Antelope Valley 

Air Quality Management District 

Final 

Staff Report 

Amendment to 

Rule 431.1 – Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels

Adopted on 

08/21/2012 

43301 DIVISION ST., SUITE 206,

LANCASTER, CALIFORNIA 93535-4649 

PHONE (661) 723-8070 

FAX (661) 723-3450 
This page intentionally left blank. 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 TC-1

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

STAFF REPORT 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Rule 431.1 – Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels 

I. PURPOSE OF STAFF REPORT ...........................................................................................1 

II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...................................................................................................1 

III. STAFF RECOMMENDATION ............................................................................................3 

IV. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS CHECKLIST...........................................................................4 

V. DISCUSSION OF LEGAL REQUIREMENTS ...................................................................5 

A. REQUIRED ELEMENTS/FINDINGS...........................................................................5 

1. State Findings Required for Adoption of Rules & Regulations ......................5 

a. Necessity ..............................................................................................5 

b. Authority..............................................................................................5 

c. Clarity...................................................................................................5 

d. Consistency..........................................................................................5 

e. Non-duplication ...................................................................................5 

f. Reference..............................................................................................6 

g. Public Notice & Comment, Public Hearing.........................................6 

2. Federal Elements (SIP Submittals, Other Federal Submittals)........................6 

a. Satisfaction of Underlying Federal Requirements ...............................6 

b. Public Notice and Comment................................................................6 

c. Availability of Document.....................................................................7 

d. Notice to Specified Entities .................................................................7 

e. Public Hearing.......................................................................................7 

f. Legal Authority to Adopt and Implement ............................................7 

g. Applicable State Laws and Regulations Were Followed.....................7 

B. WRITTEN ANALYSIS OF EXISTING REQUIREMENTS.........................................7 

C. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ..............................................................................................8 

1. General.............................................................................................................8 

2. Incremental Cost Effectiveness.......................................................................8 

D. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS (CEQA) ..................................................................8 

E. SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS .................................................9 

1. Potential Environmental Impacts.....................................................................9 

2. Mitigation of Impacts.......................................................................................9 

3. Alternative Methods of Compliance................................................................9 
TC-2 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

F. PUBLIC REVIEW ..........................................................................................................9 

VI. TECHNICAL DISCUSSION ...............................................................................................9 

A. SOURCE DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................9 

B. TECHNOLOGY STATUS OF sulfur controls of LANDFILL GAS ...........................10 

C. CONTROL REQUIREMENTS....................................................................................10 

D. PROPOSED RULE SUMMARY.................................................................................10 

E. SIP HISTORY...............................................................................................................12 

1. SIP History.....................................................................................................12 

2. SIP Analysis...................................................................................................13 

Appendix A – Rule 431.1 Iterated Version .................................................................................A-1 

Appendix B - Public Notice Documents .....................................................................................B-1 

Appendix C - Public Comments and Responses .........................................................................C-1 

Appendix D - California Environmental Quality Act Documentation ........................................D-1 

1. Notice of Intent to Adopt Neg Dec.............................................................D-3 

2. Notice of Completion ...............................................................................D-45 

3. Department of Fish and Game Fee Waiver...............................................D-47 

4. No Effect Determination Form.................................................................D-48 

Appendix E – Best Available Control Technology Analysis ......................................................E-1 

1. Revised Best Available Control Technology Analysis...............................E-2 

2. Rule 431.1 SO2 Emission Calculation Worksheet...................................E-41 

3. SOx Ambient Air Quality Analysis...........................................................E-45 

Appendix F - Bibliography.......................................................................................................... F-1 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 1

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

STAFF REPORT 

Rule 431.1 – Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels

I. PURPOSE OF STAFF REPORT 

A staff report serves several discrete purposes. Its primary purpose is to provide a summary and 

background material to the members of the Governing Board. This allows the members of the 

Governing Board to be fully informed before making any required decision. It also provides the 

documentation necessary for the Governing Board to make any findings, which are required by law to 

be made prior to the approval or adoption of a document. In addition, a staff report ensures that the

correct procedures and proper documentation for approval or adoption of a document have been 

performed. Finally, the staff report provides evidence for defense against legal challenges regarding

the propriety of the approval or adoption of the document. 

II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Rule 431.1 is proposed for amendment to update rule language and formatting, delete exemptions 

which have expired by their own terms, and to provide relief to landfill operators from having to 

remove sulfur compounds from Landfill Gas (LFG) to the required level of 40 parts per million (pmv), 

since a cost-effective control technology has not been developed. AVAQMD staff, in consideration of 

today’s sulfur control technologies, proposes to amend Rule 431.1 by raising the sulfur limit for LFG 

to from 40 ppmv to 250 ppmv, calculated as hydrogen sulfide (H2S). This proposed amendment was 

presented at the May 16, 2012 Governing Board Meeting. At the direction of the Board, the proposed 

amendment was continued to allow Board members additional time in making their decision on the 

proposed amendment. 

On July 1, 1997 the Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District (AVAPCD) was created pursuant to 

statute (former Health & Safety (H&S) Code §40106, A.B. 266-Knight Ch. 542, statutes of 1996) and 

assumed all air pollution control responsibilities from the South Coast Air Quality Management 

District (SCAQMD) for the area of Los Angeles County outside the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). 

The SCAQMD rules in effect within the jurisdiction of the AVAPCD remained in effect until the 

AVAPCD Governing Board superseded, amended, or rescinded them. On January 1, 2002 the 

Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District (AVAQMD) was created pursuant to statute (H&S 

Code §41300 et seq.) to replace the AVAPCD. Once again the rules in effect at the time of the change 

remained in effect until the AVAQMD Governing Board superseded, amended or rescinded them. 

Rule 431.1 was amended by the SCAQMD on November 17, 1995 and therefore is the current rule in 

the AVAQMD rule book. 

The AVAQMD is the local agency with the primary responsibility for the control of air pollution from 

all sources other than vehicular sources (H&S Code §§39000, 40000). It is the agency responsible for 

developing and enforcing air quality rules for stationary sources of air pollution within the desert 

portion of Los Angeles County as described in H&S Code §413001

. The purpose of Rule 431.1 - 

 

1

 See also District Rule 103 for a meets and bounds description of the District’s jurisdiction. 
2 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels is to reduce SOx emissions from the burning of gaseous fuels in 

stationary combustion equipment requiring a Permit to Operate (PTO). Rule 431.1 limits total sulfur 

compounds in gaseous fuels at 40 ppmv, calculated as hydrogen sulfide (H2S). The AVAQMD is 

proposing amendments to Rule 431.1 to provide relief to landfill operators from having to remove 

sulfur compounds from LFG to the required level of 40 ppmv, since a cost-effective control technology 

has not been developed, provide alternative fuel gas monitoring provision for a person burning LFG or

sewer digester gas, and eliminated the Optional Facility Compliance Plan (OFCP), considered an 

economic incentive program (EIP), because it does not conform to the requirements of a USEPA EIP 

program. Additionally, obsolete rule language is proposed to be deleted and for rule clarity, existing 

rule language is proposed to be revised, and definitions will be updated. 

The Lancaster Landfill and Antelope Valley Recycling & Disposal Facility are both located in the 

AVAQMD in the cities of Lancaster and Palmdale respectively. They are approximately 12.3 miles 

apart from one another. The operations and equipment utilized at each landfill are similar, and both 

feature a landfill gas collection and flaring system. At each site, LFG is continuously extracted from 

the landfill via vertical collection wells and then piped to an enclosed flare where the LFG is 

combusted. Products of LFG combustion include carbon monoxide, unburned hydrocarbons, oxides of 

nitrogen, sulfur dioxide (SOx), and particulate matter (PM10). Only SOx and PM10 emissions are 

expected to increase. PM10 emission increases are expected to be insignificant, however, based on the 

constituents of LFG from each site as well as atmospheric conditions in the Antelope Valley which 

limit secondary PM10 formation. 

The proposed amendments will result in a maximum amount of emissions reductions of sulfur oxides 

(SOx) forgone in the amount of about 10 pounds per day and about 2 tons per year. SOx emission 

calculations are presented in Appendix E. 

Facilities subject to Rule 431.1 generally include utilities, oil and gas production facilities, publicly 

owned treatment works (POTWs), and wastewater treatment facilities and landfill facilities which 

produce sewage digester gas and LFG, respectively. It should be noted, that at present, the AVAQMD 

is not aware of any utilities or oil and gas production facilities subject to this rule. 

LFG consists of moisture, carbon dioxide and light hydrocarbon, mainly methane, with heat content 

about half as high as that of refinery gas. Because of the intervening reaction of carbon dioxide with 

the reagents for removal of sulfur compounds in LFG, the sulfur removal technologies now available in 

refineries cannot be directly transferred to landfills. Historically, it has been stated that “after 

reviewing available techniques, conducting an extended literature search and conducting research 

demonstration projects for cost-effective technologies to remove sulfur from LFG, some landfill 

operators have been unable to cost effectively meet the sulfur limit of 40 ppmv and have entered into 

compliance agreements with the AVAQMD for exceeding the sulfur limit” (SCAQMD Staff Report, 

April 1998). An analysis and review of potential sulfur control technologies for LFG similar to that of 

SCAQMD 1998 review (See Appendix E) was conducted. Results of this analysis show that although 

there are a number of potential control technologies available, the cost, using SCAQMD methodology 

and cost criteria, is prohibitive. Therefore, the AVAQMD concludes that a cost effective sulfur control 

for LFG is presently not available. A more detailed discussion of the sulfur control technologies can be 

found in Appendix E. 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 3

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

III. STAFF RECOMMENDATION 

Staff recommends that the Governing Board of the AVAQMD adopt the proposed amendments to Rule 

431.1 – Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels and approve the appropriate California Environmental 

Quality Act Documentation. This action is necessary to update rule language and definitions, and to 

provide relief to landfill operators. 

The Governing Board of the AVAQMD amended Rule 431.1 on August 21, 2012. 
4 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

IV. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS CHECKLIST 

The findings and analysis as indicated below are required for the procedurally correct amendment of 

Rule 431.1 – Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels. Each item is discussed, if applicable, in Section V 

below. Copies of documents are included in the appropriate Appendix. 

FINDINGS REQUIRED FOR 

RULES & REGULATIONS 

 X Necessity 

 X Authority 

 X Clarity 

 X Consistency 

 X Non duplication 

 X Reference 

 X Public Notice & Comment 

 X Public Hearing 

REQUIREMENTS FOR STATE 

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 

SUBMISSION (SIP): 

 X Public Notice & Comment 

 X Availability of Document 

 X Notice to Specified Entities (State, 

Air Districts, USEPA, Other States) 

 X Public Hearing 

 X Legal Authority to adopt and 

implement the document. 

