SACRAMENTO METROPOLITAN AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT. Board of Directors Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District

Similar documents
SACRAMENTO METROPOLITAN AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT. Board of Directors Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District

SACRAMENTO METROPOLITAN AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT. Board of Directors Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District

Senate Bill 700 (Florez): Agriculture & Air Quality Summary and Implementation April 2004

PROPOSED ADOPTION OF RULE 3.25, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW FOR NEW AND MODIFIED MAJOR PM2.5 SOURCES FINAL STAFF REPORT

Table of Contents. (a) APPLICABILITY... 1 (b) EXEMPTIONS... 1 (c) DEFINITIONS... 1 (d) STANDARDS... 2

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT DRAFT STAFF REPORT. Annual Offset Equivalency Demonstration.

Table of Contents. (a) APPLICABILITY... 1 (b) EXEMPTIONS... 1 (c) DEFINITIONS... 1 (d) STANDARDS... 2

SANTA BARBARA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT PROPOSED STAFF REPORT

3 CONSTRUCTION-GENERATED CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANT AND PRECURSOR EMISSIONS

Air Pollution Control Board San Diego County Air Pollution Control District

New Source Review Staff Presentation Community Advisory Council

RULE 214 FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW Adopted (Amended ) INDEX

INDEX. August 23,

Air Pollution Sources Overview. Amy Roberts, Division Manager January 24, 2019

SACRAMENTO METROPOLITAN AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT STATEMENT OF REASONS. and. March 25, Associate Air Quality Engineer

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT FINAL DRAFT STAFF REPORT

Statement of Reasons Rules 414 and 419 September 24, 2018 Page 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents. (a) APPLICABILITY (b) EXEMPTIONS (c) DEFINITIONS... 2

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT FINAL DRAFT STAFF REPORT

APPENDIX B General Conformity Analysis

POTENTIAL TO EMIT LIMITATIONS FOR PART 70 SOURCES. (Adopted 6/15/1995, revised 1/18/2001 and 1/20/2011)

RULE SUMMARY. Purpose of Change (Why)

NORTHERN SONOMA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

BOARD OF DIRECTORS Summary of Actions WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 21, :30 P.M Silver Cloud Court, Board Room, 3 rd Floor, Monterey, California

2 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE

CEQA Implementation Policy

SACRAMENTO METROPOLITAN AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT EXPEDITED BARCT IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE FOR ASSEMBLY BILL 617.

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT DRAFT STAFF REPORT

CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action

ATTACHMENT-3 NEW JERSEY EMISSION OFFSET RULE FORMER SIP PROVISIONS

Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District BACKGROUND PAPER December 9, 2010

Chapter Introduction. 1.2 Purpose. 1.3 Background. 1.4 Ozone Production and Health Effects. 1.5 Responsibilities of Agencies

NACAA Fall NACAA Meeting Fall October 29, 2007 Samir Sheikh Perm it S erv ices Manager San Joaquin Va V lley Air Pollution Control lley District

SECTION.2300 BANKING EMISSION REDUCTION CREDITS

RULE Federally Enforceable Limits on Potential to Emit - Adopted 1/25/96

United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9. Air Division. Technical Support Document. for. EPA s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Attainment Revised August 25, 2011 and Reasonable Further Progress Plan March 26, 2009

42 USC 7511a. NB: This unofficial compilation of the U.S. Code is current as of Jan. 4, 2012 (see

INDUSTRIAL STAKEHOLDERS GROUP (ISG) MEETING MINUTES February 19, 2010

Implementation of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS): Opportunities for Public Participation

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT DRAFT STAFF REPORT

Public Comments Received between March 27, 2015 to April 16, 2015

SACRAMENTO METROPOLITAN AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT

1.0 Purpose. The purpose of this rule is to provide for the following:

Rule 210.1A MAJOR NEW AND MODIFIED STATIONARY SOURCE REVIEW (MNSR)

Technical Contact. Reed Caron Quality Manager (704) Airport Road Monroe, NC 28110

SANTA BARBARA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT REVISED STAFF REPORT

Re: Post Certification Amendment to Redding Peaking Power Plant (92-SPPE-2)

