BOARD MEETING DATE: May 2, 2008
AGENDA NO. 32

RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:

Adopt the attached resolution:

1. Certifying the Notice of Exemption for Proposed Amended Rules 301 – Permitting and Associated Fees, 303 – Hearing Board Fees, 304 – Equipment, Materials and Ambient Air Analyses, 304.1 – Analyses Fees, 306 – Plan Fees, 307.1 – Alternative Fees for Air Toxics Emissions Inventory, 308 – On-Road Motor Vehicle Mitigation Options Fees, 309 – Fees for Regulation XVI, 311 – Air Quality Investment Program (AQIP) Fees, and Rule 313 – Authority to Adjust Fees and Due Dates.

2. Amending Rule 301 – Permitting and Associated Fees to:

1. Increase all fees except those scheduled for a 10 percent increase pursuant to the rule amendments adopted in 2006, as applicable, by a rate of 4.1 percent which is equivalent to the 2007 change in the California Consumer Price Index (CPI), to adjust for inflation and continue better recovering program costs; and
2. Adopt specific amendments to better recover program costs, clarify or correct existing language, and align specific fee programs with those of CARB.

3. Amending Rule 303 – Hearing Board Fees, 304 – Equipment, Materials and Ambient Air Analyses, 304.1 – Analyses Fees, 306 – Plan Fees, 307.1 – Alternative Fees for Air Toxics Emissions, 308 – On-Road Motor Vehicle Mitigation Options Fees, 309 – Fees for Regulation XVI, 311 – Air Quality Investment Program (AQIP) Fees and 313 – Authority to Adjust Fees and Due Dates to increase these fees by 4.1 percent which is equivalent to the 2007 change in the California CPI and exempt Rule 2449 – Control of Oxides of Nitrogen from Off-Road Diesel Vehicles plans from Rule 306 – Plan Fees.
 

Barry R. Wallerstein, D.Env.
Executive Officer

Background

Regulation III – Fees, establishes the fee rates and schedules associated with permitting, annual renewals, emissions and other activities that help fund most of AQMD's regulatory programs and services. Shortfalls exist despite the significant budget reductions adopted and continuous improvements in performance and efficiency. Key contributors to the shortfalls include the declining emissions fee revenues, including the continued reduction of nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from RECLAIM sources, and legally mandated retirement contributions. In addition, due to the provisions of Rule 2002(f)(1)(A) effective January 2007, NOx emissions fees from RECLAIM sources continue to decline due to a mandatory annual reduction each year.

To address the shortfall in revenues, staff adopted amendments to the fee rule at the June 9, 2006 public hearing to more fully recover specific program costs and fee increases. The adopted amendment included a 3.65 percent fee increase (the change in the 2005 California Consumer Price Index) for all source categories for fiscal year (FY) 06-07, except for permitting, annual renewal and emission fees which are to be increased by 10 percent annually for 3 years (FY 06-07, FY 07-08 and FY 08-09), to more fully recover program costs.

The current proposal seeks to increase fees other than Permit Processing, Annual Operating Permit Renewal and Annual Operating Emissions Fees by the change in the 2007 California Consumer Price Index (CPI). Increasing fees by the change in the 2007 CPI will relieve inflationary pressure on the recovery action taken by the Board at the June 9, 2006 Board hearing and as such seeks to preserve the goal of more closely aligning revenues with program costs. Cost recovery proposals include a modification of the provision for credit on annual renewals for solar power generation installed on site, amendment of the fees for the Portable Equipment Registration Program (PERP) for consistency with changes implemented by the California Air Resources Board (CARB), adjustment of Annual Emissions Reporting (AER) from a fiscal to a calendar basis to align with the CARB mandatory greenhouse gas reporting program, a waiver of plan fees for Rule 2449 - Control of Oxides of Nitrogen from Off-Road Diesel Vehicles, a clarification of the initial plan evaluation fee for Rule 461(i) compliance plans, a special operating fee for petroleum refineries to fund a technology assessment to reduce SOx emissions from petroleum refineries (the special operating fee will be implemented over two years) and a waiver of the public notice preparation fee for dry cleaners located within 1,000 feet of a school that install, modify or replace perchloroethylene dry cleaning equipment to comply with Rule 1421. Other amendments are administrative in nature and include clarification and correction of existing language with negligible or no fee increase. The provision waiving the public notice preparation fee for certain dry cleaners was added to the current proposal after the Notice of Public Hearing was published. The added provision does not significantly change the meaning of the proposed amended rule within the meaning of Health and Safety Code §40726 and would not constitute significant new information pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15088.5.