 X Applicable State laws and 

regulations were followed. 

ELEMENTS OF A FEDERAL 

SUBMISSION 

 X Elements as set forth in applicable 

Federal law or regulations. 

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL 

QUALITY ACT REQUIREMENTS 

(CEQA):

NA Ministerial Action 

NA Exemption 

 X Negative Declaration 

N/A Environmental Impact Report 

 X Appropriate findings, if necessary. 

 X Public Notice & Comment 

SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL 

ANALYSIS (RULES & REGULATIONS 

ONLY): 

 X Environmental impacts of 

compliance. 

 X Mitigation of impacts. 

 X Alternative methods of compliance. 

OTHER: 

 X Written analysis of existing air 

pollution control requirements 

 X Economic Analysis 

 X Public Review 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 5

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

V. DISCUSSION OF LEGAL REQUIREMENTS 

A. REQUIRED ELEMENTS/FINDINGS 

This section discusses the State of California statutory requirements that apply to the proposed 

amendment of Rule 431.1. These are actions, that need to be performed, and/or information, 

that must be provided in order to amend the rule in a procedurally correct manner. 

1. State Findings Required for Adoption of Rules & Regulations: 

Before adopting, amending, or repealing a rule or regulation, the Governing Board of 

the AVAQMD is required to make findings of necessity, authority, clarity, consistency, 

non-duplication, and reference based upon relevant information presented at the hearing. 

The information below is provided to assist the Governing Board of the AVAQMD in 

making these findings. 

a. Necessity: 

The proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 is necessary to update the rule and to 

adjust the current LFG fuel sulfur limits to levels which are reasonable to 

achieve for local landfill operators.

b. Authority: 

AVAQMD has the authority pursuant to H&S Code §40702 to adopt, amend or 

repeal rules and regulations. 

c. Clarity: 

The proposed amendments are clear in that they are written so that the persons 

subject to the rule can easily understand the meaning. 

d. Consistency: 

The proposed amendment of Rule 431.1 is in harmony with, and not in conflict 

with or contradictory to, any state law or regulation, federal law or regulation, or 

court decisions because they update the rule consistent with local and statewide 

LFG standards. 

e. Non-duplication: 

The proposed amendment of Rule 431.1 does not impose the same requirements 

as an existing state or federal law or regulation because there are no existing 

applicable laws or regulations for sulfur content of LFG. 
6 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

f. Reference: 

AVAQMD has the authority pursuant to H&S Code §40702 to adopt, amend or 

repeal rules and regulations. 

g. Public Notice & Comment, Public Hearing: 

Notice for the public hearing for the proposed amendment of Rule 431.1 was 

published April 5, 2012 for the May 15, 2012 meeting. This proposed 

amendment was presented at the May 16, 2012 Governing Board Meeting. At 

the direction of the Board, the proposed amendment was continued to allow 

Board members additional time in making their decision on the proposed 

amendment. This item was continued from May 16, 2012 to June 19, 2012 and 

again to July 17, 2012 and finally to August 21, 2012. See Appendix “B” for a 

copy of the public notice. See Appendix C for copies of comments, if any, and 

AVAQMD responses. 

2. Federal Elements (SIP Submittals, Other Federal Submittals): 

Submittals to USEPA are required to include various elements depending upon the type 

of document submitted and the underlying federal law which requires the submittal. 

The information below indicates which elements are required for the proposed 

amendment of Rule 431.1 and how they were satisfied. 

a. Satisfaction of Underlying Federal Requirements: 

AVAQMD Rule 431.1 is the local rule governing sulfur content of gaseous 

fuels. The 05/06/1983 SCAQMD version of Rule 431.1 was approved into the 

SIP2

 at 49 FR 41028 on 10/19/1984. The proposed amendments will be 

submitted into the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The criteria for determining 

completeness of SIP submissions are set forth in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix V, 

2.0. This staff report and supporting adoption documentation will satisfy the 

completeness requirements. 

b. Public Notice and Comment: 

Notice for the public hearing for the proposed adoption of Rule 431.1 was 

published on April 5, 2012 for the May 15, 2012 meeting. This proposed 

amendment was presented at the May 16, 2012 Governing Board Meeting. At 

the direction of the Board, the proposed amendment was continued to allow 

Board members additional time in making their decision on the proposed 

amendment. This item was continued from May 16, 2012 to June 19, 2012 and 

again to July 17, 2012 and finally to August 21, 2012. See Appendix “B” for a 

copy of the public notice. 

 

2

 See section (VI)(E). for SIP history and analysis of Rule 431.1. 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 7

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

c. Availability of Document: 

Copies of proposed amended Rule 431.1 and the accompanying draft staff report 

will be made available to the public on or before April 2, 2012. 

d. Notice to Specified Entities: 

Copies of the proposed amendment of Rule 431.1 and the accompanying draft 

staff report were mailed to all affected agencies, including but not limited to 

CARB and USEPA. 

e. Public Hearing: 

Notice for the public hearing for the proposed adoption of Rule 431.1 was 

published on April 5, 2012 for the May 15, 2012 meeting. This proposed 

amendment was presented at the May 16, 2012 Governing Board Meeting. At 

the direction of the Board, the proposed amendment was continued to allow 

Board members additional time in making their decision on the proposed 

amendment. 

f. Legal Authority to Adopt and Implement: 

The AVAQMD has the authority pursuant to H&S Code §40702 to adopt, 

amend, or repeal rules and regulations and to do such acts as may be necessary 

or proper to execute the duties imposed upon the AVAQMD. 

g. Applicable State Laws and Regulations Were Followed: 

Public notice and hearing procedures pursuant to H&S Code §§40725-40728 

have been followed. See Section (V)(A)(1) above for compliance with state 

findings required pursuant to H&S Code §40727. See Section (V)(B) below for 

compliance with the required analysis of existing requirements pursuant to H&S 

Code §40727.2. See Section (V)(C) for compliance with economic analysis 

requirements pursuant to H&S Code §40920.6. See Section (V)(D) below for 

compliance with provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act 

(CEQA). 

B. WRITTEN ANALYSIS OF EXISTING REQUIREMENTS 

H&S Code §40727.2 requires air districts to prepare a written analysis of all existing federal air 

pollution control requirements that apply to the same equipment or source type as the rule 

proposed for modification by the district. The proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 will remove 

obsolete rule language, revise existing rule language and requirements, and update definitions. 

Two federal source specific requirements-New Source Performance Standard 40 CFR Part 60, 

Subpart WWWW – Standards of Performance for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills, and 

National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart AAAA, are 
8 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

applicable to both local landfills. The requirements found in either federal regulation, however 

does not interfere or conflict with the requirements of Rule 431.1, and vice versa. Therefore, 

additional analysis of existing pollution control requirements is not required. 

C. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS 

1. General 

The proposed amendments to adjust the sulfur dioxide requirements are intended to 

provide economic relief to landfill owner/operators. Current LFG sulfur control 

technologies have not proven to be cost effective to install and operate in meeting 

current rule emission limits (See “BACT Analysis” in Appendix E). Adjusting gaseous 

fuel sulfur limits upwards provides a cost effective solution for landfill owner/operators. 

2. Incremental Cost Effectiveness 

Pursuant to H&S Code §40920.6, incremental cost effectiveness calculations are 

required for rules and regulations which are adopted or amended to meet the California 

Clean Air Act requirements for Best Available Retrofit Control Technology (BARCT) 

or “all feasible measures” to control volatile compounds, oxides of nitrogen or oxides of 

sulfur. The incremental cost effectiveness calculation is not applicable to this action as 

the proposed amendments do not impose more stringent or additional control 

requirements. 

D. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS (CEQA) 

Through the process described below, it was determined that a Negative Declaration would be 

the appropriate California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process for the proposed 

amendment of Rule 431.1. 

1. The proposed amendment of Rule 431.1 meets the CEQA definition of 

“project.” They are not “ministerial” actions. 

2. The proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 are not exempt from CEQA review 

because the proposed amendments could potentially result in environmental 

impacts, especially in the area of “Air Quality”, so no statutory or categorical 

exemptions apply. 

3. Because the proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 were determined to be subject 

to CEQA review, an Initial Study was performed. Based upon the results of the 

Initial Study a Negative Declaration has been prepared. The proposed Negative 

Declaration and Initial Study was submitted to the Governor’s Office of 

Planning and Research and circulated to the County of Los Angeles with a 

public review period that commenced March 12, 2012 and will close April 11, 

2012. Copies of the proposed Negative Declaration and Initial Study as well as 

correspondence and other CEQA documentation can be found in Appendix D. 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 9

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

E. SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 

1. Potential Environmental Impacts 

No significant impacts have been identified as a result of the proposed 

amendments. 

2. Mitigation of Impacts 

Mitigation is not required. 

3. Alternative Methods of Compliance 

 None present. 

F. PUBLIC REVIEW 

See Staff Report Section (V)(A)(1)(g) and (2)(b), as well as Appendix B. 

VI. TECHNICAL DISCUSSION 

A. SOURCE DESCRIPTION 

1. Rule Applicability 

Rule 431.1 – Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels applies to any burning, transferring, 

selling or the offering for sale of any gaseous fuels containing sulfur compounds in 

excess of 16 parts per million by volume (ppmv) calculated as hydrogen sulfide (H2S) in 

stationary equipment requiring a PTO by the AVAQMD.

Facilities subject to Rule 431.1 generally include utilities, oil and gas production 

facilities, and POTWs and landfill facilities which produce sewage digester gas and 

LFG, respectively. 

2. Rule History 

On July 1, 1997 the AVAPCD was created pursuant to statute (former H&S Code 

§40106, A.B. 266-Knight Ch. 542, statutes of 1996) and assumed all air pollution 

control responsibilities from the SCAQMD for the area of Los Angeles County outside 

the South Coast Air Basin. The SCAQMD rules in effect within the jurisdiction of the 

AVAPCD remained in effect until the AVAPCD Governing Board superceded or 

amended them. Rule 431.1 as amended by SCAQMD on November 17, 1995 was one 

of these rules. 

On January 1, 2002 the AVAQMD was created pursuant to statute (H&S Code §41300 

et seq.) to replace the AVAPCD. Once again the rules in effect at the time of the change 

remained in effect until the AVAQMD Governing Board superceded or amended them. 
10 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

Rule 431.1 has not been amended by the AVAPCD Governing Board since November 

17, 1995, therefore, it is current version effective within the AVAQMD. 

