BOARD MEETING DATE: July 8, 2005
AGENDA NO. 26

Stationary Source Committee

SYNOPSIS:

The Stationary Source Committee met Friday, June 24, 2005. Following is a summary of that meeting. The next meeting will be July 22, 2005 at 10:30 a.m., in Conference Room CC8.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Receive and file.

Dennis Yates, Acting Chair
Stationary Source Committee

Attendance

The meeting began at 10:30 a.m. Present were Dr. Burke (attended by videoteleconference), Jane Carney, Acting Chair (appointed by Dr. Burke), Dennis Yates and Gary Ovitt. Absent was Ronald Loveridge.

INFORMATIONAL ITEMS

1. Rule 1113 – Architectural Coatings Status Report
   Lee Lockie, Director of Area Sources, presented a status report on the preparation of the Annual Report on Rule 1113 Implementation. She explained that the full report will be presented to the Governing Board once ongoing laboratory testing is completed and adequate time has been allowed for public comment. Staff intends for the report to be presented at the October 2005 meeting of the Board.
    
   Ms. Lockie briefly summarized the findings of a number of technology assessments to date of specific coating categories where the VOC content limit will be lowered on July 1, 2006. The technology assessments included laboratory and field exposure testing under contract to AQMD and other agencies who are studying coatings, as well as on-the-shelf surveys, CARB manufacturer surveys, Internet-based data searches and in-situ coating performance evaluations at a variety of construction projects in the South Coast air basin.
    
   Ms. Lockie discussed the three phases of ongoing laboratory testing being performed under the AQMD contract with the University of Missouri – Rolla Coatings Institute. This testing is evaluating performance characteristics of the architectural coatings that have future effective limits in July of next year. She concluded by stating that the Technical Advisory Committee, comprising representatives of the coatings industry, contractors and academia, has been consulted prior to the start of each phase of the project to receive their comments on coating selection, test protocols and interpretation of results.
    
   Ms. Lockie concluded the presentation by stating that the ongoing coating technology assessments by AQMD staff continue to support the future effective limits in the rule.
    
   There were no public comments received at the meeting.
    
   Staff distributed a copy of the Draft Status Report which is available on the AQMD website.
    
2. Implementation of SB 656 – Measures to Reduce Particulate Matter
   Elaine Chang, DEO, Planning, Rules and Area Sources, presented this item. Senate Bill 656 enacted in 2003 aims to achieve near-term reductions in PM10 and PM2.5. Pursuant to SB 656, CARB has developed a list of the most readily available, feasible, and cost-effective control measures that could be employed by air districts to reduce PM. The list of control measures (adopted by CARB in November 2004) is based on rules, regulations, and programs adopted by CARB or local air districts in California as of January 1, 2004. SB 656 calls for local air districts to identify PM control measures appropriate for local implementation from the list compiled by CARB, and also requires air districts to adopt implementation schedules for any newly identifiable measures by July 31, 2005.
    
   For the majority of the stationary and area source categories, AQMD has been identified as having the most stringent rules in California. Considering the extensive PM control strategy already employed by the AQMD (including existing rules and 2003 AQMP control measures), staff has identified only four control measures on the CARB list that may be applicable to the AQMD relative to SB 656 requirements. While the AQMD has previously adopted comprehensive rules regulating the sources subject to three of these control measures, staff has identified requirements in other districts’ rules for these particular equipment categories that appear to be more stringent than those in AQMD’s existing rules. These categories include:
   1) boilers, steam generators, and process heaters (Rule 1146); 2) gas turbines (Rule 1134); and 3) organic liquid storage (Rule 463). Analyses of more stringent requirements for Rule 1134 and Rule 463 within the context of AQMD’s existing rules and the nature of sources within the South Coast District indicate that further reductions would not be feasible or cost-effective for sources within the jurisdiction of the AQMD. The applicability and feasibility of lower emission limits for Rule 1146 (Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Industrial, Institutional and Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters) will be evaluated during the rule amendment process currently scheduled for adoption in October 2005. In addition, staff identified a control measure for wood-burning fireplaces/heaters, but a similar control measure is already scheduled for adoption in 2005. Consequently, pursuant to the guidance in SB 656 and the upcoming rule development schedule, there is no need to have an SB 656 implementation schedule for additional measures.
    