This Board letter and Attachment A constitute the staff report supporting the adoption of these amendments.

California Health and Safety Code Section 40500, et seq., established AQMD’s authority to adopt rules and regulations, including fee schedules intended to cover AQMD’s actual costs of cleaning the air. There are currently twelve rules within Regulation III - Fees that set fees and procedures in three major categories:

1. Permitting, including permit processing and annual renewals of permits to stationary sources;
2. Annual emissions fees for facilities based on operations that have emitted specific amounts of toxic or criteria air contaminants; and
3. Other District services including variances from the Hearing Board, compliance monitoring and testing, review of emission control plans, registration programs and certain training programs.

California Health and Safety Code sections relating to the fees of the AQMD allow staff to align fees with costs to recover program costs. The current proposal seeks to continue the goal of maintaining better cost recovery by compensating for inflation. The proposed Fiscal Year 2008-09 Budget and Work Program will be incorporated by reference in the final Board package.
 

Proposals

The amendments being considered for Regulation III – Fees, focus on better recovering the costs of the various stationary source programs, conforming with revisions to state regulations and clarifying/correcting existing language in the rule. They include the following main proposals (for a complete itemized list see Attachment A):

(Regulation III) - Consumer Price Index Increase (CPI) and Approved 10 Percent Increase

All fees, except for permitting, annual renewal and emissions fees, are proposed to be increased by the 4.1 percent change in the 2007 CPI in order to keep pace with inflation and continue better recovering program costs. No additional fee increase is proposed for Permitting, Annual Renewal and Emissions fees for which a 10 percent increase for FY 08-09 was adopted by the District Governing Board on June 9, 2006.

301(c)(1)(A), 301(c)(2)(C), 301(c)(3), 301(d)(1), 301(g), 301(k)(5) and 301(k)(7) - Payment of Court Judgments and Administrative Civil Penalties

Applicants for permits and those seeking to reinstate expired permits must first pay any amounts due from court judgments awarded in favor of the District and any administrative civil penalties along with all other required fees prior to the processing of any such applications. These fee provisions are equitable since they seek to recover monies awarded to or intended for payment to the District. They are necessary because these fees help fund District programs.

301(c)(1)(F) – Clarification of Fees for ERC Application Processing

Clarification that the fees charged for processing of identical emission reduction credit (ERC) applications and for processing of identical equipment applications are the same.

301(d)(3) - Credit for Solar Energy Equipment

Currently, any facility with installed on-site solar power generation can receive a credit towards the facility annual renewal fee based on the British Thermal Unit per hour (Btu/hr) design capacity. The credit cannot exceed the billed facility annual renewal fee. Staff recommends that projects funded by grant(s) from the District’s Priority Reserve account would be ineligible for any solar energy credit. This is equitable since grant funding would defray the capital costs for installing on-site solar power generation and justified since the District would better recover the cost of ensuring compliance with solar power generation at the site.

301(e) – Annual Operating Emissions Fee & Rule 301(k) – RECLAIM Facilities

Proposed changes to the AQMD Annual Emissions Reporting program include:

1. Changing from fiscal year (FY) reporting (July 1 through June 30) to calendar year (CY) reporting (January 1 through December 31) starting January 1, 2008,
2. A six-month transitional emissions reporting period (July 1, 2007 through December 31, 2007),
3. Reduction of the emissions reporting thresholds to one-half (1/2) of the current values for both criteria & toxics during the six-month transitional reporting period,
4. Inclusion of voluntary greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reporting and its associated reporting deadlines,
5. First installment fees for calendar year 2008 emissions reporting using FY 06-07 reporting emissions,
6. Revision to Annual Emission Report (AER) submittal due dates, and
7. Minor rule language clarifications.

