BOARD MEETING DATE August 11, 1995 AGENDA NO. 4

August 11, 1995

South Coast Air Quality

Management District Board

Amend Rule 2011 - Requirements for Monitoring, Reporting, and Recordkeeping for Oxides of Sulfur (SOx) Emissions Rule 2012 - Requirements for Monitoring, Reporting, and Recordkeeping for Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) Emissions

Your Board launched a bold new approach to environmental regulation on October 15, 1993 with the adoption of Regulation XX - Regional Clean Air Incentives Market (RECLAIM). In order to meet the challenge of achieving healthful air quality at a lower cost and with greater flexibility, RECLAIM establishes two emission trading markets--one each for oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and oxides of sulfur (SOx). Each facility participating in a market has an Allocation of the pollutant for each year through 2010. Each facility's Allocation declines through year 2003. Any facility which emits at a level less than its Allocation in a particular year can sell the remaining portion to another facility which can thereby increase its Allocation for the same year. This provides the facilities with greater flexibility in terms of scheduling plant modifications, as well as offsetting their costs.

In conjunction with its flexibility, RECLAIM also establishes monitoring and reporting requirements designed to ensure that participating facilities are able to accurately report emissions in a timely manner. Their reported emissions are then deducted from their Allocations on a quarterly basis. Thus, the monitoring and reporting protocols provide a keystone to the program as a whole. In effect, the concept of emissions Allocations and trading would have little meaning without reliable monitoring and reporting. RECLAIM NOx sources are divided into three categories with increasingly rigorous monitoring and reporting requirements: NOx process unit, large NOx source, and major NOx source. Similarly, there are two categories of SOx sources: SOx process unit and major SOx source.

Although accurate emission monitoring and reporting are key components of the RECLAIM program, for the case of Super Compliant facilities, it is appropriate to allow the reclassification of major NOx sources and major SOx sources as large NOx sources and SOx process units, respectively, as described below. The process of acquiring Super Compliant status includes the retirement of RTCs in excess of the facility's end Allocation from the trading market. Therefore, the decrease in monitoring accuracy is more than offset by the air quality benefit associated with the decrease in emissions.

The proposed amendments to Rules 2011 and 2012 will enable staff to apply the RECLAIM Rules in a manner more representative of actual operating conditions at particular facilities. These proposed amendments will simultaneously result in early emission reductions from some facilities and substantially reduce the cost of compliance for certain facilities. They will also provide AQMD with emissions data which more accurately represent actual emissions. Specifically, the proposed amendments will:

1. Provide for the reclassification of a major NOx source to a large NOx source or a major SOx source to a SOx process unit, if a facility can be deemed Super Compliant.

The term Super Compliant denotes a facility with existing current emissions that are below their 2003 allocation or a facility which can reduce their current emissions by the installation of air pollution control equipment to below their 2003 allocations. There are a few RECLAIM facilities which are already operating with emission levels at or below their compliance year 2003 Allocations. Additional facilities may be able to reduce emissions to the level of their compliance year 2003 Allocations in the short term by installing control equipment. Therefore, staff proposes to amend Rules 2011 and 2012 so as to establish a methodology whereby the operators of such facilities can have their major SOx sources reclassified as SOx process units or their major NOx sources reclassified as large NOx sources, as appropriate.

2. Expand the acceptable valid data range of a continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS) from 20 to 95 percent of the full scale span (FSS) range to 10 to 95 percent of the FSS range.

Currently, RECLAIM Rules 2011, Appendix A (SOx Protocol) and 2012, Appendix A (NOx Protocol) require the use of missing data procedures anytime a CEMS is reading concentrations below 20 percent of FSS range. For example, if a CEMS has a certified span range of 0 to 100 parts per million (ppm), anytime the CEMS is reading concentrations below 20 ppm, missing data procedures would be invoked.

Since the RECLAIM program focuses on the measurement and reporting of actual emissions and the use of missing data procedures does not necessarily yield the measurement or reporting of actual emissions, it is imperative that a RECLAIM CEMS can accurately measure emissions at both low and high concentrations. To accommodate the capturing of low emissions, staff is recommending to increase the valid range of acceptable CEMS data to 10 to 95 percent of FSS range.

3. Include procedures under which data measured by a CEMS below 10 percent of the "lowest available vendor guaranteed" FSS range can be deemed acceptable, rather than resorting to "missing data" procedures.

Staff is proposing to include in the NOx and SOx Protocols criteria under which the measurement of concentrations that fall below 10 percent of the lowest available vendor guaranteed FSS range can be deemed acceptable, rather than triggering the missing data procedures. The use of the lowest "available" vendor guaranteed range is intended to provide a technological incentive to CEMS manufacturers to improve their instruments' accuracy at low concentrations, which would then set the standard upon which this alternate measuring option is based.

4. Amend the Missing Data Procedures to allow facilities with major sources to address those situations in which a CEMS cannot be certified based on the application of equipment typically used in the certification process. Such sources that do not have an approved RECLAIM certified continuous emission monitoring systems (CEMS) may propose alternate equipment and, if approved will be allowed to continue using the interim period emissions calculation methodology up until December 31, 1995 or when the CEMS is finally certified, whichever is earlier. This calculation procedure would be retroactive to July 1, 1995.

Alternate equipment that may be proposed would include specially designed probes or other type of equipment that would require further engineering design. This rule provision would exclude equipment that is being developed at a laboratory level or would require one or more years to become achieved in practice.

5. Change the relative accuracy requirements for stack gas volumetric flow measurement systems from 10 percent to 15 percent. This change is consistent with the United States Environmental Protection Agency's Acid Rain Program (40CFR, Part 75) relative accuracy requirements.

Currently the relative accuracy requirements for the measurement of RECLAIM mass emissions is 20 percent. Hence, this change will not effect measurement accuracy of mass emissions.

6. Correct obvious typographical errors such as:

a. the table referenced in Rule 2012, Appendix A, Chapter 2, Subdivision (E)(1)(d)(iv) should be Table 1, instead of Table 2.

b. the word "SOx" was added to the first sentence of Rule 2011 Subdivision (g): "The Facility Permit holder of a major SOx source or SOx process unit shall..."

In addition, rule language was modified in Attachment C to both the SOx and NOx Protocols in order to clarify the testing frequency required for semiannual assessments.

AQMD staff has reviewed the proposed amendments to Rules 2011 and 2012 and determined with certainty that the amendments have no potential to adversely impact the environment and are thus exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The amendments are exempt pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15002(k) and 15061(b)(3) [SCAQMD CEQA Guidelines Sections 1.2(k) and 5.1(b)(3)]. As such, a Notice of Exemption has been prepared and will be filed with the county clerks for Orange, Riverside, Los Angeles, and San Bernardino counties immediately following the adoption of the proposed amendments.

THEREFORE, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT YOUR BOARD

--Set a Public Hearing for September 8, 1995 to amend Rule 2011 - Requirements for Monitoring, Reporting, and Recordkeeping for Oxides of Sulfur (SOx) Emissions and Rule 2012 - Requirements for Monitoring, Reporting, and Recordkeeping for Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) Emissions, as set forth in the attached.

Respectfully,

James M. Lents, Ph.D.

Executive Officer

Attachment

PL:LL:CM:GQ:DWS/MH

ATTACHMENT A

SUMMARY OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

                           Rules 2011 and 2012                             

Super Compliance                                                           
¨ The Facility Permit holder of a major SOx or NOx source may apply for    
designation as a Super Compliant Facility and for a permit modification    
to reclassify the major source to a SOx process unit or large NOx source,  
as appropriate, if either:                                                 
 the facility's annual SOx or NOx emissions were already at or below the   
level of its compliance year 2003 Allocation during its 1994 compliance    
year, will permanently remain at that level, and all SOx or NOx RTCs in    
excess of the facility's compliance year 2003 Allocation for each of the   
compliance years from the year of application submittal through the 2010   
compliance year have been retired; or                                      
 the facility implements equipment modifications which permanently reduce  
the facility's annual SOx or NOx emissions to a level at or below its      
compliance year 2003 Allocation, all SOx or NOx RTCs in excess of the      
facility's compliance year 2003 Allocation for each of the compliance      
years from the year of application submittal through the 2010 compliance   
year have been retired, and any emission control technologies utilized to  
achieve these emission reductions do not result in any increases in the    
emissions of any other air contaminant or in emissions to any other        
media.                                                                     
¨ Facilities which take advantage of this option will not be required to   
maintain SOx or NOx CEMS, as appropriate on the subject equipment,         
thereby avoiding the associated expense.                                   
Expansion of CEMS Valid Data Range and Measurement of Low CEMS             
Concentrations                                                             
 The AQMD is proposing to expand the range of acceptable CEMS data to      
include all data at or above 10 percent of full scale span range.          
Currently, RECLAIM Rules 2011, Appendix A (SOx Protocol) and 2012,         
Appendix A (NOx Protocol) require the use of missing data procedures       
anytime a CEMS is reading concentrations below 20 percent of full scale    
span range.                                                                
 The AQMD is also proposing to include in the SOx and NOx Protocols a      
tiered approach under which the measurement of SOx or NOx concentrations   
below 10 percent of the lowest available vendor guaranteed full scale      
span range can be deemed acceptable, rather than resorting to missing      
data procedures                                                            
Missing Data Amendments                                                    
The AQMD is proposing to allow facilities with major sources that cannot   
certify CEMS with applicable equipment to continue using, under specific   
conditions, the interim period emission calculation methodology up until   
December 31, 1995 or when the CEMS is finally certified, whichever is      
earlier.  This calculation procedure would be retroactive to July 1,       
1995.                                                                      
Stack Gas Flow Measurement Relative Accuracy                               
Change the relative accuracy requirements for stack gas volumetric flow    
measurement systems from 10 percent to 15 percent.  This change is         
consistent with the United States Environmental Protection Agency's Acid   
Rain Program (40CFR, Part 75) relative accuracy requirements.

ATTACHMENT B

RULE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

Proposed Amended Rule 2011 - Requirements for Monitoring,
Reporting, and Recordkeeping for Oxides of Sulfur (SOx) Emissions
Proposed Amended Rule 2012 - Requirements for Monitoring,
Reporting, and Recordkeeping for Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) Emissions

                                                                           
   First Request For       Initial Rule Development,     Input from Other  
     Public Input:         Initial Environmental and       Agencies and    
                          Socio-Economic Assessments:     SCAQMD Staff:    
       June 1995                                               n/a         
                                   April 1995                              
                           (1 months spent developing                      
                                  draft rule)                              


       Public Workshop:        

             n/a               


 Consultation Meetings   CEQA AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC REPORTS                   
 with Industry/Public:   June 1995                                         

       June 1995*        Supplemental Environmental Assessment             
       July 1995                                                           
                         n/a                                               

Socio-Economic Impact Assessment                  
                                                  
                         June 1995                                         


                         FINAL CEQA ACTION:  Exemption                     


Date Set for Hearing:  August    
11, 1995                         
Date of Hearing:  September 8,   
1995

Total Time Spent in Rule Development

Pre-Board Hearing: 5 months

* The meetings held on June 7, 1995 and July 18, 1995 were referred to as a Public Workshop. However, because the proposed amendments have no potential adverse impact on the environment, the Notice period for a Public Workshop was not required.

SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT

Draft Staff Report for
Proposed Amended Rule 2011 - Requirements for Monitoring, Reporting, and Recordkeeping for Oxides of Sulfur (SOx) Emissions and Rule 2012 - Requirements for Monitoring, Reporting, and Recordkeeping for Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) Emissions

Rule Development Assessment
Socioeconomic Impact Assessment

August 11, 1995
(staff3.doc)

Deputy Executive Officer
Stationary Source Compliance
Patricia Leyden, A.I.C.P.

Assistant Deputy Executive Officer
Stationary Source Compliance
Lee Lockie

Director
Planning
Jack Broadbent

Senior Manager
Pang Mueller

Planning Manager
Cindy Greenwald

AUTHORS: DARREN STROUD - AIR QUALITY ENGINEER I
MITCH HAIMOV - AIR QUALITY ENGINEER I
GARY QUINN - AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS AND COMPLIANCE SUPERVISOR
BOB KNEISEL - STAFF SPECIALIST

REVIEWED BY: BILL WONG - SENIOR DEPUTY DISTRICT COUNSEL

SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT

GOVERNING BOARD

Chairman: JON D. MIKELS

Supervisor, Second District

San Bernardino County Representative

Vice Chairman: WILLIAM A. BURKE, Ed.D.

Speaker of the Assembly Appointee

MEMBERS:

HUGH HEWITT

Governor's Appointee

MICHAEL D. ANTONOVICH

Supervisor, Fifth District

Los Angeles County Representative

MARVIN BRAUDE
Councilmember, City of Los Angeles

Cities Representative, Los Angeles County/Western Region

CANDACE HAGGARD

Mayor Pro Tem, City of San Clemente

Cities Representative, County of Orange

MEE HAE LEE

Senate Rules Committee Appointee

RONALD O. LOVERIDGE

Mayor, City of Riverside

Cities Representative, Riverside County

LEONARD PAULITZ

Councilmember, City of Montclair

Cities Representative, San Bernardino County

JAMES W. SILVA

Supervisor, Second District

Orange County Representative,

NELL SOTO
Councilmember, City of Pomona

Cities Representative, Los Angeles County/Eastern Region

S. ROY WILSON

Supervisor, Fourth District

Riverside County Representative

EXECUTIVE OFFICER

JAMES M. LENTS, Ph.D.

                   Section                              Page(s)           

Background                                               1 - 3            

Proposed Amendments                                      3 - 8            

Implementation                                           8 - 11           

Estimated Emission Reductions                           11 - 12           

Socioeconomic Impact Assessment                         12 - 15           

Comments and Responses                                  15 - 16           

Appendix A                                              Attached          
Proposed Rule Language for Rule 2011                                      

Appendix B                                              Attached          
Proposed Amended Protocol for Rule 2011 (SOx)                             

Appendix C                                              Attached          
Proposed Rule Language for Rule 2012                                      

Appendix D                                              Attached          
Proposed Amended Protocol for Rule 2012 (NOx)

RULE DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT
OF PROPOSED AMENDED RULES 2011 & 2012

I. BACKGROUND

The South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) Governing Board launched a new approach to environmental regulation October 15, 1993 with the adoption of Regulation XX - Regional Clean Air Incentives Market (RECLAIM). In order to meet the challenge of achieving healthful air quality at a lower cost and with greater flexibility, RECLAIM establishes two emission trading markets--one each for oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and oxides of sulfur (SOx). Each facility participating in a market has an Allocation of the pollutant for each year through 2010. Each facility's Allocation declines through year 2003. Any facility which emits at a level less than its Allocation in a particular year can sell the remaining portion to another facility which can thereby increase its Allocation for the same year. This approach provides the facilities with greater flexibility in terms of scheduling plant modifications, as well as offsetting their costs.

In conjunction with its flexibility, RECLAIM also establishes monitoring and reporting requirements designed to ensure that participating facilities are able to accurately report emissions in a timely manner. Their reported emissions are then deducted from their Allocations on a quarterly basis. Thus, the monitoring and reporting protocols provide a keystone to the program as a whole--the concept of emissions Allocations and trading would have little meaning without reliable monitoring and reporting. RECLAIM NOx sources are divided into three categories with increasingly rigorous monitoring and reporting requirements: NOx process unit, large NOx source, and major NOx source. Similarly, there are two categories of SOx sources: SOx process unit and major SOx source.

The proposed amendments to Rule 2011 - Requirements for Monitoring, Reporting, and Recordkeeping for Oxides of Sulfur (SOx) Emissions and to Rule 2012 - Requirements for Monitoring, Reporting, and Recordkeeping for Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) Emissions intend to accomplish the following:

1. Provide for the reclassification of a major NOx source to a large NOx source or a major SOx source to a SOx process unit, if a facility can be deemed Super Compliant.

2. Expand the acceptable valid data range of a continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS) from 20 to 95 percent of the full scale span (FSS) range to 10 to 95 percent of the FSS range.

Staff is proposing to include in the NOx and SOx Protocols criteria under which the measurement of concentrations that fall below 10 percent of the lowest vendor guaranteed FSS range can be deemed acceptable, rather than triggering the missing data procedures. Also, the proposed procedures address the fact that some CEMS technology has advanced to the point that it can accurately read low concentrations below 10 percent of lowest vendor guaranteed FSS range and it also provides a technological incentive to other CEMS manufacturers to improve their instruments' accuracy at low concentrations.

4. Amend the Missing Data Procedures to allow facilities with major sources that cannot certify CEMS using standard equipment to continue using, under specified conditions, the interim period emissions calculation methodology up until December 31, 1995 or when the CEMS is finally certified, whichever is earlier. This calculation procedure would be retroactive to July 1, 1995.

Currently the relative accuracy requirements for the measurement of RECLAIM mass emissions is 20 percent. Hence, this change will not effect measurement accuracy of mass emissions.

6. Correct obvious typographical errors such as:

a. the table referenced in Rule 2012, Appendix A, Chapter 2, Subdivision (E)(1)(d)(iv) should be Table 1, instead of Table 2.

b. the word "SOx" was added to the first sentence of Rule 2011 Subdivision (g): "The Facility Permit holder of a major SOx source or SOx process unit shall..."

In addition, rule language was modified in Attachment C to both the SOx and NOx Protocols in order to clarify the testing frequency required for semiannual assessments.

II. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

Reclassification of major NOx sources to large sources and major SOx sources to process units

The proposed amendments specify criteria which must be met in order for a major NOx source to be reclassified as a large NOx source or for a major SOx source to be reclassified as a SOx process unit. In order to apply for such a reclassification the facility permit holder must:

1. submit an application for Permit modification to install NOx or SOx emission reduction equipment no later than December 2, 1996 (unless the facility's emissions will be at the level of its compliance year 2003 Allocation by July 1, 1997 without implementing any modifications);

2. operate the equipment such that the facility's total NOx or SOx emissions, as appropriate, are continuously at a level at or below the facility's Allocations for compliance year 2003 beginning no later than the facility's 1998 compliance year;

3. retire all RECLAIM Trading Credits (RTCs) in excess of the facility's Allocations for compliance year 2003 for the compliance year during which the application is submitted through the 2010 compliance year; and

4. accomplish any emission reductions using only control technologies which do not result in increases in emissions of any other air contaminants or in emissions to any other media (e.g., they cannot result in increased production of contaminated waste water).

Comparisons to compliance year 2003 Allocations are exclusive of any RTC transactions. That is, comparisons are made to the year 2003 Allocations issued to the facility pursuant to Rule 2004 (b)(4), regardless of any 2003 compliance year RTCs subsequently purchased, sold, or retired by the facility. Additionally, all RTCs in excess of the 2003 level issued to the facility must be retired for each year from the year of application through 2002; they cannot be sold or otherwise transferred and any such RTCs which were previously transferred must be replaced and retired. Finally, any RTCs for the compliance year of the application through the 2010 compliance year acquired by the facility in excess of the Allocations issued to the facility for the same year must be either retired or transferred out of the facility's account.

AQMD staff will perform an engineering analysis of applications for reclassification in order to determine if they are likely to result in the facility operating at, or below, its compliance year 2003 Allocation level. If the analysis does indicate that the facility can be expected to operate at the level of its compliance year 2003 Allocation the facility will receive provisional approval. Facilities which receive provisional approval and which report emissions below their compliance year 2003 Allocations for their 1998 compliance year (Cycle 1 facilities) or the 1997-1998 compliance year (Cycle 2 facilities) will receive final approval, will have their major sources reclassified as SOx process units or large NOx sources, as appropriate, and will be designated as Super Compliant Facilities.

Facility operators which have received provisional approval as a SOx or NOx Super Compliant Facility may monitor and report emissions pursuant to the provisions pertaining to SOx process units or large NOx sources, as appropriate, during the interval between application for major source reclassification and Super Compliant Facility designation submittal and final approval. However, if a facility which exercises this option is unsuccessful at obtaining final approval, the missing data provisions of Chapter 2 of Appendix A shall apply retroactively to each major source which had been using the SOx process unit or Large NOx source monitoring and reporting procedures.

Additionally, the proposed amendments stipulate that if a RECLAIM facility which has been designated a Super Compliant Facility and has been reclassified from a major source to a SOx process unit or a large NOx source exceeds its 2003 Allocation in any single year, then the facility must acquire sufficient RTCs to offset the increase. If such a facility exceeds its 2003 Allocation for two consecutive years or any three years, then the facility shall acquire sufficient RTCs to offset the increase, all reclassified sources at the facility shall be permanently redesignated as major sources, and the facility shall no longer be designated a Super Compliant Facility.

Accurate emission monitoring and reporting are key components of the RECLAIM program. However, for the case of Super Compliant facilities, it is appropriate to allow the reclassification of major NOx sources and major SOx sources as large NOx sources and SOx process units, respectively, because the process of acquiring Super Compliant status includes the retirement of RTCs in excess of the facility's end Allocation from the trading market. Therefore, the decrease in monitoring accuracy is more than offset by the air quality benefit associated with the decrease in emissions.

Expanding the range of acceptable valid CEMS data

Currently, the RECLAIM NOx and SOx monitoring protocols (Appendix A of Rules 2011 and 2012) require that in order for CEMS data to be acceptable and quantifiable, the data had to lie within 20 to 95 percent of the full scale span (FSS) of the analyzer. If data fell outside of this range, missing data provisions would apply (with limited exception for SO2). These limits were based on District requirements for the use of continuous analyzers for compliance determination during source tests. This criterion was set for two reasons:

· The typical chart recorder was, on an electronic basis, most accurate and linear in the midscale range with accuracy falling off at both the high and low ends.