The AVAQMD version of the rule in the State Implementation Plan (SIP) is the May 6, 

1983 version. This is due to the November 17, 1995 version being submitted as a SIP 

revision with no USEPA approval action. Please see section (E) below for a more 

detailed explanation of the SIP history. 

B. TECHNOLOGY STATUS OF SULFUR CONTROLS OF LANDFILL GAS 

Sulfur control technology manufacturers have engineered control technology equipment 

capable of removing sulfur from LFG down to levels compliant with current Rule 431.1 

levels. A detailed analysis of suitable control technology is presented in Appendix E. 

C. CONTROL REQUIREMENTS 

The proposed amendments to AVAQMD Rule 431.1 do not mandate controls however 

failure to meet proposed fuel sulfur levels would almost necessarily result in the 

requirement to install emission control equipment to comply with the specified fuel 

sulfur limits. 

D. PROPOSED RULE SUMMARY 

This section gives a brief overview of Rule 431.1– Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels 

Rule sections have been renumbered as needed. The Rule follows standard AVAQMD 

format. 

1. Section (A) – General 

Section (A)(1) – Removed references to South Coast Air Quality Management District 

(SCAQMD). Broadened applicability of rule by removing provision that only permitted 

equipment need comply. Rule is now applicable to all stationary equipment. 

Section (A)(2) – Further defined applicability by clarifying with backstop of 16 ppmv. 

2. Section (B) − Definitions 

In general all definitions used have been formatted into AVAQMD format. They have 

been designed to harmonize existing rule definitions, define terms not in previous use 

and remove definitions no longer in use. 

3. Section (C) − Sulfur Content Requirements 

Section (C)(1) − Revised language with no change to requirements or applicability. 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 11

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

Section (C)(2) − Minor formatting changes. Modified Table 1, Landfill Gas H2S limit 

increased to 250 ppmv averaged on a daily basis. Will use rule effective date as date of 

compliance. Modified language enabling landfill gas and sewage digester gas 

production facilities increased monitoring flexiblility of gaseous fuel produced. 

Section (C)(3) − Modified formatting and clarified requirements by revising language of 

section. 

Section (C)(4) − “OFCP” provision eliminated because in its present form did not 

conform to USEPAs economic incentive program (EIP). There are currently no 

facilities in the District opting to use an OFCP as a means to comply with the emission 

limits of Rule 431.1. 

4. Section (D) − Monitoring Requirements 

Section (D)(1) − Provides exemption from requirement to install and operate a CFGMS 

or a CEMS. Stipulates specific gases which do require CFGMS or CEMS. Remove 

reference to Rule 1150.1 plan. 

Section (D)(2) − Minor modifications to references for clarity. 

Section (D)(3) − Allows approved alternative monitoring requirements that may be used 

in lieu of CFGMS or CEMS. 

5. Section (E) − Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements 

Section (E)(1) − Stipulates duration records to be kept. 

Section (E)(2) − Minor modification to clarify language as well as to specify 

information required and approved for use in the annual report. 

Section (E)(3) − Minor modification for terms and language clarification. 

Section (E)(4) − Stipulates records to be kept for person(s) who operate continuous 

monitor. 

6. Section (F) − Test Methods 

Section (F) − Recordkeeping Requirements 

Section (F)(1) − Minor modification clarifying language. 

Section (F)(2) −No Changes. 

Section (F)(3) −No Changes. 

7. Section (G) − Exemptions 
12 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

Section has had minor formatting changes which include removing expired definitions, 

clarifying language, and removing references to SCAQMD and SCAQMD programs 

which are not applicable in the AVAQMD. 

8. Attachment A 

Minor formatting changes referencing SCAQMD methods to be used and to remove 

deadline for the alternative monitoring plan. 

E. SIP HISTORY 

1. SIP History. 

Prior to 1975 the original air district for the Antelope Valley region was the Los Angeles 

County APCD that had a jurisdiction covering the entire county of Los Angeles. In 

1975, the Southern California APCD was created. It was a joint powers authority that 

had a jurisdiction covering all of the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and 

San Bernardino. The South Cost Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) came 

into existence pursuant to statute on February 1, 1976 and originally covered only the 

areas within South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). The legislation was thereafter amended to 

allow non SCAB areas to “opt in”. Los Angeles County exercised this option and thus 

the Antelope Valley became a part of SCAQMD. On July 1, 1997 the Antelope Valley 

Air Pollution Control District (AVAPCD) replaced the SCAQMD as the agency with 

jurisdiction over the Los Angeles County portion of the Mojave Desert Air Basin 

(MDAB). On January 1, 2002 the AVAPCD was replaced by the AVAQMD. Pursuant 

to both statutory changes, the rule and regulations of the predecessor district were 

retained until the Governing Board adopted, amended or rescinded them. At the first 

meeting of the both the AVAPCD and the AVAQMD, the respective Governing Boards 

reaffirmed all the rules and regulations in effect at the time the agency changed. 

The jurisdiction of the AVAPCD and the AVAQMD were specified in the statutes as 

the portion of the Los Angeles County contained within the MDAB. The MDAB was 

formerly known as the Southeast Desert Air Basin (SEDAB). In 1997 the SEDAB was 

split into the MDAB and the Salton Sea Air Basin. Descriptions of these air basins can 

be found in 17 Cal. Code Regs. §§60109 and 60144. Since USEPA adopts SIP 

revisions in California as effective within jurisdictional boundaries of local air districts, 

when the local air district boundaries change the SIP as approved by USEPA for that 

area up to the date of the change remains as the SIP in that particular area. Thus, upon 

creation of the AVAPCD on July 1, 1997 the AVAPCD acquired the SIP applicable to 

the Antelope Valley portion of the SCAQMD that was effective as of June 30, 1997. 

Likewise, the AVAQMD acquired the SIP that was effective in the jurisdiction of the 

AVAPCD as of December 31, 2000. Therefore, the SIP history for this region is based 

upon the rules adopted, effective, and approved for the Antelope Valley by SCAQMD. 

Rule 431.1 was originally adopted by SCAQMD on November 4, 1977. It was 

thereafter amended by SCAQMD on September 1, 1978, February 2, 1979, January 8, 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 13

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

1982, May 6, 1983, May 4, 1990, April 5, 1991, September 11, 1992, October 2, 1992, 

and November 17, 1995. The November 17, 1995 amendment is the version of the rule 

retained by the AVAPCD upon its creation and also retained by the AVAQMD upon its 

creation. The AVAQMD could find no evidence that this version of the rule was acted 

upon by USEPA as a SIP submission. Therefore, the amendment of May 6, 1983 is the 

SIP rule within the jurisdiction of the AVAQMD. 

2. SIP Analysis. 

The AVAQMD will request CARB to submit amended Rule 431.1 to replace the current 

SIP version in effect. 

Since there is a previously existing SIP rule for this category the AVAQMD will request 

that it be superseded. In order to replace existing SIP rules the AVAQMD is required to 

show that the proposed amendments are not less stringent than the provisions currently 

in the SIP. 

This rule amendment proposes to return LFG sulfur limits to those required for sale of 

LFG in the current SIP version for AVAQMD. This is not a relaxation of the SIP. This 

amendment contains similar requirements to the SCAQMD version of Rule 431.1 as 

amended June 12, 1998, which is SIP approved at 64 FR 67787 (12/3/99). 
14 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

This page intentionally left blank. 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 A-1

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

APPENDIX "A"

Rule 431.1 – Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels

Iterated Version 

The iterated version is provided so that the changes to an existing rule may be easily found. The manner 

of differentiating text is as follows: 

1. Underline identifies new or revised language. 

2. Lined out text identifies language which is being deleted. 

3. Normal text identifies the current language of the current rule which will remain unchanged by the 

adoption of the proposed amendments. 

4. Italicized text identifies explanatory material that is not part of the proposed language. 
A-2 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

This page intentionally left blank. 
(Adopted: 04/07/89; Amended: 02/01/91; Amended: 02/01/91; 

Amended: 07/19/91; Amended: 08/02/91; Amended: 12/04/92; 

Amended: 12/10/93; Amended: 04/11/97; Amended: mm/dd/yy)

AVAQMD Rule 431.1 431.1-1

Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels 

D1b: 03/29/12 

RULE 431.1 

Sulfur Content Of of Gaseous Fuels 

(aA) General

(1) Purpose 

(a) The purpose of this rule is to reduce sulfur oxides (SOx) emissions from the 

burning of gaseous fuels in stationary equipment requiring a permit to operate by 

the South Coast Air Quality Management District (District)..

(2) Applicability

(a) The provisions of this rule shall apply to any burning, transferring, selling or the 

offering for sale of any gaseous fuels containing sulfur compounds in excess of 

16 parts per million by volume (ppmv), calculated as hydrogen sulfide (H2S), in 

stationary equipment requiring a Permit to Operate (PTO) by the Antelope 

Valley Air Quality Management District (District). [Derived from SCAQMD 

Rule 431.1(b)]

(B) Definitions 

(1) BURN means to “Air Pollution Control Officer” (APCO) – The person appointed to the 

position of Air Pollution Control Officer of the District pursuant to the provisions of 

California Health & Safety Code §40750, and his or her designee. [Derived from 

AVAQMD Rule 1301(G)]

(2) “Authority to Construct Permit” (ATC) – A District permit required pursuant to the

provisions of District Rule 201 which must be obtained prior to the building, erecting, 

installation, alteration or replacement of any Permit Unit. Such permit may act as a

temporary PTO pursuant to the provisions of District Rule 202. [Derived from 

AVAQMD Rule 1301(K)]

(3) Burn – To combust any gaseous fuel, whether for useful heat or by incineration without 

heat recovery, except for flaring of emergency vent gases. 
431.1-2 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels 

D1b: 03/29/12 

(2) CONTINUOUS EMISSION MONITORING SYSTEM (CEMS) is a4) “California 

Air Resources Board” (CARB) – The California State Air Resources Board the powers 

and duties of which are described in Part 2 of Division 26 of the California Health & 

Safety Code (commencing with section 39500). [Derived from AVAQMD Rule 

1301(P)]

(5) Continuous Emission Monitoring System (CEMS) – A system of equipment that 

continuously measures and records all parameters necessary to directly determine 

concentrations and/or mass emissions of selected pollutants, and which meets all of the 

requirements of Attachment A, Section II. 

(3) CONTINUOUS FUEL GAS MONITORING SYSTEM6) Continuous Fuel Gas 

Monitoring System” (CFGMS) is a – A system of equipment that continuously 

measures and records total sulfur concentration in the gaseous fuel prior to burning, and 

which meets all the requirements of Attachment A, Section I. 

