will exceed the sulfur dioxide standard. It is our understanding of prior determinations that the proper performance testing in this case would be a single test while burning 100% fuel oil. However, the change to allow the use of wood residue in compliance testing implies a change in approach; therefore, we request clari- fication of the policy. [Handwritten notations and routing and concurrence notations omitted in printing] 82 (1) Gael Bergman CLEARY, GOTTLIEB, STEEN & HAMILTON 1250 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 228-2151 Cable: Cleargolaw Washi KENNETH L. BACHMAN, JR. CHARLES F. LETTOW RICHARD deC. HINDS RESIDENT PARTNERS MATTHEW HALE WASHINGTON COUNSEL SARA D. SCHOTLAND ERIC SCHWARTZ JOHN S. MAGNEY Twx 7108220108 GEORGE W. BALL COUNSEL NEW YORK OFFICE ONE STATE STREET PLAZA NEW YORK 10004 PARIS OFFICE 41, AVENUE de FRIEDLAND 75008 PARIS, FRANCE BRUSSELS OFFICE RUE de la LOI, 23 1040 BRUSSELS, BELGIUM LONDON OFFICE WINCHESTER HOUSE 77 LONDON WALL LONDON EC2N IDA, ENGLAND THOMAS C. HILL JOSEPH ISENBERGH April 29, 1977 Received EPA Region VI 1977 May—2 AM 10:11 Enforcement Division Received May 2, 1977—9 A.M. EPA Region VI—Legal Mr. Howard Bergman Director, Enforcement Division Environmental Protection Agency Region VI 1600 Patterson Street Dallas, Texas 75201 aT 83 Mr. Edward E. Reich Director, Division of Stationary Source Enforcement Environmental Protection Agency 401 M Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20460 Dear Messrs. Bergman and Reich: On April 14, 1977, Mr. George P. Cheney, Jr., Assistant Counsel, PPG Industries, Inc., filed a request for determi- nations under 40 C.F.R. § 60.5 (the request is dated April 18, 1977). This request pertains to “waste heat” boilers at PPG’s Lake Charles works. On April 20, 1977, in an address to a Joint Session of Congress, President Carter spoke of measures “to en- courage industries and utilities to expand what is called “cogeneration’ projects, which capture the steam which is now wasted from the electrical power production.” (White House Press Release, at 5.) The “ ‘cogeneration’ projects” of which President Carter spoke and what the PPG re- quest denominates as “waste heat” boilers are the same thing. A copy of President Carter’s address is attached. Very truly yours, /s/ Charles F. Lettow CHARLES F, LETTOW CFL/ce Attachment ee: George P. Cheney, Jr., Esq. (w/attachment) [Italicized material appears as handwritten material in record] 84 For Immediate Release April 20, 1977 OFFICE OF THE WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY THE WHITE HOUSE REMARKS OF THE PRESIDENT TO A JOINT SESSION OF CONGRESS THE CAPITOL 9:05 P.M. EST Mr. President, Mr. Speaker, Members of the Congress, and distinguished guests: The last time we met as a group was exactly three months ago today on Inauguration Day. We have had a good beginning as partners in addressing our Nation’s problems. But in the months ahead, we must work together even more closely, to deal with the greatest domestic challenge that our Nation will face in our lifetime. We must act now—together—to devise and to implement a compre- hensive national energy plan to cope with a crisis that otherwise could overwhelm us. This cannot be an inspirational speech tonight. I don’t expect much applause. It is a sober and a different pres- entation. During the last three months, I have come to realize very clearly why a comprehensive energy policy has not already been evolved. It has been a thankless job, but it is our job, and I believe that we have a fair, well-balanced and effective plan to present to you. It can lead to an even better life for the people of America. The heart of our energy policy is—the heart of our energy problem is that we have too much demand for fuel that keeps going up too quickly, while production goes down, and our primary means of solving this prob- lem is to reduce waste and inefficiency. Oil and natural gas make up about 75 percent of our consumption in this country, but they only compromise 85 about 7 percent of our reserves. Our demand for oil has been rising by more than 5 percent each year, but do- mestic oil supplies have been dropping more than 6 percent. Therefore, our imports have risen sharply—making us more and more vulnerable if supplies are interrupted— but early in the 1980’s even foreign oil will become in- creasingly scarce. If it were possible for world demand to continue rising during the next few years at the rate of 5 percent a year, we could use up all the proven reserves in the entire world by the end of the next decade. Our trade deficits are growing. We imported more than $35 billion worth of oil last year, and we will spend much more than that this year. The time has come to draw the line. We could continue to ignore this problem—as many have done in the past—but to do so would subject our people to an impending catastrophy. That is why we need a comprehensive national energy policy. Your ad- vice has been an important influence as this plan has taken shape. Many of its proposals will be built on the legislative initiatives that you have taken in the Con- gress in the last few years. Two nights ago, I spoke to the American people about the principles behind our plan and our specific goals for 1985: To reduce the annual growth rate in energy consump- tion by more than 2 percent; To reduce gasoline consumption by 10 percent; To cut imports of foreign oil to less than 6 million barrels a day, less than half the amount that we will be importing if we do not conserve; To establish a strategic petroleum reserve supply of at least a billion barrels, which will meet our needs for about 10 months; To increase our coai production by more than two- thirds, over 1 billion tons a year; To insulate 90 percent of American homes and all new buildings; and To use solar energy in more than 214 million American homes. 