· The zero drift and span drift allowances were such that if they were at the maximum allowable levels, the uncertainty in an analyzer reading at 20 percent of FSS could be in excess of 10 percent for a 15 minute averaging time.

The 20 to 95 percent criterion was seen as a conservative limitation because the averaging period under RECLAIM would be much longer than 15 minutes. Yet, staff believed that this range would not be unduly restrictive.

As RECLAIM was implemented, it became clear that the monitored concentrations of pollutants, SO2 in particular, were much lower than originally anticipated, especially for refinery fuel gas. Consequently, a greater amount of missing data would be applied, which adversely affected the facilities ability to meet its annual allocation, even though it was clear that the actual data were well below the missing data levels.

Staff is proposing to help alleviate this situation by extending the lower allowed limit for quantifiable data to 10 percent of FSS. Staff believes that this can be done without adversely affecting the credibility of the RECLAIM program because of the conservative nature of the original criterion and because of the following:

· Data acquisition and handling systems have replaced chart recorders as the primary means of calculating emissions (chart recorders are still necessary as back up legal evidence) and they exhibit a greater accuracy and linearity across the FSS of the CEMS analyzer.

· The averaging time is on an annual basis and the uncertainty is still a random function of time (no bias over a long averaging period even with large random errors such as zero drift, and span drift).

· The analysis done by staff during the RECLAIM Rule making process to estimate the impact of random uncertainty on the accuracy of the annual mass emission calculation assumed twice the error that is allowed under the RECLAIM rules for certification of a monitoring system.

Establish procedures for measuring low concentrations that fall below 10 percent of lowest vendor guaranteed FSS range

The proposed procedures for the NOx and SOx Protocols establish a two tiered approach for a CEMS to measure and report low emission concentrations The procedures specify that in the event that some or all data points gathered by the CEMS fall below 10 percent of the lowest available vendor guaranteed full scale span (defined as the lowest full scale span range that any vendor guarantees, or is generally accepted in the scientific community, or has been demonstrated for the specific source category, to be capable of meeting all current certification requirements of RECLAIM in Rule 2011 Protocols, Appendix A). Figure 1 illustrates the use of the term "lowest available vendor guaranteed full scale span range" in the context of the proposed rule amendments.

Figure 1

As shown in Figure 1, the lowest available vendor guaranteed FSS range infers the lowest range that has been demonstrated in industry. For example, RECLAIM Facility A whose CEMS manufacturer's lowest guaranteed FSS range is 0 to 50 ppm would not be eligible to report NOx emissions at the 10 percent span range value or the actual measured value. Only facilities whose CEMS are guaranteed from 0 to 25 ppm, in this example, would be eligible to report NOx emissions below 2.5 ppm.

Specifically, the proposed amendments allow a Facility Permit holder whose CEMS can meet the industry demonstrated lowest guaranteed FSS range criteria to select one of the following procedures to measure low concentrations that fall below 10 percent of the FSS range.

1. Report all monitored concentrations that fall below 10 percent of the FSS range at the 10 percent span range value, or

2. Report all monitored concentrations that fall below 10 percent of the FSS range at the actual measured value, provided that the CEMS meets the Alternative Performance Requirements prescribed in Attachment F for SOx and Attachment G for NOx.

The Alternative Performance Requirements prescribed in Attachment F or Attachment G shall be imposed in place of the semiannual assessments as required pursuant to Attachment C (B)(2).

Each procedure as shown above addresses the acceptable methodology that can be used to measure low concentrations that fall below 10 percent of the lowest available vendor guaranteed full scale span below. A procedure may be invoked by the RECLAIM facility at any time for their major source(s) by submitting an application with the appropriate Rule 301 fees. Along with the application, the RECLAIM facility shall submit all necessary documentation and if necessary test protocols necessary to establish a specific procedure. However, to report actual emission below 10 percent of the lowest available vendor guaranteed FSS range, it will first be necessary to demonstrate by using the Supplemental and Alternative CEMS Performance Requirements (Attachment F for low SOx concentrations and Attachment G for low NOx concentrations) that this chosen procedure is capable of accurately measuring low concentrations before submitting an application.

The proposed rule amendments also allows the Facility Permit holder to retroactively report emissions data that fell below the 10 percent of FSS range at the 10 percent span range value in lieu of using the missing data procedures specified Chapter 2, Subdivision (E), from the beginning of the compliance year for which the application was submitted up until the date the AQMD approves the use of one of the aforementioned procedures. This allows the facility to report more accurate emissions data.

Facilities which have received provisional certification or final certification based on the valid data range of 20 to 95 percent will not be required to re-certify because of the expansion of the valid data range to 10 to 95 percent. Staff believes that most CEMS employed to measure RECLAIM NOx and SOx emissions, are currently capable of accurately measure emissions between the 10 to 20 percent range. Also facilities which are waiting to be granted provisional certification status will not be required to re-certify to account for the 10 to 95 percent valid data range.

The rule amendments also allow for Facility Permit holders' whose CEMS with RECLAIM certified dual span ranges, to report data that falls between 10 percent of the higher range and 95 percent of the lower range at the 10 percent value of the higher range, in lieu of using the Missing Data Procedures prescribed in Chapter 2, Subdivision E.

Missing Data Amendments

This rule language was included to address those situations in which a CEMS cannot be certified based on the application of equipment typically used in the certification process. Atypical equipment used in the certification process would include specially designed probes or other type of equipment that would require further engineering design. This rule provision would exclude equipment that is being developed at a laboratory level or would require one or more years to become achieved in practice. Upon approval of the Facility Permit holder's application, the facility would calculate mass emissions by using the interim reporting methodology. Mass emissions calculated pursuant to the interim reporting methodology or derived by multiplying the emission factor(s) in Table 1 (NOx) or Table 2 (SOx) of Rule 2002 or any alternative emission factor used in the determination of initial allocations or specified in the facility permit by the totalized fuel usage or process throughput. This alternate method of emission calculation would be applied retroactively from July 1, 1995 to the time in which the CEMS has been finally certified or December 31, 1995, whichever is earlier. If the Facility Permit holder is unable to have their the CEMS certified by December 31, 1995 then the missing data procedures specified in clauses E(1)(d)(i), E(1)(d)(ii), and E(1)(d)(iii) would be applied retroactively to July 1, 1995.

IV. IMPLEMENTATION (Super Compliance & Low CEMS Emissions)

Reclassification of major NOx sources to large sources and major SOx sources to process units

The following is a brief summary of the procedures which will be followed in the implementation of the provisions pertaining to Super Compliant Facilities:

A. Any facility which operated at or below the level of its compliance year 2003 Allocation during its 1994 compliance year shall;

· Retire all NOx or SOx RTCs in excess of facility's compliance year 2003 Allocation, as calculated pursuant to Rule 2002 subdivision (e) for each compliance year from year of Super Compliance application through 2010.

· Conduct source tests of each major source to be reclassified. Alternative emission factors for SOx sources will be based upon the source test results.

· Subject to approval, select concentration limits consistent with the above source test results for NOx sources to be reclassified.

· Submit application for designation as a Super Compliant facility and for modification to Facility Permit to reclassify major SOx source(s) as SOx process unit(s) or major NOx source(s) as large NOx source(s).

· Be subject to the condition that if the facility's total annual SOx or NOx emissions exceed its 2003 Allocation for two consecutive years or any three years then the facility will no longer be designated as Super Compliant.

AQMD staff will review the application, emission data, and source test reports. If the application is approved AQMD staff will reissue Facility Permit indicating Super Compliant status and updated monitoring and reporting categories.

· Source test each major source which is reclassified a minimum of once every twelve months (SOx source) or once every six months (NOx source) in order to establish alternative emission factors.

B. Facility which operated in excess of the level of its compliance year 2003 Allocation during its 1994 compliance year shall;

· File a petition for variance with AQMD Hearing Board if the facility intends to operate without CEMS prior to receiving Super Compliant designation.

· Submit complete application(s) for any permit modifications which will be implemented to achieve the level of its compliance year 2003 Allocation no later than December 2, 1996.

· Demonstrate that total annual SOx or NOx emissions are at or below the level of facility's compliance year 2003 Allocation on a permanent basis by January 1, 1998 if Cycle 1 or by July 1, 1998 if Cycle 2. The emission control equipment installed to accomplish the reduction in NOx or SOx emissions must not result in any increases in emissions of any other air contaminant or in emissions to any other media.

· Retire all SOx or NOx RTCs in excess of compliance year 2003 Allocation for each compliance year from year of super compliance application submittal through 2010 compliance year.

AQMD staff will review application and emission data. If the application is approved, AQMD staff will issue provisional approval.

· Facility with provisional approval may commence monitoring and reporting major sources pursuant to the requirements for SOx process units or large NOx sources retroactively from July 1, 1995 if the complete application for Super Compliance is submitted on or before January 2, 1996 or from the date of super compliance application submittal if the complete application is submitted after January 2, 1996. However, if facility is unsuccessful at obtaining Super Compliance designation then "missing data" procedures apply to each major source which had been reporting as a process unit or large source. "Missing data" will apply to such sources retroactively from the date it began monitoring and reporting as a process unit or large source until the date a CEMS is installed and certified.

· Select concentration limits which shall not be exceeded by the source for all major NOx sources to be reclassified.

· Conduct source tests of each major source to be reclassified as SOx process unit or as large NOx source. Also conduct source tests of each large source or process unit which was modified in order to help bring the facility's total emissions below 2003 Allocation. Alternative emission factors will be based on the source test results for all major SOx sources to be reclassified.

AQMD staff will review the source test reports. Alternative emission factors for SOx sources shall be assigned based upon approved source test results and AQMD staff will reissue the Facility Permit indicating Super Compliant status and updated monitoring and reporting categories if facility has received provisional approval, completed approved source tests, and reported SOx or NOx emissions below its compliance year 2003 Allocation for the 1997 compliance year, subject to the condition that if the facility's total annual SOx or NOx emissions exceed its 2003 Allocation for two consecutive years or any three years then the facility will no longer be designated as Super Compliant.

· Source test each major source which is reclassified at a minimum of once every twelve months (SOx source) or once every six months (NOx source) in order to establish alternative emission factors.

Procedures for measuring low concentrations that fall below 10 percent of the lowest vendor guaranteed FSS range

The following is a brief summary of the procedures which will be followed in the implementation of the provisions pertaining to the measurement and reporting of low concentrations below 10 percent of the lowest vendor guaranteed FSS range:

A. Facilities choosing to report emissions at the 10 percent span range value shall;

· Submit complete application(s) to modify CEMS plan. A separate application must be submitted for each CEMS.