(4) DAILY AVERAGE is an7) “Continuous Monitor” – a CEMS or CFGMS. [Derived 

from SCAQMD Rule 431.1(c)(4)]

(8) Daily Average – An arithmetic mean of all the of a facility’s sulfur compounds readings 

within a calendar day obtained according to the guideline specified in Attachment A.

(5) EMERGENCY VENT GAS is any(9) “District” – The Antelope Valley Air 

Quality Management District, the geographical area of which is described in District 

Rule 103. [Derived from AVAQMD Rule 1301(X)]

(10) Emergency Vent Gas – Any gas released from a process unit as a result of any process 

upset or breakdown. 

(6) GASEOUS FUEL is any11) Gaseous Fuel – Any gaseous material which releases heat 

when burned including, but not limited to, any natural, refinery, field produced, process, 

synthetic, landfill, sewage digester, or waste gases with a gross heating value of 2670 

kilocalories per cubic meter (300 BTU per cubic foot) or higher, at standard conditions. 

(7) LANDFILL GAS is any12) Landfill Gas – Any gas derived through any biological 

process from the decomposition of organic waste buried within a waste disposal site. 

(8) MONTHLY WEIGHTED AVERAGE SULFUR CONTENT is the 13) Monthly 

Weighted Average Sulfur Content – The result of the summation of average daily sulfur 

contents of the fuel(s) consumed multiplied by the average daily consumption rates of 

the fuel(s) consumed in any month divided by the total gaseous fuel consumption rate 

for that month. 

(9) NATURAL GAS is a14) Natural Gas – A mixture of gaseous hydrocarbons, with at 

least 80 percent methane (by volume), and of pipeline quality, such as the gas sold or 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 431.1-3

Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels 

D1b: 03/29/12 

distributed by any utility company regulated by the California Public Utilities 

Commission. 

(10) RECLAIM SOx FACILITY is a facility that has been included in the RECLAIM 

(Regional Clean Air Incentives Market)15) “Permit to Operate” (PTO) – A District 

permit required pursuant to the provisions of District Rule 203 which must be obtained 

prior to operation of a Permit Unit. An ATC may function as a temporary PTO pursuant 

to the provisions of District Rule 202. [Derived from AVAQMD Rule 1301(BBB)]

[Deleted-SCAQMD legacy program in accordance with the requirements of Rule 2001 

"Applicability", and/or which has been issued a RECLAIM Facility Permit and is 

subject to the requirements of Rule 2011, "Requirements for Monitoring, 

Reporting,recinded from AVAQMD by its removal from AVAQMD Rules and 

Recordkeeping for Oxides of Sulfur (SOx) Emissions".

(11) REFINERY GAS is anyRegulations](16) Refinery Gas – Any combustible gaseous 

by-product generated from a petroleum refinery process unit operation, with a gross 

heating value of 2670 kilocalories per cubic meter (300 BTU per cubic foot) or higher, 

at standard conditions.

(12) SEWAGE DIGESTER GAS is any(17) Sewage Digester Gas – Any gas derived 

from anaerobic decomposition of organic sewage within its containment. 

(13) SMALL REFINER means any person owning or operating a facility in California that 

produces materials from processing of petroleum crude provided such facility:18)

 “South Coast Air Quality Management District” – The air quality district created 

pursuant to Division 26, Part 3, Chapter 5.5 of the California Health & Safety Code 

(commencing with §40400). [Derived from AVAQMD Rule 1124.]

(A) has and at(18) [Deleted-Consolidated all times had since January 1, 1978, a 

crude oil capacity of not more than 55,000 barrels per stream day; and

(B) has not been, at any time since September 1, 1988, owned or controlled by any 

refiner that at the same time owned or controlled refineries in California with a total 

combined crude oil capacity of more than 55,000 barrels per stream day; and

(C) has not been at any time since September 1, 1988, owned or controlled by any 

refiner that at the same time owned or controlled refineries in the United States with a 

total combined crude oil capacity of more than 137,500 barrels per stream day; and

(D) has received a two-year extension forrefinery gas due to expiration of extra

compliance with California Air Resources Board's Phase II Reformulated Gasoline 

Requirements.time]
431.1-4 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels 

D1b: 03/29/12 

(14) STANDARD CONDITIONS is the(19) Standard Conditions – The atmospheric 

state where the temperature is 60o°F and barometric pressure is 14.7 pounds per square

inch absolute.

(15) STREAM DAY is any(20) Stream Day – Any day or part of a day when a facility or a 

process unit is in operation. 

(21) “United States Environmental Protection Agency” (USEPA) - The United States

Environmental Protection Agency, the Administrator of the USEPA and his or her

authorized representative. [Derived from AVAQMD Rule 1301(YYY)]

(c) Sulfur Content C) Requirements 

(1) Natural gas 

A person shall not sell or offer for sale for use in the jurisdiction covered 

by of the District natural gas containing sulfur compounds, calculated as H2S, in excess 

of 16 parts per million by volume (ppmv) calculated as hydrogen sulfide. 

[Deleted- Provision expired by its own terms](2) Small Refiners Refinery gas

Anytime prior to May 4, 1996, a small refiner shall not:

(A) sell any refinery gas containing sulfur compounds in excess of 80 ppmv 

calculated as hydrogen sulfide, or

(B) burn or discharge to any fuel gas system or vent gas disposal system, refinery gas 

containing sulfur compounds in excess of 800 ppmv calculated as hydrogen 

sulfide, unless sulfur compounds in the stack gases are reduced to a level below 

that which would be emitted when using a fuel which complies with the 

requirements of this paragraph.

For purposes of this paragraph, the 80 or 800 ppmv limit shall apply to any gaseous fuel 

vented from a process unit or, if applicable, as vented from a sulfur removal unit. On or 

after May 4, 1996, the applicable sulfur compounds content limit for small refiners 

refinery gas shall be as specified in paragraph (c)(3) of this rule.

(3) Other Gaseous Fuels 

On or after the applicable compliance dates specified in Table 1, aA person shall 

not burn in equipment requiring a PTO, purchase, transfer, sell or offer for sale for use 

in the jurisdiction of the District, any gaseous fuel containing sulfur compounds,

calculated as ppmv hydrogen sulfideasH2S, in excess of the concentration limits as 

measured over the averaging periods for various gaseous fuels as specified in Table 1.

[Derived from SCAQMD Rule 431.1(d]
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 431.1-5

Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels 

D1b: 03/29/12 

TABLE 1

Fuel Type Sulfur Limits 

ppmv 

Averaging Periods Compliance Date On or 

After

Refinery Gas 40 4 hrs

 Small Refiners 40 4 hrs May 4, 1996

 Other Refiners 40 4 hrs May 4, 1994

Landfill Gas 150 Daily November 17, 1995

40 or Daily or July 1, 1997

40 and 200 Monthly and15-

minutes

July 1, 1997

Sewage Digester 

Gas

40 or250 Daily or November 17, 1995

Sewage Digester 

Gas

40 and 500or Monthly and 15-

minutesDaily or

November 17, 1995

Other Gases 40 and 500 4 hrsMonthly and

15-minutes

May 4, 1994

(A) Landfill gas and sewage digester gas

(i)

A 

person who 

complies through 

monthly averaging 

shall install and 

properly operate a 

continuous 

monitor that 

compliesOther 

Gases

40 4 hrs

[Deleted column with the requirements specified in subdivision (d) of this rule. Compliance 

shall be determined based on readings obtained from the approved 

CFGMS or as calculated from the approved CEMS reading.

(B) Optional Facility Compliance Plan ("OFCP")
431.1-6 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels 

D1b: 03/29/12 

A person may comply with paragraph (c)(3) by achieving equivalent sulfur 

oxides (SOx) emission reductions within the facility, provided that the applicant 

submits and complies with an Optional Facility Compliance Plan ("OFCP") 

which has been approved in writing by the Executive Officer or designee. The 

OFCP shall:

(i) Contain, at a minimum, all data, records, and other information necessary 

to determine eligibility for alternative emission control, including but not 

limited to:

(I) A list of equipment and a description of the equipment where the 

gaseous fuel is being produced and/or burned;

(II) Amount of fuel produced by and/or to be burned in each of the 

equipment listed above;

(III) The estimated emission of sulfur dioxide from each equipment; 

and

(IV) Historical and projected information on fuel usage;

(ii) Demonstrate that daily total SOx emissions under the OFCP from all 

sources within the facility regulated under Rule 431.1 would be less than or 

equal to SOx emissions that would have been emitted based on actual total SOx

emissions from each source, or the sulfur content limits of this rule, whichever 

results in lower SOx emissions. The total SOx emissions generated from the 

subject fuel shall be determined using a continuous emission monitoring system 

(CEMS) specified in subdivision (d). The total emissions may be determined by 

monitoring the sulfur dioxide emissions from at least 70 percent of the total fuel 

gas consumed as obtained from a totalizing meter, and calculating the total 

emissions using the CEMS data;

(iii) Demonstrate that the permit units subject to the specified rule emission 

limitations are inexpired compliance with all applicable District rules or 

are on an approved schedule of compliance; anddates]

(iv) Demonstrate that continuous monitoring requirements of SOx emissions 

specified in subdivision (d) of this rule are complied with.

(4) [“OFCP” provision eliminated because in its present form did not conform to USEPAs economic 

incentive program (EIP). There are currently no facilities in the District opting to use an OFCP as a

means to comply with the emission limits of Rule 431.1.] (3) Previously Exempt or Previously 

Compliant Facilities 

A person burning gaseous fuel containing sulfur compounds in excess of the 

limits specified in Table 1 and whose facility had been previously exempt from this rule 

pursuant to paragraph (g)(8subsection (G)(6); or any person who, without the use of any 

sulfur removal or control system, had been previously in compliance with the limits 

specified in Table 1, shall: 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 431.1-7

Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels 

D1b: 03/29/12 

(A) submit(a) Submit for approval by the Executive Officer or 

designeeAPCO within 30 days from the time of exceedance or non-compliance, 

a plan to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the rule; 

(B) submit(b) Submit to the Executive Officer or designeeAPCO an 

application for a fuel gas control system within six months of the time of 

exceedance of the exemption criteria specified in paragraph (g)(8subsection

(G)(6), or non-compliance with the limit; 

(C) demonstrate (c) Demonstrate compliance with the limit specified 

in Table 1 no later than eighteen (18) months after the time of exceedance, or by 

July 1, 1997, whichever is later; and 

(D) comply with paragraph (d)(3).

(d(d) Comply with subsections (D)(1)and (D)(2), or (D)(3).