Mecklenburg County Air Pollution Control Ordinance: 2014 MCAPCO Revisions

REASONABLY AVAILABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY (RACT) STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP) REVISION WESTERN NEVADA COUNTY 8-HOUR OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREA

AIR REGULATION IN SOUTH CAROLINA 3 JUNE 2016

COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 1600 PACIFIC HIGHWAY, ROOM 335, SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA AGENDA ITEM

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT COMPLIANCE DEPARTMENT COM 2177

DRAFT AUTHORITY TO CONSTRUCT

State Implementation Plans for Federal 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 Standards San Joaquin Valley Eastern Kern County

The EARLY ACTION COMPACT. The Roanoke Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) in the Commonwealth of Virginia

Rule PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION

Barry Young CAPCOA Engineering & Toxics Symposium October 31, 2018

"LIST AND CRITERIA" INDEX INTRODUCTION Section 1 - General Application Information... 5

SUNY Westchester Community College Air Emissions Permit Program Latest Revision Date January 2, 2016 Previous Revision Date June 12, 2015.

STATE OF MINNESOTA MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY

Protect AQ & public health. Governing Board: Large, complex region: 9 counties / 101 cities > 7 million people > 5 million vehicles

Vista Canyon Transit Center - Air Quality Technical Memorandum

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Annual Report. Indirect Source Review Program

Commanding Clean Air. The Clean Air Act of 1970 as a Model for U.S. Environmental Policy Clean Air Act

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO RULE 2.34, STATIONARY GAS TURBINES FINAL STAFF REPORT

SACRAMENTO METROPOLITAN AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT. Board of Directors Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District

BACKGROUND TO THE 1993 GENERAL PLAN AS AMENDED

Bay Area 2005 Ozone Strategy

Summary of the November 5, 2003, Published Proposed Rulemaking

Final Updates to National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for Ozone. October 2015

CHAPTER 4 ALTERNATIVES

The 3 N s of Air. Diane H. Leche Air Permit Coordinator ExxonMobil Baton Rouge

DRAFT 2015 OZONE CONFORMITY ANALYSIS FOR THE 2019 FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND THE 2018 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN

PART C - POLICY AND PROCEDURES FOR NON-MAJOR POLLUTING FACILITIES

YOLO-SOLANO AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 1947 Galileo Court, Suite 103; Davis, CA Phone (530) ; Fax (530)

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Annual Report Indirect Source Review Program

Rule PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION

2016 Ozone Plan. Ben Ellenberger SBCAPCD Division Manager. August 10, 2016

California Environmental Quality Act Thresholds of Significance

RULE Prevention of Significant Deterioration Adopted 9/24/84, Amended 11/18/85, 9/2/99, Amended 1/12/12 (Effective 2/8/13)

Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control District Policy

ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATORY PROCESS

Air Quality Issues. North Carolina Division of Air Quality. Environmental Review Commission November 12, 2009

SANTA BARBARA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES. Policy No Draft Div Pol Yr

Fine Particles in the Air

Chapter 3. Demonstration of Federal Clean Air Act Requirements. PROPOSED 2016 Moderate Area Plan for the 2012 PM2.5 Standard

NAAQS Update. Amy Marshall March 22, 2016

New Source Review (NSR) Program Review Questionnaire May 14, 2003

CAFO Air Emissions and Enforcement. Susan O Keefe STAPPA/ALAPCO National Meeting May 5, 2003

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Annual Report. Indirect Source Review Program

APPENDIX VIII AIR QUALITY CONFORMITY ANALYSIS

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis

Tuscan Village Addendum

The requirement to obtain a Part 70 operating permit under this rule shall not apply to:

BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines Update

San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District

RULE 701 EMERGENCY EPISODE PLAN Adopted (Amended , , , , , ) INDEX

MPCA Citizens Board. Michael Sandusky Director Environment Analysis and Outcomes Division

Case 2:10-cv BAF -RSW Document 1 Filed 08/05/10 Page 1 of 17

Transcription:

SACRAMENTO METROPOLITAN AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT For Agenda of August 24, 2006 To: From: Board of Directors Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District Larry Greene, Air Pollution Control Officer Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District Subject: 1. Amendments to Rule 201, GENERAL PERMIT REQUIREMENTS 2. New Rule 215, AGRICULTURAL PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AND NEW AGRICULTURAL PERMIT REVIEW. Recommendations 1. Determine that the amendments to Rule 201 and new Rule 215 are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); 2. Approve the attached resolution adopting the amendments to Rule 201; and 3. Approve the attached resolution adopting new Rule 215. Executive Summary In 2003, state law was changed, in part to comply with the federal Clean Air Act, to require air districts to remove their exemptions from permitting requirements for certain agricultural operations. The amendments to Rule 201 and proposed new Rule 215 are being proposed to comply with this state law. These changes, if approved, will avoid potential federal sanctions that would withhold federal transportation funding for noncompliance with the federal Clean Air Act. Proposed amendments to Rule 201, GENERAL PERMIT REQUIREMENTS, will delete the exemption for large agricultural operations that emit more than 50 tons/year of ozone precursors (or specified levels of other pollutants), referred to as major sources or major modifications. Sources that are subject to this rule will be permitted in the same manner as other under the federal Clean Air Act. At this time, we do not have any agricultural sources that will be subject to this rule. In addition, the amendments update references to test methods in the rule. State law also requires permits for agricultural facilities and confined animal facilities, as defined by the California Air Resources Board (CARB), that emit more than 25 tons per year of ozone precursors. In addition, it authorizes permits for smaller agricultural sources and confined animal facilities, as defined by CARB, if the District makes certain findings. In an effort to streamline that permitting process, particularly for operations not subject to the federal Clean Air Act, staff proposes a separate rule, Rule 215, AGRICULTURAL PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AND NEW AGRICULTURAL PERMIT REVIEW, which will require permits for: 1. Agricultural sources that emit more than 25 tons/year of ozone precursors (or specified levels of other pollutants), 2. Large confined animal feeding operations that involve more than 1,000 milking cows or 100,000 turkeys (or other specified animal head count thresholds); and 3. Agricultural sources seeking a low fuel usage exemption under District Rule 411

Board Memo Rule 210, General Permit Requirements, and Rule 215, Agricultural Permit Requirements and New Agricultural Permit Review August 24, 2006, Page 2 governing boilers and large water heaters. We currently have one large emission source and three confined animal feeding operations that will be subject to Rule 215. Proposed Rule 215 will require that operators use the best available control technology when they install or modify equipment that emits more than ten pounds per day of ozone precursors (or specified levels of other pollutants) and there is a quarterly increase in emissions. The rule will also require that regulated operators provide emission reduction credits if the District has adopted a specific emission reduction crediting rule for the emission source and that rule has been approved by the Environmental Protection Agency. Sources will be required to pay permit fees established by Rule 310, considered separately on today s agenda. Attachments The table below identifies the attachments to this memo. Item Attachment Page Number Board Resolution Rule 201 A 7 Board Resolution Rule 215 B 10 Draft Rule 201 C 13 Draft Rule 215 D 21 Staff Report Rules 201 and 215 E 39 Evidence of Public Notice F 62 Background In the past, state law exempted agricultural operations from air quality permit requirements. Because this exemption conflicted with federal law California faced sanctions and stood to lose billions of dollars in federal transportation funding. In addition, in some parts of the state including the Sacramento Federal Ozone Nonattainment Area agricultural activities contribute to air quality problems. Poor air quality harms public health causing and/or exacerbating asthma, respiratory illness, heart and lung disease, and early mortality. In September 2003, California Senate Bill 700 (SB 700) was signed into law, amending the Health and Safety Code, in particular Section 42301.16, to include regulatory requirements for agriculture. In the District, the majority of agricultural stationary sources are farming operations that grow crops. The primary emissions from this type of operation are from the use of diesel-fired engines driving irrigation pumps. There are also some small dairies, chicken and turkey farms in the area. Agricultural stationary sources may also operate equipment similar to traditional stationary sources such as, gasoline, propane or natural gas-fired engines, gasoline or diesel storage tanks, boilers, and painting and degreasing operations. The emissions from all of these types of agricultural operations contribute to the overall emissions created by an agricultural stationary source.