· Apply the missing data procedures described in Chapter 2, Subdivision E until application is reviewed and approved for any instances that the CEMS is measuring low concentrations below 10 percent of FSS range.

· Once application is approved, retroactively report any CEMS reading below 10 percent of FSS range at the 10 percent span range value, up until the beginning of the compliance year (January 1 for Cycle 1 or July 1 for Cycle 2) for which the application was submitted.

B. Facilities choosing to report emissions at the actual measured value shall;

· Perform tests as prescribed in Attachment F (SOx) or Attachment G (NOx) to demonstrate that the CEMS is capable of measuring emissions at below 10 percent of the full scale span range.

· Submit complete application(s) to modify CEMS plan. A separate application must be submitted for each CEMS.

· Perform tests as prescribed in Attachment F (SOx) or Attachment G (NOx) on a semi-annual basis to demonstrate that the CEMS is capable of measuring emissions at below 10 percent of the full scale span range.

Performance tests may be performed on an annual basis rather than on a semiannual basis if the relative accuracy during the previous audit for the SOx pollutant concentration monitor, flow monitoring system, and SOx emission rate measurement system is 7.5 percent or less.

IV. ESTIMATED EMISSION REDUCTIONS

The proposed amendments to Rules 2011 and 2012 provide a mechanism to reassign major NOx sources as large sources and/or major SOx sources as process units. These proposed amendments do not include any provisions requiring emission reductions beyond those which are already required by the RECLAIM program. They may, however, cause emission reductions which are already required under RECLAIM to occur at an earlier date--a subject facility's Allocations for compliance years 2003 through 2010 will not change, but its Allocations between the time of applying for reclassification and 2003 will be reduced to the 2003 level. Thus, the proposed amendments will help to improve air quality during the short term but are not expected to have any long term effects.

Also, the proposed amendments introduce a tiered approach of measuring and reporting low concentrations that fall below 20 percent of the FSS range. The purpose of these amendments is to provide a more accurate methodology for measuring low concentrations rather than invoking missing data procedures. In addition, it raises the relative accuracy from 10 to 15 percent for flow measurement which will not impact the mass emission relative accuracy of 20 percent. Thus, the amendments to Rules 2011 (SOx Protocol) and 2012 (NOx Protocol) will not at all impact the amount of emission reductions expected when the RECLAIM Rules were originally adopted. As a result, these proposed amendments do not significantly affect air quality or emission limitations.

The proposed amendments allow the continued use of the interim period calculation methodology and for a limited time period between July 1, 1995 to December 31, 1995. The main purpose of missing data procedures was to ensure the installation of approved CEMS and not to reduce emissions. Thus, the amendments to this rule do not at all impact the amount of emission reductions expected when the RECLAIM rules were originally adopted. As a result, these proposed amendments do not significantly affect air quality or emission limitations. Consequently, no public workshop or socioeconomic impact analysis is required.

V. SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Proposed Amended Rules 2011 and 2012 would allow a NOx or SOx RECLAIM facility to be designated as "super compliant" if it 1) permanently operates at or below the level of its year-2003 emission Allocation, and 2) retires any RECLAIM Trading Credits (RTCs) for each compliance year which are in excess of its year-2003 Allocation. Major sources at super compliant facilities can be reclassified as "large NOx sources" or "SOx process units," as appropriate. Reclassification will allow participating facilities to forgo installation of Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems (CEMS).

Existing Rules 2011 and 2012 require the use of the "missing data" procedures when CEMS readings are below 20 percent of the monitor's FSS. The "missing data" procedures can subject facilities to the risk of reporting unrepresentatively high emissions. This over-reporting of emissions could cause a facility to exceed its RECLAIM Allocation. The proposed amendments remove this risk by expanding the range for the use of CEMS emission data to 10 percent of the CEMS' FSS, and by establishing procedures which allow the use of more accurate data for operations measured below 10 percent of the lowest vendor guaranteed FSS range.

Affected Industries

The proposed amendments to Rules 2011 and 2012 would affect NOx and SOx RECLAIM facilities. Five specific facilities have indicated a desire to be reclassified in a smaller size category according to the terms of the proposed amendments. Three of these facilities intend to install control equipment to meet the requirements of the proposed amendments concerning reclassification. One of these facilities is a manufacturer of painted roofing granules (SIC 3299) and two are asphalt batch plants (SIC 2951). The two remaining facilities are already operating below their year-2003 Allocations and, therefore, do not need to install additional control equipment. One of these three facilities is a malt manufacturer (SIC 2083) and one is a petroleum refinery (SIC 2911).

Control Costs

The proposed amendments to Rules 2011 and 2012 do not impose control costs. The amendments provide flexibility for RECLAIM facilities to meet program requirements, and provide a lower cost compliance alternative.

Designation of Sources as "Super Compliant"

The proposed amendments allow a facility to be reclassified to a smaller size category if the source can demonstrate that it has or will become "super compliant" by July 1, 1997. A facility may be considered "super compliant" if it permanently maintains its emissions at or below its year-2003 Allocation. Reclassification to the smaller size category enables these sources to avoid the installation of CEMS. The reclassifications allowed by the amendments are from a "major NOx source" to a "large NOx source," and from a "major SOx source" to a "SOx process unit." Monitoring requirements for the smaller size categories are less stringent and less costly than for the larger size categories. Specifically, while major NOx and SOx sources must install CEMS, large NOx sources and SOx process units can meet RECLAIM monitoring and reporting requirements by simpler, less costly means, such as with fuel flow meters and appropriate calculations.

One effect of the amendments is that control equipment will likely be purchased and installed by the "super compliant" facilities sooner than under the existing RECLAIM program. Currently, these facilities can forgo the installation of control equipment by purchasing sufficient RTCs to meet their yearly Allocations. Another effect of the amendments is that fewer CEMS will be purchased and installed in the immediate future, than would be expected under existing Rules 2011 and 2012. The cost of the control equipment is expected to be substantially less than the cost of CEMS.

Allowance of CEMS Data for Emissions Registering Below 20 Percent of FSS Range

Currently, if a CEMS reading is below 20 percent of the FSS range of the equipment, it must be rejected, and the "missing data" procedures set forth in existing Rules 2011 and 2012 used. Since the "missing data" procedures are based on "full scale" operation of the source equipment, the procedures tend to over-estimate emissions. Hence, sources operating at low emissions or throughput levels are at risk of exceeding their RECLAIM emission allocations.

The proposed amendments expand the lower end of the range for the use of CEMS emission data from 20 percent to 10 percent of the CEMS' FSS. Furthermore, CEMS emission data below 10 percent of lowest vendor guaranteed FSS can be accepted if special performance requirements are met. Sources can also submit an "alternative measurement proposal" to the SCAQMD for use of CEMS emission data below 10 percent of the FSS of the equipment.

The proposed amendments will reduce a facility's risk of exceeding its Allocation due to reporting unrepresentatively high emissions when using the "missing data" procedures in existing Rules 2011 and 2012. Accordingly, the facility will be less likely to exceed its RECLAIM Allocation and to need to purchase RTCs for these excess emissions. The cost of RTCs is $593/ton, for year-1995 NOx RTCs traded to-date. The amendments reduce the risk of unnecessarily purchasing RTCs, by establishing procedures which allow the use of actual CEMS data instead of the "missing data" procedures in existing Rules 2011 and 2012.

Potential Reduction in the Size of the RECLAIM Market

The proposed amendments allowing reclassification of RECLAIM sources for monitoring and reporting purposes have the potential to shrink the size of the RECLAIM market, by reducing either the demand for RTCs or the supply of RTCs, depending on what compliance route a facility chooses. If a facility chooses to install control equipment earlier than necessary in order to be classified as "super compliant," it will not need to purchase RTCs. The demand for RTCs would then likely be less than it would have been under existing Rules 2011 and 2012.

On the other hand, in order to be considered "super compliant" a facility must surrender all of its excess emission reductions up to its year-2003 Allocation. The facility, therefore, loses the economic opportunity to trade any potential RTCs it might have generated by installing control equipment at an early date while not seeking classification as a "super compliant" facility. The classification of facilities as "super compliant" with the attendant surrender of excess emission credits may, therefore, have the effect of reducing the potential supply if RTCs that may have been available under existing Rules 2011 and 2012.

It is considered unlikely that there will be a significant reduction either in demand for RTCs or supply of RTCs as a result of the proposed amendments to Rules 2011 and 2012. For there to be a significant drop in the demand for RTCs, a large number of sources would have to install control equipment and reduce their emissions to their year-2003 Allocations by July 1, 1997. At present, only five facilities have expressed an interest in reclassification. The cost of control and the loss of the potential economic benefit of selling RTCs generated from early control of emissions is not likely to result in a large number of facilities seeking "super compliant" status.

For example, the combined year-1996 retirement of NOx RTCs from the four NOx RECLAIM facilities indicating a desire for "super compliant" status represents only 0.4 percent of total NOx RECLAIM Allocations for all facilities for that year. For the single facility requesting "super compliant" SOx RECLAIM status, the year-1996 retirement of SOx RTCs represents only 0.3 percent of total SOx RECLAIM Allocations for all facilities for that year.

Summary

The proposed amendments to Rules 2011 and 2012 allowing reclassification have the potential to provide an economic benefit to sources choosing this option, through not having to install and operate CEMS. The magnitude of the District-wide economic benefit is a function of the number of sources choosing the reclassification option. The size of the RECLAIM market is not expected to shrink significantly as a result of allowing this reclassification option.

For RECLAIM sources utilizing CEMS, the amendments remove the risk of over-reporting emissions when in fact they can accurately measure and report emissions by; (1) expanding the range of valid CEMS emission data from 20 to 95 percent to 10 to 95 percent; (2) raising the relative accuracy for flow measurement for 10 to 15 percent; and (3) establishing procedures which allow the use of actual CEMS data below ten percent of FSS.