(D) Monitoring Requirements 

(1) A person burning landfill gas or sewage digester gasExcept as provided in subsection 

(D)(3), a person burning gaseous fuels, other than exclusively natural gas, in stationary 

equipment requiring a permit to operatePTO by the District shall install andhave a

properly operate aoperating continuous fuel gas monitoring system (CFGMS) to 

determine the sulfur content, calculated as H2S, of the fuel gas prior to burning, or a 

continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS) to determine SOx emissions after 

burning. SuchAll continuous monitormonitors, require District approval, which shall 

be approved according tobased on the requirements as set forth specified in Attachment 

A. An alternative method that ensures adequate compliance with the daily total sulfur 

content limitation of paragraphs (c)(1), (2) and (3) of this rule may be used upon written 

approval by the Executive Officers of the District, the California Air Resources Board 

(CARB), and the Regional Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA), Region IX, or their designees. At a minimum, the alternative method shall meet 

the specifications of Attachment A, Section III.

Prior to the final compliance date specified for landfill gas in Table 1, (a person burning 

landfill gas may comply with the monitoring requirements specified in this paragraph, if 

data regarding total sulfur content of the landfill gas is contained and submitted to the 

District in a Rule 1150.1 plan.

(2) A person burning gaseous fuels other than natural gas, landfill gas, or sewage digester 

gas in stationary equipment requiring a District permit to operate shall install and 

properly operate a the CFGMS to determine the total sulfur contentupstream of any 

mixing of the gaseous fuel prior to burning, or a CEMS to determine the sulfur oxides 
431.1-8 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels 

D1b: 03/29/12 

(SOx) emissions after burning according to the applicable requirements set forth in 

Attachment A. A person shall not mix refinery gases with natural gas, propane or other 

fuels upstream of the monitoring device. 

(3)b) A person subject to (c)(4)subsection (C)(3) of this rule who burns gaseous fuels 

containing sulfur compounds in excess of the limits specified in Table 1, shall 

installcomply with subsections (D)(1) and properly operate a CFGMS to 

determine the sulfur content in the fuel gas prior to combustion, or CEMS to 

determine the sulfur oxide emissions after burning, within(D)(2) no later than

twelve months from after the date a Permit to Construct a sulfur removal system 

an ATC is issued. Such monitor shall be approved according to the 

requirements of Attachment A, or an alternative method may be used upon 

approval by the Executive Officers of the District and CARB, and the Regional 

Administrator of the EPA, Region IX, or their designeesfor a sulfur removal 

system or comply with subsection (D)(3). 

(4c) Compliance with the Table 1 sulfur limits shall be determined based on readings 

obtained from an approved Continuous Monitor.

[Moved to section (D)(1)] [Moved to section (D)(1)] [Moved to section (D)(1)](2) A 

person installing a continuous monitorContinuous Monitor shall submit to the District 

for approval, a quality assurance procedure as specified in USEPA 40 CFR Part 60, 

Appendix F, Procedure 1 for CEMS and, as applicable, for CFGMS. 

(Aa) The quality assurance procedure specified above shall be approved in writing by 

the Executive Officer or designee before submitted to the District for written 

approval by the APCO prior to the CFGMS or CEMS final certification. 

(Bb) Any CFGMS or CEMS deemed to be out of control, as specified in Attachment 

A, according to the facility quality assurance procedure approved by the 

Executive Officer or designeeAPCO shall be corrected within 72 hours, as 

demonstrated by meeting the performance specification for which it was deemed 

out of control. 

(i) The person operating the CFGMS or CEMS shall notify the Executive 

Officer or designeeAPCO by telephone or facsimile of any breakdown(s) 

of the monitoring systems if the duration of the breakdown is in excess 

of 60 minutes or if there are three (3) or more breakdowns in any one day 

within 24 hours of the occurrence of the breakdown which triggers 

notification. Such report shall identify the time, location, equipment 

involved, and contact person. 

(ii) The person shall keep a record of any breakdown of the monitors and 

shall maintain such record for at least two years, and make it available to 

the District staff upon request.
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 431.1-9

Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels 

D1b: 03/29/12 

(iii) The person who complies with the provisions of clauses (d)(4)(B)(i) and 

(iisubsection (D)(2)(b)(i) and subsection (E) (3) shall not be considered 

in violation of this rule for the 72 hour period of breakdown provided 

that the breakdown did not result from operator error, neglect or 

improper operation or maintenance procedures. 

(3) A person burning landfill gas or sewage digester gas, or who is subject to subsection 

(C)(3) of this rule may use an alternative monitoring method, in lieu of the requirements 

in subsections (D)(1) and (D)(2), that ensures compliance with the daily total sulfur 

content limitation as specified in Table 1. Alternative monitoring methods shall not be 

used unless first approved in writing by the APCO, the California Air Resources Board 

(CARB), and the Regional Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA), Region IX, or their designees.

(a) At a minimum, the alternative monitoring method shall meet the guidelines of 

Attachment A, Section III.

(b) A person subject to subsection (C)(3) of this rule shall submit an alternative 

monitoring method for approval no later than 45 days after the date an ATC for a 

sulfur removal system is issued.

(c) All monitoring must comply with the approved alternative monitoring method.

(d) District personnel shall use the approved alternative monitoring method to 

determine compliance with the limits of this rule.

[Derived from SCAQMD Rule 431.1 (e)(1 through 3)] 

(E) Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements 

(1) All records required by this rule shall be maintained at the facility for at least five (5) 

years, and be made available to District staff upon request.

(2) Except at electric utility generating facilities and refineries, a person burning gaseous 

fuel, other than exclusively natural gas, in stationary equipment requiring a District 

permit to operatePTO, shall submit to the Executive Officer or designeeAPCO annual 

reports of the monthly fuel consumption and the total sulfur content of the fuel 

consumed. SuchThe annual report shall be submitted no later than 60 days following 

the end of the reporting year, and shall consist of the amount of any gaseous fuel 

consumed monthly, the applicable hourly, daily or monthly average sulfur content as 

determined by the deviceContinuous Monitor or approved alternative monitoring 

method as specified in paragraph (dsubsections (D)(1), (dD)(2), or (dD)(3) of this rule, 

and total SOx emissions, calculated as SO2. 

(2)3) A person burning gaseous fuel in stationary equipment located at electric utility 

generating facilities or refineries shall submit to the Executive Officer or 

designeeAPCO monthly reports of the daily fuel consumption, the monthly weighted 
431.1-10 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels 

D1b: 03/29/12 

average sulfur content (except for natural gas), and the maximum four (4)-hour average 

sulfur content of the fuel consumed, as determined by the device specified in paragraph 

(dsubsection (D)(2) of this rule and the total SOx emissions, calculated as SO2. The 

report shall be submitted withinno later than 30 days following the end of the reporting 

month. 

(3) The information specified in paragraphs (e)(1) and (e)(2) shall be maintained at the 

facility for at least two years, and be made available to the District staff upon request.

(4) The person operating a continuous monitor shall keep records as specified in clause 

(D)(2)(b)(i) for monitor breakdown (s)

[Derived from SCAQMD Rule 431.1 (f)(1 through 4)] 

(F) Test Methods 

The following may be used by the Executive Officer or designeeAPCO to verify compliance 

with the provisions of this rule: 

(1) For determination of compliance with sulfur content requirements of subdivision 

(csection (C): 

(A(a) The reference method for determining the concentration of sulfur compounds in 

a gaseous fuel, calculated as hydrogen sulfide, shall be DistrictH2S, shall be South Coast 

Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Method 307-91 - Determination of Sulfur 

in a Gaseous Matrix, or any other method demonstrated by the applicant to be 

equivalent and approved in writing by the Executive Officers of the DistrictAPCO, the 

CARB, and the Regional Administrator of the EPA, Region IX, or their designees, or 

(B(b) Data obtained from a continuous monitor, which is required to be installed and 

properly operated according to subdivision (dsection (D) and as approved by the 

Executive Officer or designeeAPCO pursuant to the guidelinesrequirements specified in 

Attachment A. 

(2) The gross heating value of gaseous fuels shall be determined by ASTM Method D 3588-

91 or, if applicable, ASTM Method D 4891-89. 

(3) The methane content of gaseous fuels shall be determined by ASTM Method D 1945-

81. 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 431.1-11

Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels 

D1b: 03/29/12 

(g(G) Exemptions 

Unless otherwise specified, and provided that the person seeking the exemption supplies proof 

and verification upon request of applicable criteria to the satisfaction of the Executive Officer 

or designeeAPCO, the provisions of this rule shall not apply to the following cases: 

(1) A person selling, for use in the jurisdiction of the District, any gaseous fuel not 

complying with paragraphs (c)subsections (C)(1) through (cand (C)(3) provided that: 

(Aa) The gaseous fuel is delivered directly to a sulfur removal unit which is in full 

operation and which reduces the sulfur content to the limits specified in 

paragraphs (csubsections (C)(1) through (cand (C)(3); and 

(Bb) The seller notifies the Executive Officer or designeeAPCO prior to any such sale 

of the quantity, heating value, and composition of the gaseous fuel to be sold; 

and 

(C)c) The buyer has an approved Permit to ConstructATC and/or OperatePTO for the 

sulfur removal unit that will be used to treat the purchased gas. 

(2) Gaseous fuels containing sulfur used in the production of sulfur or sulfur compounds. 

(3) Waste gases being burned provided that: 

(Aa) The gross heating value of such gases is less than 2670 kilocalories per cubic 

meter (300 British Thermal Units per cubic foot) at standard conditions; and 

(Bb) Any supplemental fuel used to burn such waste gases does not contain sulfur or 

sulfur compounds in excess of the amount specified in this rule. 

(4) Gases being burned from fluidized catalytic cracking unit (FCCU) regenerators subject 

to District [Deleted-Rule 1105 or and Regulation XX.rescinded]

(5) Gases vented during refinery turnaround pursuant to District [Deleted-Rule 1123 

or and Regulation XX.rescinded]

(64) Gases vented to a control system pursuant to District Rule1173.[Deleted-Rule 466 and 

1173 or Regulation XX.rescinded]

(75) Gases vented intermittently to fuel gas or waste disposal system from pressure control 

valves, sight glasses, compressor bottles, sampling systems, and pump and compressor 

case vents. 

(86) Any facility which emits less than five (5) pounds per day total sulfur compounds, 

calculated as hydrogen sulfideH2S, from the burning of gaseous fuels other than natural 

gas. Emissions of total sulfur compounds shall be measured based on fuel analysis, 

using the test method specified in paragraph (fsubsection (F)(1), and the maximum daily 
431.1-12 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels 

D1b: 03/29/12 

gaseous fuel consumption. This exemption shall not apply to the requirement of 

paragraph (csubsection (C)(1). 

