BOARD MEETING DATE: June 3, 2005
AGENDA NO. 32

Stationary Source Committee

SYNOPSIS:

The Stationary Source Committee met Friday, May 27, 2005. Following is a summary of that meeting. The next meeting will be June 24, at 10:30 a.m., in Conference Room CC8.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Receive and file.

Ronald O. Loveridge, Chair
Stationary Source Committee

Attendance

The meeting began at 10:40 a.m. Present were Chairman Ronald Loveridge and Dennis Yates. Absent were Gary Ovitt and Jane Carney.

INFORMATIONAL ITEMS

1. Proposed Rule 1156 – PM10 Emission Reductions from Cement Manufacturing Facilities
   Lee Lockie, Director of Area Sources, provided a summary presentation of staff’s efforts to develop Proposed Rule 1156. The rule is being developed pursuant to 2003 AQMP Control Measure BCM-08 to require further particulate emission reductions from process equipment and fugitive dust sources. The rule affects two facilities: California Portland Cement Company and TXI Riverside Cement. Both facilities are located in western San Bernardino and Riverside counties, respectively, and located in close proximity to the Rubidoux monitoring station. The rule development process has included an industry survey, facility visits, monthly working group meetings, and extensive technical research and vendor communications. The rule would establish requirements for sources such as process equipment vented to air pollution control equipment, material handling and storage, and paved and unpaved roads. The rule is currently scheduled for consideration by the Board at its September 2005 meeting.
    
   Comments were received from two representatives of California Portland Cement Company. Mr. Howard Berman raised four key concerns. He believes that the rule is imposing facility-specific requirements relative to bag house standards that would best be handled in a general rule applicable to more than one industry. He also discussed that there is an overlap of Proposed Rule 1156 with applicable requirements of other rules, such as Rule 1157 (he stated that he would provide more detailed comments at a later date). Third, he claimed that the proposed rule applies more stringent requirements on an existing facility than is placed on a brand new facility subject to BACT. Lastly, he stated the environmental assessment will result in significant comments based on the current version of the rule, which will hopefully change through continuing dialogue. A request was made to delay the release of the CEQA document. Mr. Curt Coleman raised concerns regarding the legal issues surrounding more stringent standards than BACT. Specifically, he believes that state law prohibits implementing a BACT-type standard under a retrofit regulatory requirement. Secondly, he disagrees with staff’s argument relative to one basis of the rule being that of the proximity of both cement facilities to the Rubidoux monitoring station. He stated that the wind data does not support such a claim and that a direct link has not been established relative to the facility’s impact on the area surrounding the station.
    
2. Proposed Amended Rule 403 – Fugitive Dust Status Report
   Lee Lockie, Director of Area Sources, provided a summary of modifications to staff’s proposal for the public hearing. Comments received on the Draft Environmental Assessment prepared for the proposed amendments indicate that adjustments to the emission factor used to estimate PM10 emissions for weed abatement may be necessary. This will require time to evaluate the comments and prepare the appropriate CEQA analysis, as necessary. AQMD staff is proposing to delay the proposed amendments to the Rule 403 weed abatement provisions to allow such analysis. Removal of this portion of PAR 403 does not affect the emission reductions or cost effectiveness estimates for the remaining proposed amendments to implement Conservation Management Practices at livestock facilities in conjunction with SB 700. Proposed amendments to Rule 403 are anticipated to be brought back to the Board for consideration at its November 2005 meeting.
    
   Comments supporting the bifurcation were received from Lynn Nunney, representing himself and Friends of the Riverside Hills. Mr. Nunney commented that discing promulgates the luxuriant growth of weeds, thereby creating a larger fire risk, and that more should be done to promote mowing as the preferred method of weed abatement. Concerns were raised relative to enforcement of current provisions of Rule 403 relative to weed abatement and that more needs to be done to inform the public and agencies regarding the provisions of the current rule. Also that weed abatement should be conducted during times of the year when weeds are green, thereby lowering the fire risk, and alternative technologies to weed removal should be investigated.
    
   Board Members Loveridge and Yates suggested that staff conduct case studies to further investigate the relative benefits of mowing over discing for weed abatement.
    
   On an unrelated topic, Scott Cohen of West Coast Environmental, commented that consideration should be given, at this time of amending Rule 403, to clarifying provisions of the rule relative to the upwind/downwind monitoring requirements to provide additional guidance for conducting such testing, so as to provide reliable results. Laki Tisopulos, Assistant Deputy Executive Officer, stated that this matter is best addressed through the Rule 403 implementation task force.
    