Board Memo Rule 210, General Permit Requirements, and Rule 215, Agricultural Permit Requirements and New Agricultural Permit Review August 24, 2006, Page 3 Summary of SB700 Permitting Requirements Health and Safety Code Section 42301.16 establishes permitting requirements for individual agricultural stationary sources and, in addition, Section 40724.6 establishes permitting requirements specific to large confined animal facilities. Pursuant to Section 42301.16(b) the District is required to issue permits to agricultural stationary sources with actual emissions equal to or exceeding one-half of any applicable emissions threshold for a major stationary source. This threshold would be 25 tons per year for ozone precursors. Staff has identified one potential source whose actual emissions may exceed the trigger levels. The three large confined animal facilities have actual emissions less than 25 tons per year. In addition, pursuant to Section 42301.16(c), the District may require permits for agricultural sources with actual emissions less than one-half of any applicable emissions thresholds if specified findings are made. Under the 1-hour ozone standard, the District was classified as a severe nonattainment area with a 25 ton per year threshold for NOx and ROG for major stationary sources. Under the 8- hour standard, the District is classified as a serious nonattainment area with 50 tons per year threshold for NOx and ROG for major stationary sources (a 25 ton per year threshold for permitting.) Both of these thresholds were in effect from June 15, 2004 until the 1-hour ozone standard was revoked on June 15, 2005. Proposed Rule 215 is a new rule that is being adopted when only the 8-hour classification is in place and it uses an emissions threshold for a major stationary source of 50 tons per year for ozone precursors. The proposed rule also includes language that would automatically change the permitting threshold if the nonattainment area was to choose to bump up in classification as part of the future 8-hour ozone attainment plan. Under Health and Safety Code Section 42301.16(c) before requiring permits for boilers and large confined animal facilities that emit less than 25 tons per year of ozone precursors, the District must make the following findings: 1) The source is not subject to a permit requirement pursuant to Section 40724.6. Boilers: Section 40724.6 applies specifically to large confined animal facilities. Boilers would not be subject to the requirements under Section 40724.6, but the three large confined animal facilities would be. Large Confined Animal Facilities: Section 40724.6 authorizes a permit only if findings 2 and 3 below are made. 2) A permit is necessary to impose or enforce reductions of emission of air pollutants that the district show cause or contribute to a violation of a state or federal ambient air quality standard. Boilers: NOx is a precursor to ozone and the district is nonattainment for ozone. Boilers, including boilers at agricultural sources, have been identified as a category that contributes NOx to the District s inventory. The permit program is the most expedient method for enforcing fuel limits established in Rule 411. The permits also help keep sources apprised of regulatory requirements. Large Confined Animal Facilities: Large confined animal facilities emit VOC which is a precursor to ozone. The District is nonattainment with the

Board Memo Rule 210, General Permit Requirements, and Rule 215, Agricultural Permit Requirements and New Agricultural Permit Review August 24, 2006, Page 4 ozone standard. The permit program establishes a mechanism for enforcing the mitigation plan requirements of Rule 496, notifies the operator of the regulatory requirements, and gives the public the opportunity to give input into the permit requirements for these sources. 3) The requirement for a source or category of sources to obtain a permit would not impose a burden on those sources that is significantly more burdensome than permits required for other similar sources of air pollution. Boilers and Large Confined Animal Facilities: The permit requirements are consistent with the requirements for other permitted sources. Impact on Businesses The amendments to Rule 201 will only affect large agricultural operations that emit more than 50 tons/year of ozone precursors (or specified levels of other pollutants), referred to as major sources. At this time, we do not have any agricultural sources that will be subject to this rule. Proposed Rule 215 will only affect agricultural stationary sources with actual emissions that are greater than 25 tons/year of ROC and NOx or 50 tons/year of SOx, PM10 or CO. It will also affect agricultural stationary sources that are subject to new Rule 496, LARGE CONFINED ANIMAL FACILITIES and boilers and process heaters that are subject to Rule 411, NOX FROM BOILERS, PROCESS HEATERS AND STEAM GENERATORS and are applying for a low fuel usage exemption pursuant to that rule. The actual impact to agricultural businesses is unknown and will depend on the number of agricultural stationary sources with actual emissions over the trigger level that will modify their operations in the future. It is estimated that there could be approximately 4 sources affected: 1 source with estimated actual emissions greater than the rule applicability limits and 3 Large Confined Animal Facilities. The only cost impact from the proposed rule on existing sources will be from the imposition of permit fees. For information on this cost impact see the Staff Report for Rule 310, PERMIT FEES AGRICULTURAL SOURCE. Expansion of large existing sources and construction of large new sources will require application of BACT and may require offsets. Applications for permits for existing agricultural sources will be due within six months of adoption of the rule (February 24, 2007.) District Impacts The proposed rule is estimated to result in 0.09 Full time Equivalent (FTE) for the initial agricultural permitting and 0.04 FTE for the ongoing inspection time. The costs of administering the agricultural permitting program will be partially recovered through proposed Rule 310, PERMIT FEES AGRICULTURAL SOURCE. The remaining costs will be covered by state grants or other funding sources.