Starting January 1, 2008, facilities will be required to report their Annual Emission Reports (AER) based on a CY, from January 1 through December 31. This will align the AER reporting period with the reporting period requirements for CARB’s mandatory reporting of GHG emissions. Facilities are also required to report their emissions using only the web-based program. This program is designed to provide the facilities with a tool to report their criteria and toxics emissions along with their GHG emissions. Reporting of the GHG emissions portion will be voluntary and it will apply to the facilities that are subject to CARB’s mandatory reporting of GHG emissions that choose to report their GHG emissions to the AQMD and CARB. All facilities will have January 1, 2009 as their official due date to submit the CY 2008 annual emission reports. All facilities, except for the ones that are subject to CARB’s mandatory reporting of GHG emissions, that choose to report their GHG emissions to the AQMD and CARB, have 60 days from the official due date to submit both the emissions report and fee payment without any late filing surcharges. For these facilities, the deadline to submit the CY 2008 annual emission report is March 2, 2009. For facilities that are subject to CARB’s mandatory reporting of GHG emissions, and choose to report their GHG emissions to the AQMD and CARB, the deadlines to submit the CY 2008 annual emissions reports are as follows:

1. April 1, 2009: Power generation & co-generation facilities, General Stationary Combustion Sources (> 25,000 MT CO₂) excluding oil & gas production facilities with a NAICS code of 211111.
2. June 1, 2009: Cement plants, hydrogen plants, and refineries, general stationary combustion facilities within the oil & gas sector with a NAICS code of 211111.

The above deadlines coincide with the deadlines set forth in the CARB Regulation for the Mandatory Reporting of GHG Emissions, adopted on December 6, 2007.

The following steps are designed to help transition from FY to CY reporting:

• AQMD will be developing a web-based program for Annual Emission Reporting.
• Facilities are required to report their six-month transitional emissions (criteria and toxics) for the reporting period of July 1, 2007 through December 31, 2007 and pay emission fees using the current fee rate specified in Rule 301 Tables III and IV. The official due date to submit the six-month transitional emission report is July 1, 2008. Facilities have 60 days from the official due date to submit both the emissions report and fee payment to avoid being subject to late filing surcharges. The deadline to submit the six-month transitional report is September 1, 2008.
• Facilities have an option to report their six-month transitional emissions using either the existing updated version of AER software or the new web-based program.
• During the six-month transitional period (July 1, 2007 through December 31, 2007), the emission reporting thresholds (as shown in the table below) are reduced to one half (1/2) of the current values listed in paragraph (e)(5) for criteria pollutants and in Rule 301 Table IV for toxics compounds. For example, any facility with total criteria pollutants emissions greater than or equal to the threshold amount listed below shall report its emissions and pay fees as described in Rule 301 Table III.
   

• The first installment payment for facilities with emissions of criteria pollutants greater or equal to 10 tons per year, except for CO which is 100 tons per year, will be based on one half (1/2) of the reported previous annual emissions except for calendar year 2008 reporting. The installment payment for calendar year 2008 reporting will be based on one half (1/2) of the FY 06-07 reporting emissions. Facilities will still have an option to pay emission fees based on their actual emissions during the reporting period of January 1, 2008 through June 30, 2008.

For clarification purposes, there have been some minor changes in the rule language. For example in Rule 301(e)(10) - Notice to Pay and Late Filling surcharges, the language is revised to include that facilities are responsible to report their emissions and pay emissions fees if their actual emissions are greater than or equal to the reporting thresholds listed in Rule 301(e)(5), regardless of whether they were notified by the District.

301(i)(4) – Payment for Public Notice on Significant Projects

Dry cleaning facilities submitting applications to install, modify, or replace dry cleaning equipment to comply with Rule 1421 requiring a significant project public notification because they are located within 1,000 feet of a school would have the public Notice of Preparation fee ($781.72 in FY 08-09) waived. The application must be for equipment at an existing perchloroethylene dry cleaning facility, and the perchloroethylene dry cleaning equipment must be concurrently removed from service. Facilities that have the public notice preparation fee waived must still comply with all other applicable requirements including notification of all addresses and school within 1,000 feet. This amendment is necessary to prevent an undue burden occurring to sources implementing mandated changes that seek to mitigate risk. It is equitable that this fee be waived as it is an AQMD mandated program to reduce risk from this category. This amendment was added after the public hearing was Noticed. It could potentially affect thirty-one dry cleaners by the year 2020 to reduce the one time public notification preparation fee for each facility. Assuming that all thirty-one facilities are within 1,000 feet of a school, and install, modify or replace their perchloroethylene equipment in FY 08-09, the total fiscal impact on the AQMD would be $24,233. This would not significantly change the meaning of the proposed rule amendment Noticed for public hearing within the meaning of Health and Safety Code §40726, and would not constitute significant new information pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15088.5.

