BOARD MEETING DATE: June 4, 2004
AGENDA NO. 32
Stationary Source Committee
SYNOPSIS:
The Stationary Source Committee met Friday, May 28, 2004. Following is a summary of that meeting. The next meeting will be June 25, at 10:30 a.m., in Conference Room CC8.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Receive and file.
William Craycraft, Acting Chair
Stationary Source Committee
Attendance
The meeting began at 10:30 a.m. Present were William Craycraft, Acting Chair, Jane Carney, Dennis Yates and Bill Postmus by Videoteleconference. Absent was Ronald Loveridge.
ACTION ITEM
- Request for Approval of Appointment of Alternate Member to the Home Rule Advisory Group
Dr. Laki Tisopulos presented this action item. Karen Higgins was approved as an alternate for the City of Los Angeles by the committee.
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
- Rule 1113 – Architectural Coatings
- Rule 1157 – PM10 Emission Reductions from Aggregate Operations
- Status Report on Rule 2015 – Backstop Provisions
- Best Available Control Technology (BACT) Guidelines Report and Amendments
Howard Lange, Technology Advancement Office Air Quality Engineer II, presented the BACT semi-annual report to the Board and proposed changes to Part D of the BACT Guidelines. The semi-annual report includes 16 new listings for the Part B (major sources) portion of the guidelines covering a variety of NOx, PM and VOC emission sources. The proposed changes to Part D (minor sources) make several minor administrative changes, revise the petroleum solvent dry cleaner BACT to be consistent with current permitting practice, and make the large stationary engine BACT more stringent based on an achieved in practice, and cost-effectiveness determination, which lowers the NOx limits by more than one half of the existing BACT limit (from 21 ppm to 9 ppm) and adds BACT limits for VOC (25 ppm) and NH3 (10 ppm).
Larry Bowen, Planning and Rules Manager, presented this item. Rule 1113 sets coating VOC limits for architectural coatings and was last amended on December 5, 2003. Just prior to the hearing U.S. EPA reiterated concerns with provisions of the Alternative Compliance Option (ACO) in the rule and indicated that some of those concerns may affect the SIP approvability of the rule. At the adoption hearing the Executive Officer committed that staff would work with U.S. EPA to resolve the issues and return to the Board with appropriate amendments to Rule 1113 before the end of 2004. The specific issues included means to address potential shortfalls in emission reductions from ACOs, Executive Officer discretion, violation of ACOs, distinguishing volumes for sell-through, formulations and definition of varnish. Since then the staff has been working with staff from U.S. EPA Region IX, CARB and the industry and has developed a rule amendment that resolves all of EPA’s SIP approvability concerns. Staff is asking the Board in June to set a July hearing for that amendment.
Dr. Julia Lester, Planning and Rules Supervisor, gave a status report on rule development for Proposed Rule (PR) 1157 – PM10 Emission Reductions from Aggregate and Related Operations. The purpose of PR1157 is to partially implement 2003 AQMP control measure #BCM-08 (PR1156, PM10 Emission reductions from Cement Manufacturing Operations will implement the remaining portion of #BCM-08) and to reduce the nuisance and rule violation potential at these sources, which has occurred at some sites in the Irwindale area. Affected sources include aggregate facilities (~20), concrete batching plants (~95), hot mix asphalt plants (~6), and mineral/cement end user plants (~195). The current emission inventory (0.9tpd PM10) is based on emissions from the larger sources and their permitted equipment. Staff has distributed a survey to improve emission estimates from all types of facilities and previously uninventoried sources such as unpaved roads. Dr. Lester described PM10 sources and related control concepts at these types of plants. She also described two special control concepts: 1) for facilities with more than 300 diesel truck trips per day, ARB-certified particulate traps would be required for trucks in excess of 300 trips per day; and 2) bump-up provisions for facilities with more than 3 emission-related NOVs in 3 years that would require that PM10 sources at the existing facility meet the same PR1157 requirements for new sources. All of these rule concepts were released to industry on May 14, 2004.
The initial PR1157 Working Group meeting on May 20, 2004 lasted over 3 hours and was very productive. Industry had technical concerns about requiring covered conveyers at new sources and were adamantly opposed to the diesel trap and bump-up provisions. Staff received many comments on the other control options that it will consider when preparing draft rule language. After briefly discussing the status of PR1156 (the inventory and control technology assessment is underway), the presentation ended with the proposed schedule, including the anticipated September 2004 Board consideration date for adoption of PR1157.
Jill Whynot, Planning and Rules Manager, gave an update on proposed amendments to Rule 2015 – Backstop Measures. There is a public hearing scheduled for adopting these amendments on June 4, 2004. The rule is being amended to be consistent with an U.S. EPA policy regarding breakdown emissions and to avoid disapproval of previous RECLAIM amendments. There will be other amendments to RECLAIM later this summer.
The proposed Rule 2015 amendments will incorporate, as part of each annual audit, an accounting of any breakdown emissions that were not covered by facility RTCs. This situation has never occurred to date. If the total unmitigated emissions are less than the unused RTCs at the end of the year, the difference needs to be made up.
The rule provides two options. Staff changed their original recommendation after comments from stakeholders. Option A, the staff recommendation, would deduct RTCs from the facilities that contributed to the problem. Option B would reduce all RTC holdings, which staff first recommended because it is closer to the original rule design. Under either option, the Executive Officer could choose to obtain and retire RTCs. Either option is acceptable to U.S. EPA, and staff is not aware of any stakeholder concerns.
Ron Wilkniss representing WSPA, and Curt Coleman representing CMA expressed support for the staff proposal for Option A.
WRITTEN REPORTS
All written reports were acknowledged by the Committee.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:10 a.m.
May 28, 2004 Committee Agenda (without its attachments)
/ / /