Board Memo Rule 210, General Permit Requirements, and Rule 215, Agricultural Permit Requirements and New Agricultural Permit Review August 24, 2006, Page 5 Emission Impacts There are no quantifiable emission benefits from either Rule 201 or 215, because they do not establish new emission control requirements. However, the rules will provide the frame-work for the District to enforce regulations that achieve emission reductions, like Rule 496, LARGE CONFINED ANIMAL FACILITIES. The proposed rule requires sources to use the best available emission controls (BACT) and provide mitigating reduction credits when installing new equipment that can reduce emission increases and help maintain the District s progress towards attainment. Environmental Review and Compliance The proposed amendments to Rule 201 and adoption of Rule 215 are categorically exempt from CEQA review as an action by a regulatory agency for the protection of the environment (Section 15308 of the state CEQA Guidelines). The exceptions to categorical exemptions for sensitive locations, cumulative impact, significant effect, scenic resources, toxic sites and historical resources do not apply to the proposed amendments to Rule 201 and proposed adoption of Rule 215. Public Comments & Outreach Below is a summary of the public outreach undertaken by Staff to ensure that affected businesses are aware of the proposed amendments to Rule 210 and new Rule 215. Staff conducted a public workshop on July 6, 2006, which was held in a location more accessible for the agricultural community (Wilton) and in the evening to promote increased attendance. Staff published the notice of public workshop in the Sacramento Bee, and sent the notice to all identified confined animal facilities and other agricultural facilities. Staff visited each affected source to tour the facility and talk one-on-one with the owner/operator about the requirements of the rule and to take input on the proposal. A meeting was held before the public workshop with Supervisor Don Nottoli, Agricultural Commissioner Frank Carl, Charlotte Mitchell of the Sacramento County Farm Bureau, and Cynthia Cory of the California Farm Bureau to go over requirements of the rule and answer any questions. A notice for the public hearing was published in the Sacramento Bee on July 24, 2006. The notice was also mailed to attendees of the public workshop, all affected sources, other agricultural facilities, and persons who have requested rulemaking notices. Staff received comments at the workshop. These comments, together with the Staff responses, are presented in Attachment C of the Staff Report (page 60 of this Board Package).

Board Memo Rule 210, General Permit Requirements, and Rule 215, Agricultural Permit Requirements and New Agricultural Permit Review August 24, 2006, Page 6 Conclusion The proposed amendments to Rule 201 and adoption of new Rule 215 will satisfy the requirements of state law (Health and Safety Code Section 42301.16) and federal law (40 CFR Part 51). Staff recommends that the Board approve the categorical exemption for these rules and approve the attached resolutions adopting amendments to Rule 201 and new Rule 215 as proposed. Respectfully Submitted Larry Greene, Air Pollution Control Officer Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District Approved as to form: Kathrine Pittard, District Counsel Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District Attachments

Attachment A Board Resolution Rule 201

Attachment B Board Resolution Rule 215

Attachment C Draft Rule 201

Attachment D Draft Rule 215

Attachment E Staff Report Rules 201 and 215

Attachment F Evidence of Public Notice