Rule Adoption Relative to the Cost-effectiveness Schedule

On October 14, 1994, the SCAQMD Governing Board adopted a resolution that requires staff to address whether proposed rules being considered for adoption are in order of cost-effectiveness as defined in the 1994 AQMP. The proposed amendments to Rules 2011 and 2012 are administrative in nature and are not expected to result in emission reductions, although emission reductions could take place earlier than under existing Rules 2011 and 2012. No cost-effectiveness ratio can be calculated for the proposed amendments to Rules 2011 and 2012. The amendments are expected to provide a potential economic benefit, rather than a cost, to participating RECLAIM sources.Super Complianceompliance year 2003 Allocation not result in any emission increases of other air contaminants or to any other media may result in conflicts for the cases of combustion modifications intended to reduce NOx emissions. Specifically, such modifications may result in increases in CO emissions, although not to a point in excess of the Rule 407 requirement of 2,000 ppm.4. Once a facility has demonstrated that it has reduced its annual emissions to the level of its compliance year 2003 Allocation it should be able to increase its annual emissions above the level of its 2003 Allocation as long as it does not increase its emissions on a per unit basis. For example, emission increases resulting from production increases should be allowed. In order to eligible to permanently forgo the use of CEMS a facility must permanently reduce its emissions. The air quality benefit of early emission reductions offsets the loss of real time monitoring data from these sources. Further, the assertion that a facility which increases its emission level after several years of operation as a Super Compliant facility loses the benefit of having become Super Compliant is misleading and erroneous. Such a facility is not required to operate a certified CEMS until one year after the end of the compliance year in which the facility exceeded its 2003 Allocation either for the third non-consecutive or the second consecutive year. Thus, such a facility has the benefit of delaying the installation of CEMS for several years. There is no retroactive loss of the benefit, it is simply discontinued one year after the loss of Super Compliant facility status.5. The proposed requirement that reclassified major NOx sources be source tested every six months is too onerous. After a suitable number of consecutive bi-annual tests indicating compliance the testing frequency should be reduced to either once every nine months or once every year. The proposal has been changed to reduce the testing frequency to once every year after two years of consecutive bi-annual tests indicating compliance.6. The proposed requirement that Super Compliant facilities retire their "excess" Allocations makes the Super Compliant proposal a "lose-lose" situation, rather than "win-win" because retiring the RECLAIM Trading Credits (RTC) eliminates the incentive to reduce emissions and the supply of RTCs will be artificially reduced. Participating facilities have a very strong incentive to reduce emissions and thereby become designated as Super Compliant. They do not need to install, operate, or maintain CEMS. Additionally, they only need to retire RTCs in excess of the level of their compliance ear 2003 Allocations; the excess RTCs associated with any additional reductions are eligible for trading. Further, because the retired RTCs represent "excess" emission reductions, their retirement will not impact the trading market. The retirement of the RTCs provides the clean air benefit of the program, and is therefore necessary.-->Use of CEMS to Monitor Low Level Emissions

APPENDIX A

Proposed Rule Language for Rule 2011

(Adopted October 15, 1993)(Amended March 10, 1995)

July 31, 1995

(PAR2011C)

RULE 2011. REQUIREMENTS FOR MONITORING, REPORTING, AND RECORDKEEPING FOR OXIDES OF SULFUR (SOx) EMISSIONS

(a) Purpose

The purpose of this rule is to establish the monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements for SOx emissions under the RECLAIM program.

(b) Applicability

The provisions of this rule shall apply to any RECLAIM SOx source or SOx process unit. The SOx sources and process units regulated by this rule include, but are not limited to:

Boilers Fluid Catalytic Cracking Units
Internal Combustion Engines Dryers
Heaters Fume Incinerators/Afterburners
Gas Turbines Test Cells
Furnaces Tail Gas Units
Kilns and Calciners Sulfuric Acid Production
Ovens Waste Incinerators

(1) Major SOx source means any of the following SOx sources, except for such SOx sources at approved Super Compliant Facilities as specified in paragraph (c)(4):

(A) any petroleum refinery fluid catalytic cracking unit;

(B) any tail gas unit;

(D) any equipment that burns refinery, landfill or sewage digester gaseous fuel, except gas flares;

(E) any existing equipment using SOx CEMS or equivalent monitoring device, or that is required to install such monitoring device under District rules to be implemented as of October 15, 1993;

(F) any SOx source or process unit elected by the Facility Permit holder or required by the Executive Officer or designee to be monitored with a CEMS or equivalent monitoring device;

(G) any SOx source or process unit for which SOx emissions reported pursuant to Rule 301 - Permit Fees, were equal to or greater than 10 tons per year for any calendar year between 1987 to 1991, inclusive, excluding any SOx source or process unit which has reduced SOx emissions to below 10 tons per year prior to
January 1, 1994.

(2) The Facility Permit holder of a major SOx source shall:

(A) install, maintain, and operate a direct monitoring device for each major SOx source to continuously measure the concentration of SOx emissions or fuel sulfur content and all other applicable variables specified in Table 2011-1 and Appendix A, Chapter 2, Table 2-A; or

(B) install, maintain, and operate an alternative monitoring device which has been determined by the Executive Officer or designee to be equivalent to CEMS in relative accuracy, reliability, reproducibility and timeliness according to the requirements set forth in Appendix A, Chapter 2.

(3) The Facility Permit holder of a major SOx source shall:

(A) install, maintain, and operate a reporting device to electronically report to the District Central SOx Station for each major SOx source: total daily mass emissions of SOx and daily status codes. Such data shall be transmitted by 5:00 p.m. of the following day. If the facility experiences a power, computer, or other system failure that prevents the reporting of total daily mass emissions of SOx and daily status codes, the Facility Permit holder shall be granted 12 hours to submit the required report; after the 12-hour extension, emissions shall be calculated pursuant to the missing data requirements set forth in Appendix A, Chapter 2; and

(B) submit Monthly Emissions Report aggregating SOx emissions from all major sources within 10 days following the end of each calendar month. In its Monthly Emissions Report, the Facility Permit holder may correct daily transmitted data for that month, provided such corrections are clearly identified and justified.

(4) Super Compliant Facilities

(A) Facilities operating at or below 2003 Allocation as of their 1994 compliance year.

(i) The Facility Permit holder of major SOx sources may reclassify its major SOx sources to SOx process units provided that (1) the facility's annual SOx emissions as properly reported in its 1994 compliance year APEP report are already at or below the level of its compliance year 2003 Allocation as calculated pursuant to Rule 2002(e) and (2) it submits a complete application for SOx Super Compliance status on or before December 2, 1996. The Executive Officer will provisionally approve for purposes of paragraph (c)(5) such application if the Facility Permit holder has retired all SOx RTCs in excess of the facility's compliance year 2003 Allocation for each of the compliance years from the year of application submittal through the 2010 compliance year. The determination of the number of RTCs to be retired for each compliance year shall be based on the facility's RTC account balances as issued prior to any trading activity.

(ii) Final approval of SOx Super Compliant status shall be granted if the Executive Officer or designee approves the initial source test required by subparagraph (c)(4)(C) and the facility's total annual SOx emissions has not exceeded its compliance year 2003 Allocation.

(B) Facilities not operating at or below 2003 Allocation as of their 1994 compliance year.

(i) On or before December 2, 1996 the facility Permit holder of major SOx sources may submit a complete application for SOx Super Compliant status. Such applications must also include a complete application for permit modifications to install SOx emission reduction equipment on the SOx sources and/or to make any other physical modifications to SOx emitting equipment. The Executive Officer shall deny the application for Super Compliant status unless the applicant demonstrates the proposed modifications would comply with all applicable District rules and would permanently reduce the facility's total annual SOx emissions to a level not to exceed its year 2003 SOx Allocation, would not result in any increases in the mass emissions of any other air contaminant or in emissions to any other media, and would not result in any increases in receptor concentrations of any air contaminant in excess of the values identified in Table A-2 of Rule 1303;

(ii) Upon issuance of the permit to construct for the modification specified in clause (c)(4)(B)(i), the Executive Officer shall also issue a provisional approval of the facility's application for SOx Super Compliant status for purposes of paragraph (c)(5).

(iii) Final approval of SOx Super Compliant status shall be granted if the following provisions are met:

(I) An approved permit to operate has been issued for the modification specified in clause (c)(4)(B)(i);

(II) The facility's total annual SOx emissions as reported in its APEP report are at a level at or below the facility's compliance year 2003 Allocation as calculated pursuant to Rule 2002(e) on a permanent basis no later than the facility's 1998 compliance year;

(III) The Facility Permit holder has retired all SOx RTCs in excess of the facility's compliance year 2003 Allocation as calculated pursuant to Rule 2002(e) for each of the compliance years from the earlier of the facility's 1998 compliance year or the facility's first full compliance year with SOx Super Compliant Facility status through the facility's 2010 compliance year. The determination of the number of RTCs to be retired for each compliance year shall be based on the facility's RTC account balances as issued prior to any trading activity; and

(IV) The facility Permit holder has an approved initial source test as required under subparagraph (c)(4)(C).

(C) The Facility Permit holder shall have initial source tests to establish an alternative emission factor, for each major source to be reclassified as a SOx process unit and, if applicable, for any SOx process unit included in the application specified in clause (c)(4)(B)(i) conducted pursuant to Appendix A, Chapter 4, Subdivision E prior to January 1, 1998 for Cycle 1 facilities and prior to July 1, 1998 for Cycle 2 facilities.

(D) Requirements to maintain Super Compliant status

Super Compliant status is contingent upon the Facility Permit holder meeting at all times the following provisions:

(i) Every major SOx source at a Super Compliant SOx facility which is reclassified as a SOx process unit shall be source tested a minimum of once every twelve months in order to establish an alternative emission factor, pursuant to Appendix A, Chapter 4, Subdivision E. These source tests shall be conducted every four calendar quarters after the initial source test. If a source test is not conducted within three months after the required date, the facility shall no longer be considered Super Compliant, unless upon good cause the Executive Officer has granted a written extension of time. The source test results shall, upon approval, constitute the basis for assigning alternative emission factors which shall be used for purposes of reporting emissions and determining compliance.

(ii) The facility's total annual SOx emissions, as reported in its APEP report, shall not exceed the facility's compliance year 2003 Allocation as calculated pursuant to Rule 2002(e). If there are such exceedances for two consecutive years or in any three years, the facility shall no longer be considered Super Compliant.

(5) Any Facility Permit holder of a facility which is provisionally approved for SOx Super Compliant status shall have the option of, in lieu of following the procedures specified in clauses E(1)(d)(i), E(1)(d)(ii), and E(1)(d)(iii) of Appendix A Chapter 2, monitoring and reporting emissions pursuant to paragraph (d)(2). This option shall be available to the Facility Permit holder retroactively from July 1, 1995 if the complete application for SOx Super Compliant status is submitted on or before January 2, 1996, or retroactively from the date of application submittal if the complete application is submitted after January 2 and before December 3, 1996. If the facility is unsuccessful at obtaining final approval as a SOx Super Compliant Facility then the procedures specified in clauses E(1)(d)(i), E(1)(d)(ii), and E(1)(d)(iii) of Appendix A Chapter 2 shall apply retroactively to each major source which had been for which SOx emissions had been calculated pursuant to this subparagraph from the date the facility began monitoring and reporting major SOx source emissions as SOx process unit emissions to the date a CEMS is installed and certified.

(d) SOx Process Unit

(1) SOx process unit is one or more pieces of SOx emitting equipment which are not major SOx sources, including equipment subject to and meeting the requirements of paragraph (c)(4), or equipment designated in Rule 219 - Equipment Not Requiring a Written Permit Pursuant to Regulation II, provided that each piece of equipment in a process unit is subject to an identical emission factor as specified in paragraphs (d)(3) through (d)(5).