86 Now, I hope that the Congress will adopt these goals by joint resolution as a demonstration of our mutual commitment to achieve them. Tonight I want to outline the specific steps by which we can reach those goals. The proposals fall into these central categories: First, conservation; second, produc- tion; third, conversion; fourth, development; and, of course, fairness or equity, which is a primary considera- tion of all of our proposals. We prefer to reach those goals through voluntary co- operation with a minimum of coercion. In many cases, we propose financial incentives, which will encourage people to save energy and will harness the power of our free economy to meet our needs. But I must say to you that voluntary compliance will not be enough—the problem is too large and the time is too short. In a few cases, penalties and restrictions to reduce waste are essential. Our first goal is conservation. It is the cheapest, most practical way to meet our energy needs and to reduce our growing dependence on foreign supplies of oil. With proper planning, economic growth, enhanced job oppor- tunities and a higher quality of life can result even while we eliminate the waste of energy. The two areas where we waste most of our energy are transportation and our heating and cooling systems. Transportation consumes 26 percent of all our energy— and as much as half of that is waste. In Europe the average automobile weighs 2,700 pounds; in our country, 4,100 pounds. Now, the Congress has already taken fuel efficiency steps and set standards which will require new auto- mobiles to have an average efficiency of miles per gallon of 27.5 by 1985 instead of the 18 among new cars today. The entire fleet of cars is only 14 miles per gallon at this time. To insure that this existing congressional mandate is met, I am proposing first of all a graduated excise tax on new gas guzzlers that do not meet Federal mileage standards. This tax will start low and then rise each year until 1985. In 1978, for instance, a tax of $180 ~~ 87 will be levied on a car getting only 15 miles per gallon, and for an 11-mile-per-gallon car the tax will be $450. That is at the beginning. By 1985 the taxes on these wasteful new cars with the same lew mileage, 15 miles per gallon or 11 miles per gallon, will have risen to $1,600 and $2,500. All of the money collected by this tax on wasteful automobiles will be returned to consumers through re- bates on automobiles that are more efficient than the mileage standards. We expect both better efficiency and also more automobile production and sales under this proposal. We will insure that American automobile work- ers and their families do not bear an unfair share of the burden. And of course we will also work with our foreign trading partners to see that they are treated fairly. Now I want to discuss one of the most controversial and most misunderstood parts of the energy proposal— a standby tax on automobile gasoline. Gasoline consump- tion represents half of our total oil usage. We simply must save gasoline, and I believe that the American people can meet this challenge. It is a matter of patri- otism and a matter of commitment. Between now and 1980 we expect gasoline consump- tion to rise slightly above the present level. For the fol- lowing five years, when we have the more efficient cars on the road, we need to reduce consumption each year to reach our targets for 1985. I propose that we commit ourselves to these fair, reasonable and necessary goals and at the same time write into law a gasoline tax of an additional five cents per gallon that will automatically take effect each year that we fail to meet our annual targets in the previous year. As an added incentive, if we miss one year, but are back on the track the next year, then the additional tax should come off. Now, if the American people re- spond to this challenge, we can meet these targets, and under these circumstances this gasoline tax will never have to be imposed. I know and you know that it can be done. 88 As with other taxes, we must minimize the adverse effects on our economy—we must reward those who con- serve, and penalize those who waste. Therefore, any pro- ceeds from the tax—if it is triggered by excessive con- sumption—should be returned to the general public in an equitable manner. I will also propose a variety of other measures to make our transportation system more efficient. One of the side effects of conserving gasoline, for in- Stance, is that state governments who have a limited amount of tax per gallon collect less money through gasoline taxes. To reduce their hardships and to insure adequate highway maintenance, we should compensate states for this loss through the Highway Trust Fund. The second major area where we can reduce waste is in our homes and buildings. Some buildings waste half the energy used for heating and cooling. From now on we must make sure that new buildings are as efficient as possible, and that old buildings are equipped—or “retro- fitted” —with insulation and heating systems that dramat- ically reduce the use of fuel. The Federal Government should set an example. I will issue an Executive Order establishing strict conservation goals for both new and old Federal b [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385006_0386%3A2. Public record. Not legal advice.