301(k)(10)(E) - Special Operating Fee for Petroleum Refineries

This proposal allows the Executive Officer to establish a special operating fee for petroleum refineries (Standard Industrial Classification No. 2911) up to an amount of $0.07 per pound for FY 07-08 and $0.07 per pound for FY 08-09 of initial SOx allocation (initial allocation of the original operator if a change of operator has occurred since the assignment of the initial allocation) to cover the cost of a technology assessment to reduce SOx emissions from the RECLAIM universe. The technology assessment is anticipated to cost up to $375,000 which equates up to $0.14 per pound of the initial SOx allocation for each facility involved. However, since the operating fee is a new permit related fee, it must be phased in over two fiscal years as a fee of up to $0.07 per pound for the current fiscal year, FY 07-08 and as a fee of up to $0.07 per pound for the next fiscal year, FY 08-09 fee. The fee is necessary to recover the AQMD cost for professional and special services to supplement staff resources in the completion of the technology assessment required for subsequent rulemaking consistent with the schedule in the AQMP. Furthermore, this rule will go into effect at adoption on May 2, 2008 with the first installment of fees due in FY 07-08 (and considered late if not paid within 60 days of notification that payment is due by the Executive Officer). The second and final installment will be due in early FY 08-09 (and considered late if not paid within 60 days of notification that payment is due by the Executive Officer). This installment schedule is necessary since the study cannot begin until the technology assessment fees have been collected and the technology assessment is scheduled for completion in early FY 08-09. The fee is equitable since it is paid only by those companies required to make the reductions in SOx specified in the technology assessment. In addition, the AQMD staff has already performed an assessment of available SOx reduction technologies but RECLAIM sources affected (petroleum refineries) have requested an independent consultant analysis as well.

301(v) - Portable Equipment Registration Program (PERP)

Staff recommends changes to Rule 301(v) in order to maintain consistency with the fees established in Section 2461 of Title 13, C.F.R. and ensure the recovery of costs expended in support of the PERP program. In 1995, the California state legislature directed CARB to establish a Statewide Portable Equipment Registration Program (PERP), allowing the operation of portable equipment in any air district throughout the state without requiring local district permits, provided the equipment is registered with CARB and met other requirements. The PERP regulation (§§ 2450-2465, Title 13, California Code of Regulations) first became effective September 17, 1997. Joint CAPCOA and industry recommendations led CARB to amend the PERP regulation on June 22, 2006, December 7, 2006, and March 22, 2007, to expand its jurisdiction over portable engines and equipment units and create a more comprehensive and inclusive statewide registration program that now provides for triennial renewal of PERP registrations.

The amended PERP regulation, which became effective on April 27, 2007, includes a revised uniform fee structure that local districts follow when invoicing registration holders for the inspection of equipment units, Tactical Support Equipment (TSE) and off-hour service fees. Current Rule 301(v) language is based on the previous program fee of $75.00 per calendar year for each registered portable engine or equipment unit inspected, which requires updating to properly implement the new statewide standards adopted by CARB. The revised fee will be an hourly fee of $98.00 per hour, except for TSE and engines. In addition, the fees surcharge has been adjusted to better recover the staffing and overhead costs associated with billing and collection of delinquent fees. This proposal is justified since it provides for conformity of the AQMD rule provision with changes to the PERP program implemented by CARB. Inspection fees for portable engines, except TSE, are paid in advance and submitted to CARB with the application for a new registration or renewal. At the time of the submittal, applicants are required to specify a “home district,” the local district in which the equipment is anticipated to be operating most of the time. CARB will provide a $315.00 inspection fee to each district identified as the home district. The proposed fee changes are necessary to ensure consistency with the statewide fee structure established by CARB for the portable equipment registration program (Section 2461), which became effective April 27, 2007, and will offset staffing and overhead costs associated with the triennial inspection of this equipment.

303(h) and Table III – Clarification of Reduced Hearing Board Fee for Small Business, Individuals and Other Entities

This proposal is justified because it clarifies that petitioners who are individuals or other entities with limited annual revenue, are charged the lower Hearing Board fees applicable to small businesses. Clarification is provided in Rule 301(h) that the eligibility criteria for a lower fee (Schedule A), also includes individuals or other entities that meet the total annual gross receipts criterion, of $500,000 or less, as defined under “Small Business” in Rule 102. Table III clarifies that the reduced fee for “Small Business” also includes petitioners that are individuals or other entities that meet the total annual gross receipts criterion ($500,000 or less) for small business as defined in Rule 102. For further clarity the headings of “Small Business” and “Large Business” in Table III are revised to “Schedule A” and “Schedule B”, respectively. Schedule B fees (formerly Large Businesses) will be applicable to all other petitioners that do not qualify as Schedule A petitioners (i.e. that are not small businesses, individuals or other entities that meet the total annual gross receipts criterion, of $500,000 or less.) This proposal is equitable since it is in line with the Hearing Board’s discretionary powers (Rule 303(m) – Discretionary Powers) to reduce or waive fees for petitioners and consistent with past practice. No fiscal impact is associated with this amendment which merely clarifies existing practice.