(2) The Facility Permit holder of a SOx process unit shall comply with paragraphs (c)(2) and (c)(3) for any SOx process unit, or elect to comply with the following:

(A) install, maintain, and operate a totalizing fuel meter and/or timer, or any device approved by the Executive Officer or designee to be equivalent in accuracy, reliability, reproducibility and timeliness, for the SOx process unit, to measure quarterly fuel usage or other applicable measured variables specified in Table 2011-1, and Appendix A, Chapter 3, Table 3-A; and

(B) report the calculated quarterly SOx emissions, for each SOx process unit as part of the Quarterly Certification of Emissions required by Rule 2004 - Requirements; and

(C) accept the emission factor as specified pursuant to paragraphs (d)(3), (d)(4), or (d)(5) in the Facility Permit, as the sole method for determining mass emissions for all purposes, including, but not limited to, determining:

(i) compliance with the annual allocations;

(ii) excess emissions;

(iii) the amount of penalties; and

(iv) fees.

(3) Starting January 1, 1994 for Cycle 1 facilities, and July 1, 1994 for Cycle 2 facilities, calculations of mass emissions from each process unit shall be based upon the emission factor specified in Rule 2002 - Allocations for Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) and Oxides of Sulfur (SOx). The emission factor for each process unit will be specified in the Facility Permit and will remain valid unless amended by the Executive Officer or designee pursuant to paragraphs (d)(4) or (d)(5).

(4) A Facility Permit holder may apply to the Executive Officer or designee to amend the emission factor in the Facility Permit for a SOx process unit at any time. If the applicant demonstrates to the Executive Officer or designee that the alternative emission factor is reliable, accurate, and representative for the purpose of calculating SOx emissions, the Executive Officer or designee will amend the Facility Permit to incorporate the alternative emission factor. The alternative emission factor shall take effect prospectively from the date the Facility Permit is amended.

(5) The Executive Officer or designee may amend the Facility Permit at any time to specify an alternative emission factor for a SOx process unit if the alternative emission factor is determined to be more reliable, accurate, or representative of that unit's emissions than the previous emission factor stated in the Facility Permit. The alternative emission factor shall take effect prospectively from the date the Facility Permit is amended.

(6) If a facility designated as a SOx Super Compliant Facility pursuant to paragraph (c)(4) exceeds its compliance year 2003 SOx Allocation as calculated pursuant to Rule 2002 subdivision (e), then the facility shall acquire, pursuant to Rule 2007, sufficient RTCs as required by Rule 2004(d).

(7) If the Executive Officer determines that a facility designated as a SOx Super Compliant Facility exceeds its compliance year 2003 SOx Allocation as calculated pursuant to Rule 2002(e) for two consecutive years or any three years, then that facility shall no longer be considered Super Compliant. If a facility loses its Super Compliant status pursuant to this paragraph or subparagraph (c)(4)(D), all sources at the facility changed from major SOx sources to SOx process units pursuant to paragraph (c)(4) shall be permanently reclassified as major SOx sources and shall become subject to the monitoring and reporting requirements of paragraphs (c)(2) and (c)(3) according to the following schedule:

(A) Within 1 month from the end of the compliance year, submit a Monitoring, Reporting, and Recordkeeping plan specifying the use of CEMS;

(B) During the shorter of the first twelve months from the end of the compliance year or until the facility complies with paragraphs (c)(2) and (c)(3), the Facility Permit holder shall comply with the monitoring requirements of paragraph (f)(3) of this rule; and

(C) Within one year from the end of the compliance year, comply with paragraphs (c)(2) and (c)(3) and have appropriate direct monitoring equipment installed and certified pursuant to Appendix A.

(e) General Requirements

(1) A Facility Permit holder shall at all times comply with all requirements specified in subdivisions (c), (d), (e), (f) and (g) for monitoring, reporting and recordkeeping, including but not limited to, measuring, reporting, timesharing, determining mass emissions, and installing, maintaining or operating monitoring, measuring, and reporting devices, in accordance with the applicable requirements set forth in Appendix A.

(2) The monitoring system and the applicable method for determination of mass emissions for each SOx source or process unit will be specified in the Facility Permit, in accordance with the applicable requirements set forth in Appendix A.

(3) The time-sharing of CEMS or equivalent devices among SOx sources may be allowed by the Executive Officer or designee in accordance with the requirements for time-sharing specified in Appendix A. In such cases, the Executive Officer or designee will specify conditions in the Facility Permit upon which time-sharing may occur.

(4) Any monitoring system certified prior to October 15, 1993 requiring a change to its full scale span range in order to meet the certification requirements set forth in Appendix A, shall be recertified by the District in accordance with the recertification requirements specified in Chapter 2, Section B.15, in
Appendix A.

(5) The Executive Officer or designee may at any time require a Facility Permit holder to use a specific monitoring and reporting system if the Executive Officer or designee determines that the elected system is inadequate to accurately determine mass emissions.

(6) The sharing of totalizing fuel meters may be allowed by the Executive Officer or designee if the process units served by the fuel meters have the same emission factor.

(7) A Facility Permit holder of any SOx major source, process unit, or piece of equipment which is exempt from permit requirements pursuant to Rule 219 - Equipment Not Requiring a Written Permit Pursuant to Regulation II, shall determine SOx emissions according to the methodology specified in Appendix A. Process units, or pieces of equipment exempt from permit requirements pursuant to Rule 219 shall report such SOx emissions in the Quarterly Certification of Emissions required by Rule 2004 - Requirements.

(f) Compliance Schedule

(1) Facilities with existing CEMS and fuel meters as of October 15, 1993 shall continue to follow recording and reporting procedures required by District rules and regulations in effect immediately prior to October 15, 1993 until December 31, 1994 for Cycle 1 facilities and June 30, 1995 for Cycle 2 facilities.

(2) Between January 1, 1994 and December 31, 1994 for Cycle 1 facilities and between July 1, 1994 and June 30, 1995 for Cycle 2 facilities, interim emission reports shall be submitted to the District by the Facility Permit holder. The interim reports shall comply with all of the data requirements of this rule and Appendix A, except that the reporting frequency shall be monthly for major sources, and quarterly for process units. Such reports shall be submitted by the tenth day of each month for major sources, and as specified in paragraph (b)(2) of Rule 2004 - Requirements, for process units.

(3) A Facility Permit holder shall install, maintain and operate a totalizing fuel meter for each major source and a totalizing fuel meter and/or timer or any device approved by the Executive Officer or designee to be equivalent in accuracy, reliability, reproducibility, and timeliness for each process unit by January 1, 1994 for Cycle 1 facilities, and July 1, 1994 for Cycle 2 facilities, except that sharing of such devices may be allowed, pursuant to paragraphs (e)(3) and (e)(6).

(4) All required or elected monitoring and reporting systems specified in subdivision (c) and (d) shall be installed no later than December 31, 1994 for Cycle 1 facilities and June 30, 1995 for Cycle 2 facilities. Monitoring, Reporting, and Recordkeeping (MRR) Forms will be provided by the Executive Officer or designee by November 15, 1993 for Cycle 1 facilities and April 15, 1994 for Cycle 2 facilities. The information required on such MRR forms shall be submitted no later than December 31, 1993 for Cycle 1 facilities and June 30, 1994 for Cycle 2 facilities.

(5) The Facility Permit holder of an existing facility which elects to enter RECLAIM or a facility which is required to enter RECLAIM shall install all required or elected monitoring, reporting and recordkeeping systems no later than 12 months after entry into RECLAIM. During the 12 months prior to the installation of the required or elected monitoring, reporting and recordkeeping systems, the Facility Permit holder shall comply with the monitoring requirements of paragraph (f)(3) of this rule.

(g) Recordkeeping

The Facility Permit holder of a major SOx source or SOx process unit shall maintain all data required to be measured or reported pursuant to this rule and Appendix A for three years after each APEP report is submitted to the District. All records shall be made available to the District staff upon request.

(h) Source Testing

(1) All required source testing shall comply with applicable District Source Test Methods 1.1, 1.2, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 3.1, 4.1, 6.1, 100.1 and 307-91; ASTM Methods D3588-91, D4891-89, D1945-81, D4294-91, and D2622-82, and EPA Method 19.

(i) Exemption

The provisions of this rule shall not apply to gas flares.

(j) Appeals

The Facility Permit holder of a facility which has established Super Compliant status shall have a maximum of ten calendar days from the receipt of notification that the facility is no longer Super Compliant in which to file an appeal of such finding to the District Hearing Board in accordance with the requirements of Rule 216.

(k) Appendix A

All provisions of Appendix A are incorporated herein by reference.

Attachment: Appendix A - "Protocol for Monitoring, Reporting and Recordkeeping for Oxides of Sulfur (SOx) Emissions." MEASURED RECORDING REPORTED REPORTINGSOURCES VARIABLES FREQUENCY DATA FREQUENCY

APPENDIX B

APPENDIX C

Proposed Rule Language for Rule 2012(Adopted October 15, 1993)(Amended March 10, 1995)

August 1, 1995

(PAR2012C)

RULE 2012. REQUIREMENTS FOR MONITORING, REPORTING, AND RECORDKEEPING FOR OXIDES OF NITROGEN (NOx) EMISSIONS

(a) Purpose

The purpose of this rule is to establish the monitoring, reporting and recordkeeping requirements for NOx emissions under the RECLAIM program.

(b) Applicability

The provisions of this rule shall apply to any RECLAIM NOx source or NOx process unit. The NOx sources and process units regulated by this rule include, but are not limited to:

(1) Major NOx Source means any of the following NOx sources, except for such NOx sources at approved Super Compliant Facilities as specified in paragraph (c)(4):

(A) any boiler, furnace, oven, dryer, heater, incinerator, test cell and any solid, liquid or gaseous fueled equipment with a maximum rated capacity:

(i) greater than or equal to 40 but less than 500 million Btu per hour and an annual heat input greater than 90 billion Btu per year; or

(ii) 500 million Btu per hour or more irrespective of annual heat input;

(B) any internal combustion engine with rated brake horsepower (bhp) greater than or equal to 1,000 bhp and operating more than 2,190 hours per year;

(C) any gas turbine rated greater than or equal to 2.9 megawatts excluding any emergency standby equipment or peaking unit;

(D) any petroleum refinery fluid catalytic cracking unit;

(E) any petroleum refinery tail gas unit;

(F) any kiln or calciner with a rated process weight greater than or equal to 10 tons per hour and processing more than 21,900 tons per year;

(G) any equipment burning or incinerating solid fuels or materials;

(H) any existing equipment using NOx CEMS or that is required to install CEMS under District rules to be implemented as of October 15, 1993;

(I) any NOx source or process unit elected by the Facility Permit holder or required by the Executive Officer or designee to be monitored with a CEMS;

(J) any NOx source or process unit for which NOx emissions reported pursuant to Rule 301 - Permit Fees, were equal to or greater than 10 tons per year for any calendar year between 1987 to 1991, inclusive, excluding NOx sources or process units listed under subparagraphs (d)(1)(A) through (d)(1)(E), and (e)(1)(A) through (e)(1)(D) and excluding any NOx source or process unit which has reduced NOx emissions to below 10 tons per year prior to
January 1, 1994.