3. Public School Compliance Survey
   Carol Coy, Deputy Executive Officer of Engineering & Compliance, presented a brief overview of the results of a compliance survey conducted at approximately 1,200 public (K-12) schools in the Los Angeles county area. The survey found that although most elementary schools have no AQMD permit-required equipment, approximately 16% (174) of the schools and 50% of the school districts have compliance problems, most of which are associated with Rule 1146.2 (small boilers and water heaters). This equipment needs registration or permitting and retrofit or replacement. Although during the compliance survey inspections, no enforcement notices were generally issued, after a second school district contact, it is now proposed to issue Notices of Violation as prescribed by state law and policy. This is in conjunction with implementation of a District Prosecutor Enforcement Guideline that would suspend the civil penalty pending compliance within a set time period or stipulated order for abatement plus the attendance of the school district staff member responsible for environmental compliance at an AQMD training course on public school air quality compliance. Ultimately, the penalty would be waived upon achieving compliance. Committee Members acknowledged the proposed plan and Ms. Coy clarified that staff would be re-contacting the school district with specific findings of the survey before notice issuance.
    
4. Inter-District Transfer of ERCs to Antelope Valley (AVAQMD)
   Mohsen Nazemi, Assistant Director of Engineering & Compliance, gave a brief presentation regarding Lockheed Martin’s request to transfer ERCs generated as a result of the shutdown of their Burbank facility in SCAQMD in 1990 to their Palmdale facility located in AVAQMD. Specifically, their request is for the transfer of 124 pounds of VOC per day, 5 pounds of NOx per day, 1 pound of CO per day, and 3 pounds of PM10 per day. Lockheed Martin previously requested transfer of the same NOx, CO, and PM10 ERCs, but the AQMD Governing Board disapproved the request in November 2000. The AQMD Governing Board has, however, approved four other previous requests for VOC inter-district ERC transfers:
    

   Year	Request
   1999	High Desert Power, 1,620 lb VOC per day to MDAQMD
   2000	Blythe Energy, 1,771 lb VOC per day to MDAQMD
   2000	Northrop, 150 lb VOC per day to AVAQMD
   2000	Lockheed Martin, 148 lb VOC per day to AVAQMD

Mr. Nazemi also indicated that state law and AQMD rules, as contained in both California Health and Safety Code Section 40709.6 and AQMD Rule 1309(i), require the following criteria for approval for inter-district ERC transfers:

• Transfer from an upwind district with worse nonattainment status;
• Downwind district is "overwhelmingly impacted" by emissions transported from the upwind district; and
• Governing Boards of both districts approve the transfer considering impacts on air quality, public health, and regional economy.

The requested VOC, NOx, and CO ERCs satisfy the first of these criteria because SCAQMD is in a worse ozone and carbon monoxide non-attainment status than AVAQMD (VOC and NOx are ozone precursors). However, AQMD and AVAQMD are in the same (and only) nonattainment status for PM10, so the requested PM10 transfer does not satisfy the first of the criteria identified above. Similarly, CARB has designated AVAQMD as overwhelmingly impacted by transport of ozone and ozone precursors from SCAQMD but has not made such findings for other pollutants. Therefore, only VOC and NOx satisfy the second criterion. The staff evaluation indicates that approval of the VOC transfer would satisfy the third criterion but approval of NOx would not. Therefore, the staff recommendation is to approve the requested VOC ERC transfer and to disapprove the requested NOx, CO, and PM10 ERC transfers.

During public comments, Mr. George Jung (Lockheed Martin Air Quality Specialist) disagreed with the staff evaluation of potential impacts on the local economy because he believes AVAQMD and AQMD are parts of the same local economy. Therefore, economic impacts in both districts should be considered together. He also expressed the need for the requested NOx and PM10 ERCs as offsets for pending projects. Finally, Mr. Jung explained that ERCs are simply unavailable in the AVAQMD—the only ERC holders are Lockheed Martin and Northrop, both of which need all that they hold. Marci Stepman (Lockheed Martin’s consultant) spoke in support of Mr. Jung’s position.

Mayor Loveridge expressed his understanding of Lockheed Martin’s position regarding the transfer of NOx ERCs. He expressed the belief that Lockheed Martin is an important employer in the region and that approval of the requested ERC transfers could help create good jobs.

In response to Mayor Loveridge’s comments, Mr. Nazemi stated that the staff recommendation for disapproval of the requested NOx ERC transfer is based on staff’s evaluation of impacts on the regional economy. Therefore, if the Governing Board decides that approval would not result in an adverse impact on the regional economy, the NOx transfer request would satisfy the other approval criteria identified above. Mayor Loveridge requested Lockheed Martin to submit a letter to the AQMD Governing Board explaining their position prior to the June Board meeting.

WRITTEN REPORTS

All written reports were acknowledged by the Committee.

The meeting was adjourned at 12:05 p.m.

Attachments

May 27, 2005 Committee Agenda (without its attachments)

/ / /