(97) A person is exempt from the requirements of paragraph (dsubsection (D)(1) and (d)(2) if 

the person demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Executive Officer or designeeAPCO

that the supplier of the gaseous fuel has complied with the requirements of subdivision 

(dsection (D) for such fuel. 

(10) Until November 17, 1997, any gaseous fuel sold or purchased in a transaction between a 

RECLAIM SOx facility and a Non-RECLAIM SOx facility is exempt from the sulfur 

content requirements specified in paragraphs (c)(1), (2) and (3), provided that:

(A) both the buyer and seller of the gaseous fuel submit to the Executive Officer or 

designee monthly written report of the quantities and daily averages of the total 

sulfur contents of the gaseous fuel sold to the buyer or purchased from the seller. 

 The daily average of total sulfur contents of gaseous fuels shall be monitored 

and reported to the District in a manner and format specified by the Executive 

Officer or designee. Such report shall be submitted within 30 calendar days 

following the end of the reporting month; and

(B) the RECLAIM SOx facility reports to the District and includes all SOx emissions 

generated from the burning of such gaseous fuel, as part of the facility's total 

SOx emissions pursuant to Rule 2004.

(11() [Deleted-RECLAIM program recinded from District Rules and Regulations]

(8) On or after July 1, 1997, a person previously in compliance with the limits specified in 

Table 1 of this rule shall be exempt from the requirements of paragraph (csubsection

(C)(43) provided that: the alternative monitoring method pursuant to paragraph 

(dsection (D) yields no more than three individual readings in a calendar year in excess 

of the limits specified in Table 1; that no single reading exceeds a fuel sulfur limit of 50 

ppmby 25 percent; and that the sampling frequency is no longer than once per week.

[Derived from SCAQMD Rule 431.1(h)(11)]

See SIP Table at http://www.avaqmd.ca.gov/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=921

[SIP: Submitted as amended 11/17/95 on 1/31/96; Submitted as amended 10/2/92 on 1/11/93; 

Submitted as amended 5/4/90 on 12/31/90; Approved 10/19/84, 49 FR 41028, 40 CFR 

52.220(c)(137)(vii)(B); Approved _______, ______, 40 CFR 52.220(c)(125)(ii)(A); approved 

9/28/81, 46 FR 47451, 40 CFR 52.220(c)(65)(ii)]
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 431.1-13

Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels 

D1b: 03/29/12 

ATTACHMENT A 

SECTION I - 

REQUIREMENTS FOR CONTINUOUS 

FUEL GAS MONITORING SYSTEM (CFGMS) 

A continuous fuel gas monitor used for determining the sulfur content of any gaseous fuel shall: 

(1) Continuously monitor and record the concentration by volume (dry basis) of sulfur compounds 

in ppmv as H2S in the gaseous fuel. 

(2) Have the span value of the monitor set so that all readings fall between 20 and 95 percent of 

scale. 

(3) Check for calibration drift of the monitoring system at least once daily (approximately 24-hr 

interval) at two concentrations, one high level and one low level. Whenever the daily high level 

or low level calibration drift exceeds 5% of analyzer full scale span, the monitoring system 

shall be deemed to be out of control and subject to the requirements of subparagraph 

(dsubsection (D)(4)(Bb) of this rule. 

(4) Determine the relative accuracy of the monitor which shall be no greater than 20 percent of the 

mean value of the reference method test data. 

(5) Be able to record negative values of zero drift. 

(6) Report the concentration of the sulfur compounds calculated as hydrogen sulfideH2S. 

SECTION II - 

REQUIREMENTS FOR CONTINUOUS 

EMISSIONS MONITORING SYSTEMS (CEMS) 

A stack CEMS used for monitoring the sulfur dioxide emissions from the burning of any gaseous fuel 

shall: 

(1) Continuously monitor and record the concentration by volume (dry basis, zero percent excess 

air) of sulfur compounds in ppmv as SO2 emitted into the atmosphere; 

(2) Include either an oxygen monitor for correcting the data for excess air or a fuel gas and exhaust 

gas flowmeter for the determination of mass emissions; 

(3) Have the span value of all the monitors set so that all readings fall between 20 and 95 percent, 

for four-hour and daily averages, and between 10 and 95 percent, for monthly averages, of full 

scale; 

(4) When using an oxygen monitor for the correction of excess air, be able to measure a sulfur 

compound concentration emission limit of 5 ppm (dry basis, zero percent excess air), which is 

stoichiometrically equivalent to the limit of sulfur compound content of 40 ppm calculated as 

hydrogen sulfide in the gaseous fuels; 

(5) Use District Methods 100.1 or 6.1 (as applicable for sulfur compound analysis) and 

DistrictSCAQMD Method 3.1 (for oxygen content analysis), or DistrictSCAQMD Method 2.1 
431.1-14 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels 

D1b: 03/29/12 

(for flowrate determination), whichever is applicable, or any other methods demonstrated by the 

applicant to be equivalent and approved in writing by the Executive Officers of the 

DistrictAPCO and the CARB, and the Regional Administrator of the EPA, Region IX, or their 

designees, for conducting the relative accuracy evaluations. The relative accuracy limit shall be 

1 ppm and zero drift (2-hour and 24-hour) and calibration drift (2-hour and 24-hour) limits for 

sulfur compounds monitor shall be 5 percent of the span range; and 

(6) Check for calibration drift of the monitoring system at least once daily (approximately 24-hr 

interval) at two concentrations, one high level and one low level. Whenever the daily high level 

or low level calibration drift exceeds 5% of analyzer full scale span, the monitoring system 

shall be deemed to be out of control and subject to the requirements of subparagraph 

(dsubsection (D)(4)(Bb) of this rule. 

(7) Facilities burning fuel gas subject to this rule shall comply with the requirements of Rule 218 

and 218.1(proposed) except where specific requirements have been incorporated into this rule. 

SECTION III - –

GUIDELINES FOR APPROVAL OF 

ALTERNATIVE MONITORING PLAN

BY THE EXECUTIVE OFFICERAPCO

In lieu of a continuous fuel gas monitoring system (CFGMS) or a continuous emission monitoring 

system (CEMS), a person subject to this rule may submit an alternative monitoring plan to the 

Executive Officer or designeeAPCO, the California Air Resources Board (CARB), and the Regional 

Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region IX, or their designees. for 

histheir review and decision. Submittal of such a plan must be at least 180 days prior to the applicable 

compliance date set forth in Table 1. The Executive Officer or designee shall approve or disapprove of 

such plan no later than 90 days prior to the applicable compliance date set forth in Table 1 based upon 

whether the alternative monitoring plan includes all of the following:

(1) A test program to determine the correlation between hydrogen sulfideH2S and total sulfur in the 

fuel gas using DistrictSCAQMD Method 307-91. If a correlation is established, a colorimetric 

test, or other alternative method approved by the Executive Officer or designeeAPCO as being 

equivalent or better in establishing such correlation, may be conducted regularly to determine 

total sulfur using hydrogen sulfideH2S as a surrogate. 

(2) An error analysis between colorimetric, or other approved alternative method readings and the 

total reduced sulfur analysis obtained from DistrictSCAQMD Method 307-91. To demonstrate 

equivalency between the two methods of analyses, the relative accuracy shall not exceed 20 

percent of average DistrictSCAQMD Method 307-91 readings. 

(3) A schedule for a daily or more frequent analysis of the fuel gas for hydrogen sulfide (H2S)

using the colorimetric test, or other approved alternative method, and a minimum weekly 

analysis of the fuel gas using DistrictSCAQMD Method 307-91. A different frequency of 

analysis may be used if the Executive Officer or designeeAPCO determines that such frequency 

is adequate towill ensure compliance with the daily total sulfur limits of this rule. 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 431.1-15

Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels 

D1b: 03/29/12 

(4) When the sulfur level is suspected to be at or above the 40 ppmv levelsulfur content 

requirements of Table 1 as determined by the colorimetric or other alternative method, a 

procedure to obtain at minimum a daily sample to be tested according to DistrictSCAQMD

Method 307-91 until three consecutive daily samples show that total sulfur is below the 40 

ppmv limitsulfur content requirements of Table 1. 
431.1-16 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels 

D1b: 03/29/12 

This page intentionally left blank 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 B-1

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 

APPENDIX "B" 

PUBLIC NOTICE DOCUMENTS

1. Proof of Publication for Notice of Intent (March 12, 2012) – Antelope Valley Press 

2. Proof of Publication for Notice of Public Hearing (April 5, 2012) – Antelope Valley Press 
B-2 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 

This page intentionally left blank. 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

B-3

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 
B-4 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 

This page left intentionally blank. 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

B-5

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
B-6 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 

This page intentionally left blank.
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 C-1

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

APPENDIX "C" 

PUBLIC COMMENTS AND RESPONSES

1. ARB Staff Rule Review Results 

2. EPA Preliminary Rule Review 

3. EPA Final Rule Review. 
C-2 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 

1. ARB Staff Rule Review Results 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 C-3

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

No response required. ARB made “No Comment.”

Response to ARB Staff Rule Review Results 
C-4 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 

This page intentionally left blank. 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 C-5

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

2. EPA Preliminary Rule Review 
C-6 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 C-7

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

1. District not in agreement with EPA that “Waste Disposal Site” needed to be defined. Reasoning 

was unclear and determined to be unnecessary. 

2a. Sulfur limit was adjusted to 250 ppm as a cost effective analysis showed not cost effective to 

control to 150 ppm. 

2b. Rule language is relevant and clear which averaging times are applicable to limits. 

3. Removed “OFCP”, considered an economic incentive program (EIP), from rule as it did not meet 

EPA requirement for an EIP. 

4. CFGMS and CEMS-limitations on breakdowns. EPA had concerns that because the number of 

breakdowns were not limited a facility could have a monitoring device in a state of flux due to 

excessive breakdowns of the CFGMS or CEMS. This will be prevented twofold, by permit condition, 

as a CFGMS or CEMS will be required to be maintained in good operating condition or a violation of 

the permit will occur. Language limiting the number of breakdowns was not included. 

5. EPA expressed concern regarding the datedness of rule 218. This is addressed with rule updates of

Rule 218 (and new 218.1). 

6. Advisement noted on EPA suggestion regarding acceptable alternative monitoring plans. 

7. Typo corrected. 

District response to EPA Preliminary Rule Review 
C-8 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 

This page intentionally left blank 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 C-9

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

3. EPA Final Rule Review 
C-10 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 D-1

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

EPA comments surround the BACT analysis. Specifically, EPA notes that carbon adsorption was not 

included in the Districts BACT analysis and may serve as a cost effective control for LFG H2S as 

SCAQMD recently issued an Experimental Permit to Construct a carbon adsorption system at Puente 

Hills Landfill. Indeed this technology was not considered as it was not believed to be proven or achieved 

in practice control for LFG at the time of rule development. Depending on the outcome of the suitability 

of carbon to control H2S at Puente Hills landfill, the District may consider this as a possible control 

technique and a reason to revisit the BACT analysis in the future. 

