BOARD MEETING DATE: May 5, 2006
AGENDA NO. 27

REPORT:

Stationary Source Committee

SYNOPSIS:

The Stationary Source Committee met Friday, April 28, 2006.  Following is a summary of that meeting.  The next meeting will be May 26, 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 Ronald Loveridge, Dennis Yates and Gary Ovitt.  Absent was Jane Carney.

INFORMATIONAL ITEMS

1. Reg. III - Fees

Presentation of this item was waived due to the identical presentation scheduled for the afternoon Governing Board Budget Workshop.

2. PAR 1113 – Architectural Coatings

Larry Bowen, Planning and Rules Manager, presented this item.  Staff is proposing amendments that implement the findings of the Technology Assessment presented to the Board earlier this year.  The proposed amended rule creates a category of non-flat high gloss and delays the implementation of the limits for non-flat high gloss, quick dry enamels and specialty primers for one year.  TBAc is also exempted as a VOC for only industrial maintenance coatings.  The VOC limits for concrete curing compounds, dry fog and traffic coatings are reduced, a one year sell through for clear wood finishes is added and other changes are proposed for the purpose of clarification.  Emission reductions of 0.77 tons per day will be forgone for a year and ultimately there will be a reduction of 0.69 tons per day.  The National Paint and Coatings Association (NPCA) has an alternate proposal that staff does not support.  It could result in permanent emissions forgone of 4.7 tons per day and the evidence does not support the requirement that the current and future limits for the categories in their proposal are infeasible.

3. Rule 1171 – Solvent Cleaning Operations

Lee Lockie outlined the key provisions of the proposed amendments. The amendments will delay by 12 months the implementation of the 100 g/l VOC limit for solvents used in cleaning ink application equipment in lithographic/letterpress printing (except newsprint), screen printing, and UV/EB inks.  The delay is necessary for extended testing designed to find additional compliant materials.  PAR 1171 will also temporarily raise the interim VOC limit for automatic roller/blanket clean up systems from 500 to 650 g/l, and extend the limited exemption for metering rollers, dampening rollers, and printing plates.

The Printing Industry Association stated that 18 months is necessary to complete the testing and transition the industry to the new materials.  In addition, several individual printers stated that they could not find compliant materials to meet the interim limits. Ms. Lockie agreed to evaluate the PIA proposal and offered to provide a list of 500 g/l solvents currently being used successfully in cleaning by other printers.  In response to another comment, Dr. Tisopulos clarified that medical device cleaning operations are not subject to this provision of the rule and can continue to use 800 g/l, isopropyl alcohol (IPA) cleaning materials.

4. Rule 219 – Equipment Not Requiring a Written Permit Pursuant to Regulation II

Lee Lockie outlined that the major provisions of the proposed amendments include a modification to the agricultural exemption and 14 proposed newly exempt equipment categories along with a proposal to exempt ovens using low-VOC ultraviolet/electron beam (UV/EB) materials.

Radtech and two cabinet coaters requested that the expanded UV/EB exemption be further expanded to include the spray enclosures used for coating UV/EB.  Staff indicated that spray equipment historically needs a permit to verify compliance with District rules. 

A request was made to delay the public hearing, now scheduled for May 5, 2006, by 30 days to discuss the possibility with staff of simplifying the permitting process for agricultural equipment.  Dr. Wallerstein responded that there are no technical impediments relative to staff’s proposal and further delay is not necessary.  Staff responded that permits are necessary to enforce District rules and New Source Review requirements.  The current exemption creates an inequity among engines operated by smaller agricultural operations and other stationary sources, including agricultural operations currently subject to AQMD’s permitting requirements.  Staff explained that they have met the required findings of SB 700 and have demonstrated that permit requirements for this equipment are no more burdensome than for similar sources and that permits are necessary to assure compliance.  This analysis can be found in the Socioeconomic section of the staff report.

Ms Lockie apologized and noted that an incomplete handout was included in the PAR 219 packet that was made available to the committee members and the public.

5. Rule 1157 – PM10 Emission Reductions from Aggregate and Related Operations

Lee Lockie, Director of Area Sources, presented the staff proposal.  Rule 1157 was adopted in January 2005 to reduce PM10 emissions from aggregate and related operations.  A Settlement Agreement in the Rule 1157 litigation was reached in early September 2005.  In that agreement, staff committed to propose specific changes to the high wind exemption and take the proposal through the public process.  The purpose of the proposed amendments is to simplify and streamline the high wind exemption by establishing specific dust control requirements that impacted facilities must comply with.

The current rule provides for an exemption from opacity and dust plume standards for ready-mix concrete and hot-mix asphalt facilities, and aggregate plants providing materials, to jobs that would cause irreparable damage if stopped prior to completion.  The proposed amended language would provide a similar exemption, but it would also be applicable to aggregate plants supplying materials to all jobs.  Allowed activities are limited to dredging operations, and loading and transport, provided dust controls are applied, unpaved roads are stabilized and water is applied within 15 minutes of disturbing storage piles.

The draft Environmental Assessment is currently out for a 45-day public review period and the draft staff report contains the socioeconomic assessment.

6. Updates on Enhanced Permit Information Access on AQMD’s  Website

Mark Henninger, Information Technology Manager,  initiated this item by indicating that some Home Rule Advisory Members had  raised security issues with displaying aerial imagery as part of the Facility Information Module (FIM),  developed to address this item topic as an Environmental Justice enhancement.  Discussions followed which highlighted the fact that several publicly available websites already displayed such imagery and the images contained in FIM are available  for  the public to freely download from the United States Geological Service (USGS) website.  Committee members voted to proceed with moving forward to deploy the FIM module, with the aerial imagery, on  AQMD's  website

7. Rule 1175 – Control of Emissions from the Manufacture of Polymeric Cellular (Foam) Products

Harry Grant, Attorney for Premier Insulfoam stated there needs to be a review of requirements in Rule 1175 that recognizes the changes in technology that would allow demonstration of equivalent compliance with 1175.  Premier will continue to work with staff on this matter.  Curt Coleman, attorney representing Falcon Foam stated that Falcon Foam was a competitor of Premier until they terminated production here in the SCAQMD.  A factor in their decision was that staff had indicated there was no plan to amend Rule 1175.  Now that staff will consider an amendment, they want to ensure that Premier receives no preferential treatment.  Michael Frances, attorney representing ACS stated that his client was also a foam block manufacturer and like Falcon Foam ceased production in the SCAQMD.  They too, want to ensure Premier does not receive preferential treatment by staff and want to be involved in any rulemaking.  It was noted by Carol Coy and Laki Tisopulos that all three companies had received NOV’s from U.S. EPA for noncompliance with Rule 1175 and either were, or in the case of Premier, is currently operating under variance protection. The AQMD has been criticized by U.S.EPA for granting the variances.

WRITTEN REPORTS

All written reports were acknowledged by the Committee.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

There were no public comments at this meeting.

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

Attachments (DOC 61kb)
April 28, 2006 Committee Agenda (without its attachments)