3. Status Report on PAR 1118 – Refinery Flares
   Larry Bowen, Planning and Rules Manager, presented this item. Rule 1118 controls emissions from refinery flares. As a result of the existing rule, refinery flare emissions have been significantly reduced voluntarily. However, the proposed rule amendment is to ensure those reductions remain permanent and that further emission reductions are achieved. The proposed rule will require that refinery flaring occur only under certain situations, such as emergencies and that when these significant events do occur that a root cause analysis is conducted to identify the cause of the event and to identify steps to be taken to prevent future occurrences. Additional requirements include implementation of a flare management plan to ensure flaring emissions are minimized or, for those facilities that have already minimized flaring, an enforceable emissions cap. The proposal also includes an industry-wide emissions cap with mitigation fees if the cap is exceeded and enhanced recordkeeping, monitoring and reporting requirements.
    
   The rule development is of significant interest to both the industry and the environmental community and there have been numerous group and individual meetings to address numerous issues. Staff will continue to work with all interested parties on the outstanding issues.
    
4. Update of Evaluation of Federal PSD vs. Local Attainment
   Mohsen Nazemi, Assistant Director of Engineering & Compliance, gave a brief update on the status of staff’s activities on this topic. Mohsen indicated at the Board meeting a couple of months ago, in response to an environmental group’s objection to a permit modification for a ConnocoPhillips Refinery project, the AQMD Board asked staff to look into what, if any, type of program is required to address New Source Review for attainment pollutants now in light of the changes made to the federal PSD standard under NSR Reform (e.g., U.S. EPA has withdrawn the AQMD’s delegation for implementation of PSD and our Regulation XVII is no longer in effect). Mohsen indicated that the AQMD is presently designated as attainment with federal ambient air quality standards with respect to nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and sulfur dioxide (SO2), as well as lead. The AQMD has also recently requested U.S. EPA to designate South Coast Air Basin attainment with respect to federal carbon monoxide (CO) standards. Both NOx and SOx, however, are presently being regulated under our NSR rules as precursors to ozone (NOx only) and PM10 (NOx & SOx).
    
   Mohsen indicated that staff is presently evaluating and analyzing the type of program necessary to prevent any significant deterioration with regard to attainment pollutants. Staff’s initial thinking is that any such program, if adopted, should apply to any attainment criteria pollutant that is not regulated as a precursor to a non-attainment pollutant under our NSR rule. For such attainment criteria pollutants, staff is looking at some of the same requirements as in NSR, such as BACT and modeling to make sure that emissions of such pollutants from new and modified sources are controlled through application of best available controls, and that based on modeling any such project does not create a new violation of the ambient standards for attainment pollutants. Offsets may not be required, however, since neither the federal PSD, nor AQMD’s Regulation XVII have any offset requirements as part of the PSD regulations. Mohsen also indicated that with respect to toxics, AQMD believes that our Rule 1401’s risk based approach is an appropriate means to deal with toxic compounds. However since environmental groups have focused on the mass emissions triggers of the federal PSD and AQMD’s Regulation XVII, staff’s initial thinking on toxics is to evaluate the use of similar mass thresholds for toxics to trigger requirements such as BACT and modeling significance thresholds.
   
   However, Mohsen indicated that, AQMD staff would like to further evaluate the need for any attainment pollutants New Source Review program and bring back any such proposal to the Stationary Source Committee, and to publicly workshop and ultimately present it to the Board for their consideration. Ms. Carney asked Mohsen about another question that was also raised at the Board meeting regarding whether or not we comply with state law. Mohsen responded that staff believes that we are in compliance with state law. SB 288, as adopted into state law, would not allow a district to relax their NSR rules. However, since Regulation XVII is not in effect due to U.S. EPA’s withdrawal of delegation, and any new rules that AQMD adopts for attainment pollutants would be new requirements to further regulate attainment pollutants, staff does not see a conflict with state law. Mohsen further stated that staff will update the Stationary Source Committee about the progress on this topic as further analysis of attainment pollutants New Source Review is completed.

PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD

Mr. Howard Berman, Environmental Mediation, Inc., addressed the Committee to report that Executive Officer Barry Wallerstein met with Cal Portland regarding their concern on proposed Rule 1156 – PM₁₀ Emission Reduction from Cement Manufacturing Facilities, and that meaningful discussions were continuing.

Committee Member Jane Carney left the meeting during Mr. Berman’s comments, due to a possible conflict of interest. Inland Concrete Enterprises, Inc., Delilah Properties, Maruhachi Ceramics of America, Inc., and J.R. Pipeline are sources of income for her.

WRITTEN REPORTS

All written reports were acknowledged by the Committee.

The meeting was adjourned at 11:45 a.m.

Attachments (DOC* 51kb)

June 24, 2005 Committee Agenda (without its attachments)

*

/ / /