306(i)(1) – Compliance Plans for Rule 461 – Gasoline Transfer and Dispensing

Compliance plans submitted pursuant to Rule 306 – Plan Fees are subject to an initial filing fee of $123.30 and an initial plan evaluation fee of $393.05. The proposed language provides clarification that compliance plans submitted for Rule 461 equipment pursuant to Rule 461(i) – Compliance Plan For Implementation of Phase II Enhanced Vapor Recovery Requirements are not subject to the $393.05 initial payment for plan evaluation. Instead, these plans shall be charged the filing fee of $112.30 in addition to a reduced initial plan evaluation fee of $112.30. These fees are necessary to clarify that a filing fee and a reduced initial plan evaluation fee will be charged at the time of plan filing submittal for Rule 461(i) plans submitted in order to recover the expected actual cost of Phase II EVR compliance plan evaluations. These fees are equitable because they apply only to those operations that require such a plan, because they have not demonstrated compliance with the certified Phase II enhanced recovery system requirements by October 1, 2008 or submitted a complete permit application by September 1, 2008 that will demonstrate compliance with Phase II enhanced vapor recovery requirements by the required deadlines.

306(n) - Plan Fee Exemption for Rule 2449 Fleets

Rule 2449 – Control of Oxides of Nitrogen Emissions from Off-Road Diesel Vehicles adopts by reference and implements the Surplus Off-Road Opt-In for NOx (SOON) provision of the CARB In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation. Rule 2449 will achieve surplus NOx reductions beyond those required under the CARB base regulation through incentive funding provided by AQMD. The rule applies to fleets with more than 20,000 bhp in maximum power on a statewide basis with more than 40% Tier 0 and 1 equipment as of January 1, 2008. Fleet operators subject to this regulation are required to submit a compliance plan to demonstrate that equipment identified for SOON funding will result in surplus reductions. Staff is proposing to waive the compliance plan fee under Rule 306 – Plan Fees for the affected fleets under Rule 2449. Rule 2449 adopts the state regulation provision outlined in Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Section 2449.3, SOON Program. Since the CARB regulation (adopted through Rule 2449) requires the submittal of these compliance plans and reports to the CARB and districts without charging a fee for review, staff is proposing that Rule 2449 compliance plan fees be exempted in Rule 306(n) for these plan submittals. There will not be any fiscal impacts from the proposed amendments since implementation of Rule 2449 (including review of compliance plans) will be conducted within the existing AQMD budget for the Off-Road section of the AQMD Mobile Source Division. Implementation of Rule 2449 will result in substantial additional NOx reductions (i.e., 12 tons per day in 2014) which are critical for meeting the federal ambient air quality standard for PM2.5 in the Basin by 2014. The AQMD Board has approved the release of Program Announcement PA#2008-01 on November 2, 2007 to solicit SOON projects in 2008 based on an estimated incentive funding of $30 million. Compliance plan fees are not required under the state regulation nor are needed since implementation of Rule 2449 will be conducted as part of the regular workload budgeted for the Off-Road Section of the AQMD Mobile Source Division.

Table 1 below summarizes the preliminary estimated net increase in revenue from FY 07-08 to FY 08-09 based on the adoption of the above proposed amendments:

Table 1. Summary of Estimated Increased Cost Recovery for FY 08-09

* 10% increase in Permit, Annual Operating Permit Renewal and Annual Operating Emissions fees already approved by the District Governing Board on June 9, 2006. Table 1 does not include anticipated revenues from Proposed Rule 314 – Architectural Coatings Fees.
 

AQMP and Legal Mandates

The fee rules are not part of the AQMP. California Health and Safety Code §§ 40500 et seq. established the authority to “adopt fee schedules for the issuance of variances and permits to cover the reasonable cost of permitting, planning, enforcement, and monitoring related thereto,” and to assess fees for the approval of plans for the control of air contaminants and for regulatory programs affecting indirect and area sources (California Health and Safety Code §§ 40522 and 40522.5). California Health and Safety Code §§ 40500.1, 40510, 40510.5 and 40523 authorize AQMD to increase fees consistent with annual increases in the CPI.
 