(2) The Facility Permit holder of a major NOx source shall:

(A) install, maintain and operate a direct monitoring device for each major NOx source to continuously measure the concentration of NOx emissions and all other applicable variables specified in Table 2012-1 and Appendix A, Chapter 2, Table 2-A; or

(3) The Facility Permit holder of a major NOx source shall:

(A) install, maintain and operate a reporting device to electronically report total daily mass emissions of NOx and daily status codes to the District Central NOx Station for each major NOx source. Such data shall be reported by 5:00 p.m., of the following day. If the facility experiences a power, computer, or other system failure that prohibits the reporting of total daily mass emissions of NOx and daily status codes, the Facility Permit holder shall be granted 12 hours to submit the required report; after the 12 hour extension, emissions shall be calculated pursuant to the missing data requirements set forth in Appendix A, Chapter 2; and

(B) submit Monthly Emissions Reports aggregating NOx emissions from all major sources within 10 days following the end of each calendar month. In its Monthly Emissions Report the Facility Permit holder may correct daily transmitted data for that month provided such corrections are clearly identified and justified.

(4) Super Compliant Facilities

(A) Facilities operating at or below 2003 Allocation as of their 1994 compliance year.

(i) The Facility Permit holder of major NOx sources may reclassify its major NOx sources to large NOx sources provided that (1) the facility's annual NOx emissions as properly reported in its 1994 compliance year APEP report are already at or below the level of its compliance year 2003 Allocation as calculated pursuant to Rule 2002(e) and (2) it submits a complete application for NOx Super Compliant status on or before December 2, 1996. The Executive Officer will provisionally approve for purposes of paragraph (c)(5) such application if the Facility Permit holder has retired all NOx RTCs in excess of the facility's compliance year 2003 Allocation for each of the compliance years from the year of application submittal through the 2010 compliance year. The determination of the number of RTCs to be retired for each compliance year shall be based on the facility's RTC account balances as issued prior to any trading activity.

(ii) Final approval of NOx Super Compliant status shall be granted if the Executive Officer or designee approves the initial source test required by subparagraph (c)(4)(C) and the facility's total annual NOx emissions has not exceeded its compliance year 2003 Allocation.

(B) Facilities not operating at or below 2003 Allocation as of their 1994 compliance year.

(i) On or before December 2, 1996 the facility Permit holder of major NOx sources may submit a complete application for NOx Super Compliant status. Such application must also include a complete application for permit modifications to install NOx emission reduction equipment on the NOx sources and/or to make any other physical modifications to NOx emitting equipment. The Executive Officer shall deny the application for Super Compliant status unless the applicant demonstrates the proposed modifications would comply with all applicable District rules and would permanently reduce the facility's total annual NOx emissions to a level not to exceed its year 2003 NOx Allocation, would not result in any increases in the mass emissions of any other air contaminant or in emissions to any other media, and would not result in any increases in receptor concentrations of any air contaminant in excess of the values identified in Table A-2 of Rule 1303;

(ii) Upon issuance of the permit to construct for the modification specified in clause (c)(4)(B)(i), the Executive Officer shall also issue a provisional approval of the facility's application for NOx Super Compliant status for purposes of paragraph (c)(5).

(iii) Final approval of NOx Super Compliant status shall be granted if the following provisions are met:

(I) An approved permit to operate has been issued for the modification specified in clause (c)(4)(B)(i);

(II) The facility's total annual NOx emissions as reported in its APEP report are at a level at or below the facility's compliance year 2003 Allocation as calculated pursuant to Rule 2002(e) on a permanent basis no later than the facility's 1998 compliance year;

(III) The Facility Permit holder has retired all NOx RTCs in excess of the facility's compliance year 2003 Allocation as calculated pursuant to Rule 2002(e) for each of the compliance years from the earlier of the facility's 1998 compliance year or the facility's first full compliance year with NOx Super Compliant Facility status through the facility's 2010 compliance year. The determination of the number of RTCs to be retired for each compliance year shall be based on the facility's RTC account balances as issued prior to any trading activity; and

(IV) The facility Permit holder has an approved initial source test as required under subparagraph (c)(4)(C).

(C) The Facility Permit holder shall have initial NOx source tests conducted for each major NOx source to be reclassified as a large NOx source, as well as of each NOx source or process unit included in the application specified in clause (c)(4)(B)(i), if applicable. The initial source tests shall be conducted pursuant to Appendix A, Chapter 5, Subdivisions A and D and shall be completed prior to January 1, 1998 for Cycle 1 facilities and prior to July 1, 1998 for Cycle 2 facilities. Additionally, the Facility Permit holder shall select an equipment-specific concentration limit for each major source which will be reclassified as a large NOx source. The concentration limits selected shall be consistent with the source test results and at a level adequate to allow continuous compliance and shall be enforceable through permit conditions.

(D) Requirements to maintain Super Compliant status

Super Compliant status is contingent upon the Facility Permit holder meeting at all times the following provisions:

(i) Every major NOx source at a Super Compliant NOx facility which is reclassified as a large NOx source shall be source tested a minimum of once every six months in order to verify compliance with the equipment-specific concentration limit. The source test shall be conducted pursuant to Appendix A, Chapter 5, Subdivisions A and D and shall constitute the basis for assigning alternative emission factors. These source tests shall be conducted every two calendar quarters after the initial source test. If a source test is not conducted within three months after the required date, the facility shall no longer be considered Super Compliant, unless upon good cause the Executive Officer has granted a written extension of time. If the results of a source test indicate non-compliance with the concentration limit then the Facility Permit holder shall select a new concentration limit which is consistent with the source test results unless the Facility Permit holder demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Executive Officer or designee that no change is warranted. If all tests conducted pursuant to this paragraph over a two-year period comply with the equipment-specific concentration limit then the facility shall have the option of reducing the source test frequency to once every four quarters. If any test conducted on a four quarter cycle exceeds the concentration limit then the facility shall return to conducting source tests every two quarters.

(ii) The facility's total annual NOx emissions, as reported in its APEP report, shall not exceed the facility's compliance year 2003 Allocation as calculated pursuant to Rule 2002(e). If there are such exceedances for two consecutive years or any three years, the facility shall no longer be considered Super Compliant.

(5) The Facility Permit holder of a facility which is provisionally approved for NOx Super Compliant status shall have the option of, in lieu of following the procedures specified in clauses E(1)(d)(i), E(1)(d)(ii), and E(1)(d)(iii) of Appendix A Chapter 2, monitoring and reporting emissions pursuant to paragraph (d)(2). This option shall be available to the Facility Permit holder retroactively from July 1, 1995 if the complete application for NOx Super Compliant status is submitted on or before January 2, 1996, or retroactively from the date of application submittal if the complete application is submitted after January 2 and before December 3, 1996. If the facility is unsuccessful at obtaining designation as a NOx Super Compliant Facility then the procedures specified in clauses E(1)(d)(i), E(1)(d)(ii), and E(1)(d)(iii) of Appendix A Chapter 2 shall apply retroactively to each major source which had been for which NOx emissions had been calculated pursuant to this subparagraph from the date the facility began monitoring and reporting major NOx source emissions as large NOx source emissions to the date a CEMS is installed and certified.

(d) Large NOx Source

(1) Large NOx Source is one or more of the following NOx sources, provided that each piece of equipment in a large NOx source is subject to an identical equipment-specific emission factor, concentration limit, or emission rate as specified in subdivision (f):

(A) any boiler, furnace, oven, dryer, heater, incinerator, test cell and any liquid or gaseous fueled equipment with a maximum rated capacity:

(i) greater than or equal to 40 but less than 500 million Btu per hour and an annual heat input of 90 billion Btu per year or less; or

(ii) greater than or equal to 10 but less than 40 million Btu per hour and an annual heat input greater than 23 billion Btu per year.

(B) any internal combustion engine with rated brake horsepower:

(i) greater than or equal to 1,000 bhp and operating 2,190 hours per year or less; or

(ii) greater than or equal to 200 but less than 1,000 bhp and operating more than 2,190 hours per year;

(C) any gas turbine rated greater than or equal to 0.2 but less than 2.9 megawatts, excluding any emergency standby equipment or peaking unit;

(D) any kiln or calciner with rated process weight less than 10 tons per hour;

(E) any sulfuric acid production unit;

(F) any source at a Super Compliant Facility subject to, and meeting, the requirements of paragraph (c)(4) and which would otherwise be a major NOx source.;

(G) any NOx source or process unit elected by the Facility Permit holder or required by the Executive Officer to be monitored with a CPMS;

(H) any NOx source or process unit for which NOx emissions reported pursuant to Rule 301 - Permit Fees, were equal to or greater than 4 tons per year but less than 10 tons per year for any calendar year from 1987 to 1991, inclusive, excluding NOx sources or process units listed under subparagraphs (c)(1)(A) through (c)(1)(H), and (e)(1)(A) through (e)(1)(D).

(2) The Facility Permit holder of a large NOx source shall either comply with paragraphs (c)(2), and (c)(3) for any large source or elect to comply with the following:

(A) install, maintain and operate a totalizing fuel meter and any other device specified by the Executive Officer or designee as necessary to determine monthly fuel usage, and all other applicable variables specified in Appendix A, Chapter 3, Table 3-A; and

(B) install, maintain and operate a modem or any reporting device approved by the Executive Officer or designee to be equivalent in accuracy, reliability, and timeliness, to report total monthly mass emissions of NOx to the District Central NOx Station for each large NOx source. Such data shall be reported within 10 days following the end of each calendar month; and

(C) accept the emission factor, equipment-specific emission rate or concentration limit, as specified pursuant to subdivision (f) in the Facility Permit, as the sole method for determining mass emissions for all purposes, including, but not limited to, determining:

(i) compliance with the annual Allocations;

(ii) excess emissions;

(iii) the amount of penalties; and

(iv) fees; and

(D) monitor one or more measured variables as specified in Appendix A in order to ensure the applicability and accuracy of any equipment-specific emission rate specified in the Facility Permit; and

(E) comply with all applicable provisions of subdivision (f).

(3) If a facility designated as a NOx Super Compliant Facility pursuant to paragraph (c)(4) exceeds its compliance year 2003 NOx Allocation as calculated pursuant to Rule 2002 subdivision (e), then the facility shall acquire, pursuant to Rule 2007, sufficient RTCs as required by Rule 2004(d).