District Response to EPA Final Review 

AVAQMD Rule 431.1 D-1

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

APPENDIX "D" 

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT 

DOCUMENTATION

1. Notice of Intent and Initial Study (July 9. 2009) 

2. Notice of Completion (Submitted) 

3. DFG Fee Waiver (To Be Submitted) 

4. CEQA Filing Fee No Effect Determination Fee (To Be Submitted) 
D-2 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 

This page intentionally left blank.
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 D-3

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

1. NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT NEG DEC 
D-4 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

This page intentionally left blank. 
Initial Study and 

Proposed Negative Declaration for 

Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District 

Rule 431.1 – Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels

Contents: 

I. Introduction.............................................................................................................................. 1 

II. Project Description .................................................................................................................. 2 

A. Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1 ........................................................................... 2 

B. Project Location ............................................................................................................. 3 

C. Project Objective............................................................................................................ 3 

D. Project History............................................................................................................... 4 

III. Initial Study............................................................................................................................. 4 

A. Background Information................................................................................................ 4 

1. Project Title..................................................................................................... 5 

2. Lead Agency Name and Address .................................................................... 5 

3. Contact Person ................................................................................................ 5 

4. Project Location .............................................................................................. 5 

5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address ............................................................. 5 

6. General Plan Designation................................................................................ 5 

7. Zoning............................................................................................................. 5 

8. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting................................................................ 5 

9. Other Agencies Whose Approval is Required ................................................ 5 

B. Environmental Factors Potentially Affected.................................................................. 6 

C. Determination ................................................................................................................ 7 

D. Environmental Impact Checklist and Discussion .......................................................... 8 

1. Aesthetics........................................................................................................ 8 

Discussion of Aesthetics............................................................................. 8

2. Agriculture Resources..................................................................................... 8 

Discussion of Agriculture ........................................................................... 9 

3. Air Quality ...................................................................................................... 9 

Discussion of Air Quality ........................................................................... 9 

4. Greenhouse Gas Emissions.............................................................................. 10 

Discussion of Greenhouse Gas Emissions................................................ 10 

5. Biological Resources..................................................................................... 10 

Discussion of Biological Resources.......................................................... 11 

6. Cultural Resources........................................................................................ 11 

Discussion of Cultural Resources ............................................................. 12 

7. Geology and Soils ......................................................................................... 12 

Discussion of Geology and Soils .............................................................. 13 

8. Hazards and Hazardous Materials................................................................. 13 

Discussion of Hazards and Hazardous Materials...................................... 14 

9. Hydrology and Water Quality....................................................................... 14 

Discussion of Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................ 15 
10. Land Use and Planning ............................................................................... 15 

Discussion of Land Use and Planning ...................................................... 16 

11. Mineral Resources ....................................................................................... 16 

Discussion of Mineral Resources.............................................................. 16 

12. Noise ............................................................................................................ 16 

Discussion of Noise .................................................................................. 17 

13. Population and Housing............................................................................... 17 

Discussion of Population and Housing..................................................... 17 

14. Public Services............................................................................................. 17 

Discussion of Public Services................................................................... 18 

15. Recreation .................................................................................................... 18 

Discussion of Recreation .......................................................................... 18 

16. Transportation and Traffic ........................................................................... 18 

Discussion of Transportation and Traffic ................................................. 19 

17. Utilities and Service Systems....................................................................... 19 

Discussion of Utilities and Service Systems............................................. 20 

18. Mandatory Findings of Significance............................................................ 20 

Discussion of Finding a) ........................................................................... 21 

Discussion of Finding b)........................................................................... 21 

Discussion of Finding c) ........................................................................... 21 

Appendix A – Rule 431.1 Emissions Worksheet ....................................................................... A-1 

Appendix B – SOx Ambient Air Quality Analysis...................................................................... B-1

Appendix C – Control Technology Cost Effectiveness Analysis ............................................... C-1 
Initial Study/Negative Declaration 1

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

Initial Study and Proposed Negative Declaration 

Rule 431.1 – Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels

I. Introduction 

The Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District (AVAQMD) is the local agency with the 

primary responsibility for the control of air pollution from all sources other than vehicular 

sources (Health & Safety Code (H&S Code) §§39000, 40000). It is the agency responsible for 

developing and enforcing air quality rules for stationary sources of air pollution within the desert 

portion of Los Angeles County as described in H&S Code §413003

. Pursuant to the California 

Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), 

this document analyzes the potential adverse environmental impacts of the proposed amendments 

to Rule 431.1 - Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels. 

The goals of the proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 are as follows: update rule language and 

formatting, delete exemptions which have expired by their own terms, and raise the Landfill Gas 

(LFG) sulfur content limit to a daily average of 250 parts per million by volume (ppmv), 

calculated as hydrogen sulfide4 (H2S). Other noteworthy amendments to Rule 431.1 include 

providing an alternative fuel gas monitoring provision for burning LFG or sewer digester gas, 

eliminating the Optional Facility Compliance Plan (OFCP), considered an Economic Incentive 

Program (EIP), because it does not conform to the requirements of a United States 

Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) EIP program, and referencing proposed new 

AVAQMD Rule 218.1. 

There are two landfills within the jurisdiction of the AVAQMD (“Antelope Valley Recycling & 

Disposal Facility”, and “Lancaster Landfill”). Both landfills burn LFG to control emissions of 

methane and nonmethane organic compounds (NMOC), and due to the content of the landfill 

such LFG often contains sulfur in excess of the current limit of 40 ppmv. Control technology is 

available for sulfur content of LFG however control to the current 40 ppmv limit is extremely 

cost ineffective. In addition, based upon historic operational data obtained from both landfills, 

the increase in the sulfur concentration limit will result in SOx emissions reductions forgone5 in 

the amount of 10 pounds per day and 2 tons per year. SOx emissions were estimated using a 

“worst case” scenario- calculated by assuming continuous operation of both landfills (Lancaster 

Landfill and Antelope Valley Recycling & Disposal Facility) over the course of one year, at 

maximally permitted exhaust flow and a maximum sulfur concentration of 250 parts per million 

 

3

 See also District Rule 103 for a meets and bounds description of the District’s jurisdiction. 

4

 Unless otherwise specified, all sulfur limits referred to herein are calculated as H2S. 

5

 Please note that Lancaster landfill has only been in intermittent compliance with the 40ppmv 

sulfur limit since it became applicable in July 1997. Lancaster landfill has been under a 

compliance agreement in an attempt to gain compliance, however, due to the fluctuations in 

sulfur content of the LFG and lack of cost effective sulfur removal systems has not been able to 

achieve full compliance with the rule as written. Therefore, actual emissions from both landfills 

have been higher than contemplated by the current rule limit and actual emissions increases are 

not anticipated. 
2 Initial Study/Negative Declaration 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

by volume (ppmv). Due to natural variations in the sulfur content of LFG as well as the fact that 

neither landfill is continuously operated actual SOx emissions are predicted to be much less. 

All environmental areas were examined for significant adverse environmental impacts as a result 

of the proposed amendments with no significant adverse environmental impacts discovered. 

II. Project Description 

A. Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1

The proposed project is to amend Rule 431.1 – Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels. Rule 

431.1 applies to all stationary equipment burning gaseous fuels that require a permit to 

operate by the AVAQMD. Generally, Rule 431.1 applies to stationary sources permitted 

within the AVAQMD which burn gaseous fuels such as natural gas, landfill gas, and 

sewage digester gas. 

The proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 include a more defined landscape of 

applicability, adjusting the LFG sulfur limits, provide for alternate monitoring methods 

from the installation of Continuous Fuel Gas Monitoring System (CFGMS) or 

Continuous Emission Monitoring System (CEMS), deleting obsolete rule language, 

deleting the OFCP, containing added definitions for regulatory bodies, and standardizing 

rule format. Changes beyond the sulfur limit and CFGMS and CEMS monitoring 

provisions are for general rule cleanup and consistency with AVAQMD rule development 

practices. All definitional additions are for clarification purposes as well as for ease of 

use and to conform to AVAQMD standard formatting provisions. 

The sulfur limits table (Table 1) will be updated with the revised LFG sulfur limit. 

Below, Table 1 lists the current and proposed sulfur limits for each fuel type. As is 

evident in Table 1, only the LFG sulfur limit is proposed to be updated in the table with a 

modified averaging period and compliance date of on or after the “Rule Effective Date”. 

Table 1 

Fuel Type Sulfur Limits 

ppmv 

Averaging Periods Compliance Date On 

or After 

Refinery Gas 

Small Refiners 40 4 hrs May 4, 1996 

Other Refiners 40 4 hrs May 4, 1994 

Landfill Gas 40 or Daily or July 1, 1997

40 and 200 Monthly and15-

minutes

July 1, 1997

 250 Daily Rule Effective Date 

Sewage Digester 

Gas 

40 or Daily or November 17, 1995 
Initial Study/Negative Declaration 3

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

 40 and 500 Monthly and 

15-minutes 

November 17, 1995 

Other Gases 40 4 hrs May 4, 1994 

In conclusion, the amendments to Rule 431.1 are proposed in order to reflect a currently 

feasible emission limit for landfill gases. Amendments are also proposed to allow 

additional time for facilities to obtain approval of their CFGMS. Minor language changes 

and modifications are also proposed to correct rule deficiencies for approval into the State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). 

B. Project Location 

The proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 would apply within the jurisdiction of the 

AVAQMD. In general, this area includes the desert portion of Los Angeles County 

commonly referred to as the Antelope Valley. Specifically the jurisdiction of the 

AVAQMD is: 

That portion of Los Angeles County which lies north and east of a line described as 

follows: 

Beginning at the Los Angeles-San Bernardino County boundary and running west along 

the township line common to T.3N and T.2N, San Bernardino Base and Meridian; then 

north along the range line common to R.8W and R.9W; then west along the township line 

common to T.4N and T.3N; then north along the range line common to R.12W and 

R.13W to the southeast corner of Section 12,T.5N, R.13W; then west along the south 

boundaries of Sections 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, T.5N, R.13W to the boundary of the Angeles 

National Forest which is collinear with the range line common to R.13W and R.14W; 

then north and west along the Angeles National Forest boundary to the point of 

intersection with the township line common to T.7N and T.6N (point is at the northwest 

corner of Section 4 in T.6N, R.14W); then west along the township line common to T.7N 

and T.6N; then north along the range line common to R.15W and R.16W to the southeast 

corner of Section 13, T.7N, R.16W; then along the south boundaries of Sections 13, 14, 

15, 16, 17, 18, T.7N, R.16W; then north along the range line common to R.16W and 

R.17W to the north boundary of the Angeles National Forest (collinear with township line 

common to T.8N and T.7N) then west and north along the Angeles National Forest 

boundary to the point of intersection with the south boundary of the Rancho La Liebre 

Land Grant; then west and north along this land grant boundary to the Los Angeles-Kern 

County boundary. (AVAQMD Rule 103(B)(1)) 

The offices of the AVAQMD are located at 43301 Division Street, Suite 206, Lancaster, 

CA 93535-4649. 