CEQA

AQMD staff has reviewed the proposed amendments to Rules 301, 303, 304, 304.1, 305, 306, 307.1, 308, 309, 311, and 313, and because the proposed project involves the modification and structuring of charges by public agencies for the purpose of meeting operating expenses and financial reserve requirements, it is statutorily exempt from CEQA, pursuant to state CEQA Guidelines § 15273 – Rates, Tolls, Fares, and Charges. A Notice of Exemption will be filed with the county clerks immediately following adoption of the proposed project.
 

Socioeconomic Analysis

Table 2 compares the revenue changes between fiscal year 2008-2009 and 2007-2008 as a result of 10 percent fee rate increases for emission, annual operating, and permit processing fees approved in 2006 and the current proposed amendments to Regulation III, including a fee rate increase of 4.1 percent for other fee categories. The projected revenue increase in emission and annual operating fees includes anticipated new revenue from Rule 314 ─ Architectural Coatings Fee Revenues. Revenues for fiscal year 2008-2009 are projected to increase by 5.05 percent from estimated 2007-2008 revenues. The total revenue is estimated at $130 million for fiscal year 2008-2009. All major revenue sources are projected to increase in the 2008-2009 fiscal year with the exception of other revenues. The smaller projected revenue increase in emission fees (5.66 percent) relative to the 10 percent increase in emission fee rates reflects the continual downward trend in emissions as the air gets cleaner. The projected revenue in permit fees reflects the anticipated level of equipment application processing. The reduction in the other revenues category is due in part to the fact that AQMD does not anticipate any large one-time penalties/settlements in fiscal year 2008-2009. The increase in the Hearing Board fees is due to the anticipated higher level of Hearing Board activities for the next fiscal year.

Table 2. Revenue Comparison Between FY 2007-2008 and FY 2008-2009

*Adopted by the Board on June 2, 2006.

**The negative number in the last column represents reductions in revenue.

Other proposed amendments to Regulation III, including clarifications or corrections of existing rule language, have either negligible or no fiscal impact.

Resource Impacts

No additional resource impacts are expected.

Comments and Response to Comments

Comment: 
Permitting of Plasma Arc Cutting and associated equipment should be reclassified from a Schedule C to a Schedule B rate, especially where multiple units are being permitted.

Response: 
Due to the mandatory health risk assessment that must be conducted for Plasma Arc Cutting and associated control equipment (such as HEPA filters for control of hexavalent chromium emissions), this equipment is correctly classified as Schedule C. However, if multiple Plasma Arc Cutters and associated equipment are being permitted as a single evaluation, even where the make and model numbers are different, each additional unit can qualify for an identical equipment reduced fee. This should result in significant savings where more than one unit is being permitted at one time.

Comment: 
Revoking or suspending permits within 30 days of the due date for late payment of annual operating renewal fees creates undue hardship for the permittee and consideration should be given to granting a grace period.

Response: 
Annual operating renewal fees are billed 60 days prior to the permit renewal date. If the annual fee is not paid by the renewal date, the fee is considered delinquent. A delinquent invoice is then mailed to the permittee allowing for an additional 30 days from the renewal date (90 days total) for the fee to be paid prior to the permit being expired due to nonpayment of fees. Should the permit expire due to nonpayment, the permittee has one year from that date of expiration to reinstate the permit by paying the fee originally due on the expired permit plus a reinstatement fee. For permit processing related fees, such as additional permit processing fees that are billed, the due date is 30 days from the invoice date. If the fee is not paid by that due date, the fee is delinquent and a delinquent notice is sent to the permittee. The delinquent notice for a permit processing-related fee allows for an additional 15 days from the delinquent date for the fee to be paid prior to the permit expiring due to non-payment of the fee. This process includes multiple notifications, grace periods and reinstatement remedies. These fees are necessary to recover the additional cost to the AQMD to recover the fees due and are equitable since these costs are recovered from the recalcitrant permittee.

Attachments (exe 1038 kb)

A. Summary of Proposals
B. Abstract of FY 08-09 Draft Budget and Work Program
C. Rule Development Process
D. Key Contacts
E. Resolution
F. Proposed Rule Language
G. Notice of Exemption