September 8, 1995

South Coast Air Quality

Management District Board

This proposed Rule will implement Point X of the Business Clean Air Partnership Action Plan, which seeks to establish a level playing field for all businesses by encouraging companies operating without required air quality permits to become legal. As an incentive for these companies to comply, the rule would establish a one-time, 6-month amnesty period during which facilities that voluntarily apply for permits for existing equipment would not be subject to any late fees, civil or criminal penalties for having violated the requirement to have a permit.

The amnesty shall extend to violations of AQMD permitting rules (Rule 201 - Permit to Construct, and Rule 203 - Permit to Operate). All other AQMD, federal, and state permitting rules and regulations will still apply.

The amnesty is primarily intended for small to medium-sized businesses, rather than major sources which are more likely to be aware of the permitting requirements. Therefore, the amnesty would apply to any facility that emits less than 10 tons/year of any criteria pollutant.

The amnesty would not apply to violations discovered by District inspectors during inspections initiated by the District. There is no intent to reduce the AQMD's inspection and compliance efforts during the amnesty period.

AQMD staff has reviewed proposed Rule 310 and has determined that it is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 (b)(3), in that staff has determined with certainty that there is no possibility that proposed Rule 310 may have a significant

SCAQMD Board -2- September 8, 1995

effect on the environment. In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15321 is applicable in that the purpose of proposed Rule 310 is to assist the District in enforcing its requirements that sources be permitted by the District.

Proposed Rule 310 may result in savings to affected facilities from not having to pay penalties or late permit processing fees. The proposed rule is not expected to result in any additional costs to facilities participating in the amnesty program and is not expected to have any adverse socioeconomic impacts.

On October 14, 1994, the Governing Board adopted a resolution that requires staff to address whether proposed rules being considered for adoption are being presented in rank order by cost-effectiveness as defined in the 1994 AQMP. Proposed Rule 310 is not a control measure in the 1994 AQMP. Therefore, no cost-effectiveness value was developed for this proposed rule.

THEREFORE IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT YOUR BOARD

--Adopt Rule 310 -- Amnesty for Unpermitted Equipment.

Respectfully,

James M. Lents, Ph.D.

Executive Officer

Attachments

LVB:DM

(310F95)