(4) If the Executive Officer determines that a facility designated as a NOx Super Compliant Facility exceeds its compliance year 2003 NOx Allocation as calculated pursuant to Rule 2002(e) for two consecutive years or any three years, then that facility shall no longer be considered Super Compliant. If a facility loses its Super Compliant status pursuant to this paragraph or subparagraph (c)(4)(D), all sources at the facility changed from major NOx sources to large NOx sources pursuant to paragraph (c)(4) shall be permanently reclassified as major NOx sources and shall become subject to the monitoring and reporting requirements of paragraphs (c)(2) and (c)(3) according to the following schedule:

(A) Within 1 month from the end of the compliance year, submit a Monitoring, Reporting, and Recordkeeping plan specifying the use of CEMS;

(C) Within one year from the end of the compliance year, comply with paragraphs (c)(2) and (c)(3) and have appropriate direct monitoring equipment installed and certified pursuant to Appendix A.

(e) NOx Process Unit

(1) NOx Process Unit means one or more of the following NOx emitting equipment, provided that each piece of equipment in a process unit is subject to an identical emission factor or equipment-specific or category-specific emission rate as specified in subdivision (f):

(A) any boiler, furnace, oven, dryer, heater, incinerator, test cell and any liquid- or gaseous-fueled equipment with maximum rated capacity:

(i) greater than or equal to 10 but less than 40 million Btu per hour and an annual heat input of 23 billion Btu per year or less; or

(ii) greater than or equal to 2 but less than 10 million Btu per hour.

(B) any internal combustion engine with rated brake horsepower:

(i) greater than or equal to 200 but less than 1,000 bhp and operating 2,190 hours per year or less; or

(ii) greater than or equal to 50 but less than 200 bhp.

(D) any emergency standby equipment or peaking unit ;

(E) any other NOx source that is not a large or major NOx source or equipment designated in Rule 219 - Equipment Not Requiring a Written Permit Pursuant to Regulation II.

(2) The Facility Permit holder of a NOx process unit shall comply with paragraph (c)(2), and (c)(3), or paragraph (d)(2), for any process unit, or elect to comply with the following:

(A) install, maintain and operate a totalizing fuel meter and/or timer or any device approved by the Executive Officer or designee to be equivalent in accuracy, reliability, reproducibility, and timeliness for the NOx process unit, to measure quarterly fuel usage or other applicable variables specified in Table 2012-1, and Appendix A, Chapter 4, Table 4-A; and

(B) report the calculated quarterly NOx emissions for each NOx process unit as part of the Quarterly Certification of Emissions required by Rule 2004 - Requirements; and

(C) accept the emission factor or equipment-specific or category-specific emission rate, as specified pursuant to subdivision (f) in the Facility Permit, as the sole method for determining mass emissions for all purposes, including, but not limited to, determining:

(i) compliance with the annual Allocations;

(ii) excess emissions;

(iii) the amount of penalties; and

(iv) fees; and

(D) comply with all applicable provisions of subdivision (f).

(f) Permit Conditions for Large Sources and Process Units

(1) Starting January 1, 1994 for Cycle 1 facilities and starting July 1, 1994 for Cycle 2 facilities, calculations of mass emissions from each large source or process unit shall be based upon the emission factor specified in Rule 2002 - Allocations for Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) and Oxides of Sulfur (SOx). The emission factor for each large source or process unit will be specified in the Facility Permit, and will remain valid unless amended by the Executive Officer pursuant to paragraphs (f)(2), (f)(3) or (f)(4).

(2) On and after January 1, 1995 for Cycle 1 facilities and July 1, 1995 for Cycle 2 facilities, the Facility Permit holder of a large source shall:

(A) comply at all times with an equipment-specific NOx concentration limit in ppm measured over any continuous 60 minutes as specified in the Facility Permit for that source; according to the requirements specified in Appendix A, Chapter 3 (large sources); or

(B) establish an equipment-specific emission rate that is reliable, accurate and representative of that source's emissions, according to the requirements specified in Appendix A, Chapter 6.

(3) A Facility Permit holder may apply to the Executive Officer or designee to amend the concentration limit or equipment-specific emission rate for a large source, or emission factor or category-specific emission rate for a process unit, in the Facility Permit, at any time. If the applicant demonstrates to the Executive Officer or designee that the alternative equipment-specific or category-specific emission rate is reliable, accurate and representative for the purpose of calculating NOx emissions, the Executive Officer or designee will amend the Facility Permit to incorporate the alternative equipment-specific or category-specific emission rate. No demonstration will be required to amend the Facility Permit to incorporate the alternative concentration limit, provided the large source complies with that limit in ppm over any continuous 60 minutes. The alternative concentration limit or equipment-specific emission rate for a large source, or the alternative emission factor or category-specific emission rate for a process unit, shall take effect prospectively from the date the Facility Permit is amended.

(4) The Executive Officer or designee may amend the Facility Permit at any time to specify an alternative equipment-specific emission rate for a large source, or an alternative emission factor or category-specific emission rate for a process unit, if the alternative emission rate or emission factor is determined to be more reliable, accurate, or representative of that source's or unit's emissions than the previous emission factor, or concentration limit or emission rate specified in the Facility Permit. The alternative concentration limit or equipment-specific emission rate for a large source, or alternative emission factor or category-specific emission rate for a process unit shall take effect prospectively from the date the Facility Permit is amended.

(g) General Requirements

(1) A Facility Permit holder shall at all times comply with all requirements specified in subdivisions (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h), and (i) for monitoring, reporting and recordkeeping, including but not limited to, measuring, reporting, time-sharing, determining mass emissions, and installing, maintaining or operating monitoring, measuring and reporting devices, in accordance with the applicable requirements set forth in Appendix A.

(2) The monitoring system and the applicable method for determination of mass emissions for each NOx source or process unit will be specified in the Facility Permit, in accordance with the applicable requirements set forth in Appendix A.

(3) The time-sharing of CEMS among NOx sources may be allowed by the Executive Officer or designee in accordance with the requirements for time-sharing specified in Appendix A. In such cases, the Executive Officer or designee will specify conditions in the Facility Permit upon which time-sharing may occur.

(4) Any monitoring system certified prior to October 15, 1993 requiring a change to its full scale span range in order to meet the certification requirements set forth in Appendix A, shall be recertified by the Executive Officer or designee in accordance with the recertification requirements specified in Chapter 2, Section B.15, in Appendix A.

(5) The Executive Officer or designee may at any time require a Facility Permit holder to use a specific monitoring and reporting system if it is determined that the elected system is inadequate to accurately determine mass emissions.

(6) The sharing of totalizing fuel meters may be allowed by the Executive Officer or designee if the fuel meter serves large sources or process units which have the same emission factor or concentration limit or emission rate. The sharing of totalizing fuel meters shall not be allowed if the fuel meters measure annual heat input as specified in clauses (d)(1)(A)(i) and (e)(1)(A)(i).

(7) A Facility Permit holder of any NOx source, process unit, or piece of equipment which is exempt from permit requirements pursuant to Rule 219 - Equipment Not Requiring A Written Permit Pursuant to Regulation II, shall determine NOx emissions according to the methodology specified in Appendix A. Process units or equipment exempt from permit requirements pursuant to Rule 219 shall report such NOx emissions in the Quarterly Certification of Emissions required by Rule 2004 - Requirements.

(h) Compliance Schedule

(1) Facilities with existing CEMS and fuel meters as of October 15, 1993 shall continue to follow recording and reporting procedures required by District rules and regulations in effect immediately prior to October 15, 1993, until December 31, 1994 for Cycle 1 facilities and June 30, 1995 for Cycle 2 facilities.

(2) Between January 1, 1994 and December 31, 1994 for Cycle 1 facilities and between July 1, 1994 and June 30, 1995 for Cycle 2 facilities, interim emission reports shall be submitted to the District by the Facility Permit holder. The interim reports shall comply with all of the requirements of this rule and Appendix A, except that the reporting frequency shall be monthly for major and large sources and quarterly for process units. Such reports shall be submitted by the tenth day of each month for major and large sources and as specified in paragraph (b)(2) of Rule 2004 - Requirements, for process units.

(3) A Facility Permit holder shall install, maintain and operate a totalizing fuel meter for each major source and a totalizing fuel meter and/or timer or any device approved by the Executive Officer or designee to be equivalent in accuracy, reliability, reproducibility, and timeliness for each large source or process unit by January 1, 1994 for Cycle 1 facilities and July 1, 1994 for Cycle 2 facilities, except that sharing of such devices may be allowed pursuant to paragraph (g)(6).

(4) All required or elected monitoring and reporting systems specified in subdivisions (c), (d), (e), (f), and (g) shall be installed no later than December 31, 1994 for Cycle 1 facilities and June 30, 1995 for Cycle 2 facilities. Monitoring, Reporting, and Recordkeeping (MRR) Forms will be provided by the Executive Officer or designee by November 15, 1993 for Cycle 1 facilities and April 15, 1994 for Cycle 2 facilities. The information required on such MRR forms shall be submitted no later than December 31, 1993 for Cycle 1 facilities and June 30, 1994 for Cycle 2 facilities.

(5) The Facility Permit holder of an existing facility which elects to enter RECLAIM or a facility which is required to enter RECLAIM shall install all required or elected monitoring, reporting and recordkeeping systems no later than 12 months after entry into RECLAIM. During the 12 months prior to the installation of the required or elected monitoring, reporting and recordkeeping systems the Facility Permit holder shall comply with the monitoring requirements of paragraph (h)(3) of this rule.

(i) Recordkeeping

The Facility Permit holder of a major or large NOx source or NOx process unit shall maintain all monitoring data required to be measured or reported pursuant to this rule and Appendix A for three years after each APEP report is submitted to the District. All records shall be made available to the District staff upon request.

(j) Source Testing

(1) All required source testing shall comply with applicable District Source Test Methods 1.1, 1.2, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 3.1, 4.1, 7.1, 100.1, and EPA
Method 19.

(2) Every large NOx source shall be source tested no later than December 31, 1996 for Cycle 1 facilities and June 30, 1997 for Cycle 2 facilities, and every three years thereafter. Such source test results shall be submitted according to the schedule prescribed by APEP. In lieu of submitting the first source test report, the Facility Permit holder may submit the results of a source test not more than three years old which meets applicable requirements of this rule when conducted.

(3) An alternative emission rate for process units shall comply with source testing guidelines to be established by the Executive Officer or designee by March 31, 1994.

(k) Exemption

The provisions of this rule shall not apply to gas flares.

(l) Appeals

(m) Appendix A

All provisions of Appendix A are incorporated herein by reference.

Attachment: Appendix A - "Protocol for Monitoring, Reporting and Recordkeeping for Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) Emissions."2012-1SOURCESMEASURED RECORDING REPORTED REPORTINGSOURCES VARIABLES FREQUENCY DATA FREQUENCY

This page updated: July 09, 2015
URL: ftp://lb1/hb/1995/August/950804.html