C. Project Objective 
4 Initial Study/Negative Declaration 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

The purpose of the proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 is to provide relief to landfill 

operators from having to remove sulfur compounds from LFG to the required level of 40 

ppmv, since a cost-effective control technology has not yet been developed (See 

Appendix C for details regarding available controls and cost). The proposed amendments 

also conform the formatting to the standard AVAQMD rule format, update definitions 

and to remove dated provisions that have expired by their terms. 

D. Project History 

On July 1, 1997 the Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District (AVAPCD) was 

created pursuant to statute (former H&S Code §40106, A.B. 266-Knight Ch. 542, statutes 

of 1996) and assumed all air pollution control responsibilities from the South Coast Air 

Quality Management District (SCAQMD) for the area of Los Angeles County outside the 

South Coast Air Basin. The SCAQMD rules in effect within the jurisdiction of the 

AVAPCD remained in effect until the AVAPCD Governing Board superceded or 

amended them. Rule 431.1, as amended by SCAQMD on November 17, 1995, was one 

of these rules. 

On January 1, 2002 the (AVAQMD) was created pursuant to statute (H&S Code §41300 

et seq.) to replace the AVAPCD. Once again the rules in effect at the time of the change 

remained in effect until the District Governing Board superceded or amended them. Rule 

431.1 had not been officially amended by the AVAPCD Governing Board, therefore, the 

November 17, 1995 version of the rule is the current version effective within the District. 

Rule 431.1 was originally adopted by SCAQMD on November 4, 1977. It was thereafter 

amended by SCAQMD on September 1, 1978, February 2, 1979, January 8, 1982, May 6, 

1983, May 4, 1990, April 5, 1991, September 11, 1992, October 2, 1992, and November 

17, 1995. The November 17, 1995 version is the version of the rule retained by the 

AVAPCD upon its creation and also retained by the AVAQMD upon its creation. The 

AVAQMD could find no evidence that this version of the rule was acted upon by USEPA 

as a SIP submission. The May 6, 1983 version was approved by USEPA into the SIP and 

therefore, it is the rule in effect for this source category currently in the SIP (49 FR 

41028, 10/19/84) within the jurisdiction of the AVAQMD. 

In summary, the November 17, 1995 version of Rule 431.1 is the version currently in the 

AVAQMD rule book and enforced by the AVAQMD. The May 6, 1983 rule is the 

version contained in the SIP within the jurisdiction of the AVAQMD. This Initial Study 

generally analyzes the potential environmental impacts of changes proposed to the 

AVAQMD Rule Book version of November 17, 1995 unless otherwise specifically 

indicated. USEPA may be required to perform its own environmental review for actions 

it may take in the future to approve the proposed Rule 431.1 into the SIP. 

III. Initial Study 

A. Background Information 
Initial Study/Negative Declaration 5

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

1. Project Title: 

Proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 – Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels. 

2. Lead Agency Name and Address: 

Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District 

43301 Division Street, Suite 206 

Lancaster, CA 93535-4649 

3. Contact Person: 

Christian Anderson 

Air Quality Engineer 

4. Project Location: 

The jurisdiction of the AVAQMD commonly referred to as the Antelope Valley. 

A specific definition of the AVAQMD’s jurisdiction can be found in AVAQMD 

Rule 103 available from the AVAQMD offices or on the Internet at: 

http://www.avaqmd.ca.gov 

5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: 

Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District 

43301 Division Street, Suite 206 

Lancaster, CA 93535-4649 

6. General Plan Designation: 

 Not Applicable 

7. Zoning: 

 Not Applicable 

8. Surrounding Land Uses And Setting: 

 Not Applicable 

9. Other Agencies Whose Approval is Required: 

No other agencies have discretionary authority over this project.
6 Initial Study/Negative Declaration 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

B. Environmental Factors Potentially Affected 

The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project. 

 Aesthetics Agriculture Resources X Air Quality 

 Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils 

 Hazards & Hazardous 

Materials 

 Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning 

 Mineral Resources Noise Population/Housing 

 Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic 

 Utilities/Service Systems Mandatory Findings of 

Significance 

 
Initial Study/Negative Declaration 7

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

C. Determination 
8 Initial Study/Negative Declaration 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

D. Environmental Impact Checklist and Discussion 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

unless 

Mitigated 

Less than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impac

t 

1. Aesthetics. Would the project:

a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a 

scenic vista? 

 X 

b) Substantially damage scenic 

resources, including, but not limited 

to, trees, rock outcroppings, and 

historic buildings within a state scenic 

highway? 

 X 

c) Substantially degrade the existing 

visual character or quality of the site 

and its surroundings? 

 X 

d) Create a new source of substantial 

light or glare which would adversely 

affect day or nighttime views in the 

area? 

 

X 

Discussion of Aesthetics: 

The adoption of the proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 will not change any land use within the 

AVAQMD. The proposed amendments to the Rule will not require any changes to the physical 

environment at all. There will be no obstruction of scenic vistas or creation of aesthetically offensive 

sites visible to the public. Therefore, no adverse aesthetic impacts are expected from the proposed 

amendments to the rule 

2. Agriculture Resources. Would the 

project: 

a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique 

Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide 

Importance, as show on maps 

prepared pursuant to the Farmland 

Mapping and Monitoring Program of 

the California Resources Agency, to 

non-agricultural use? 

 

X 

b) Conflict with existing zoning for 

agricultural use, or a Williamson Act 

contract? 

 

X 

c) Involve other changes in the existing 

environment which, due to their 

location or nature, could result in 

conversion of Farmland to nonagricultural use? 

 

X 
Initial Study/Negative Declaration 9

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

unless 

Mitigated 

Less than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impac

t 

Discussion of Agriculture: .

The adoption of the proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 are not expected to impact agricultural 

resources. Land use is not changed within the jurisdiction of the AVAQMD by the proposed 

amendments and it does not require conversion of farmland to any other use. It does not conflict with

any other zoning for agricultural use or cause changes in other land uses that could result in the 

conversion of farmland 

3. Air Quality. Would the project:

a) Conflict or obstruct implementation of 

the applicable air quality plan? 

 X 

b) Violate any air quality standard or 

contribute substantially to an existing 

or projected air quality violation? 

 X 

c) Result in a cumulatively considerable 

net increase of any criteria pollutant 

(or their precursors) for which the 

project region is non-attainment under 

an applicable federal or state ambient 

air quality standard? 

 X 

d) Expose sensitive receptors to 

substantial pollutant concentrations? 

 X 

e) Create objectionable odors affecting a 

substantial number of people? 

 X 

Discussion of Air Quality: 

The AVAQMD has been designated attainment under the CCAA and unclassified under the FCAA 

for Sulfur Dioxide. Sulfur Dioxide is a precursor to PM10. The AVAQMD has been designated 

nonattainment under the CCAA and unclassified under the FCAA for PM10. In determining whether 

or not the proposed project is significant, the AVAQMD followed the AVAQMD California 

Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Federal Conformity Guidelines, specifically the AVAQMD 

Significance Thresholds as stated in the AVAQMD CEQA & Conformity Guidelines. 

The Lancaster Landfill and Antelope Valley Recycling & Disposal Facility are both located in the 

AVAQMD in the cities of Lancaster and Palmdale respectively. They are approximately 12.3 miles 

apart from one another. The operations and equipment utilized at each landfill are similar, and both 

feature a landfill gas collection and flaring system. At each site, LFG is continuously extracted from 

the landfill via vertical collection wells and then piped to an enclosed flare where the LFG is 

combusted. Products of LFG combustion include carbon monoxide, unburned hydrocarbons, oxides 

of nitrogen, sulfur dioxide (SOx), and particulate matter (PM10). Only SOx and PM10 emissions are 

expected to increase. PM10 emission increases are expected to be insignificant, however, based on 

the constituents of LFG from each site as well as atmospheric conditions in the Antelope Valley 

which limit secondary PM10 formation. 

The proposed amendments will result in a maximum amount of emissions reductions of sulfur oxides 

(SOx) forgone in the amount of about 10 pounds per day and about 2 tons per year. SOx emission 
10 Initial Study/Negative Declaration 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

unless 

Mitigated 

Less than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impac

t 

calculations are presented as Appendix A. The emissions reductions forgone are less than the 

AVAQMD significance level of 25 tons per year for SOx. 

Despite the emissions being less than the level of significance, the AVAQMD also conducted an air 

quality analysis to determine whether the expected emissions change would result in a violation of a 

State or Federal SO2 Ambient Air Quality Standard. The analysis consisted of modeling combustion 

emissions from the Landfill Gas Flares using the United States Environmental Protection Agency 

SCREEN3 modeling program. SCREEN3 is a single source Gaussian plume model which provides 

maximum ground-level concentrations for point, area, flare, and volume sources. The program inputs 

were conservatively set to reflect the maximum impacts from the Flare and comparing the maximum 

offsite ground level emissions with that of the State and Federal ambient air quality standards. 

Results of the analysis demonstrate that the proposed project will not generate a violation of an 

ambient air quality standard (See Appendix B). Given the amount of emissions reductions forgone, 

the estimated actual emissions increase and the results of the air quality model, this proposed project 

has less than a significant impact. 

4. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Would the 

project:

a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions 

(as defined in Health & Safety Code 

§38505(g)), either directly or 

indirectly, that may have a significant 

impact on the environment? 

 X 

b) Conflict with any applicable plan, 

policy or regulation of an agency 

adopted for the purpose of reducing 

the emissions of greenhouse gasses? 

 X 

 Discussion of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: 

The adoption of the proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 is not expected to have any impact, direct or 

indirect, at all on greenhouse gas emissions as the pollutant regulated by the rule is not a Greenhouse 

Gas. 

5. Biological Resources. Would the project:

a) Have a substantial adverse effect, 

either directly or through habitat 

modifications, on any species 

identified as a candidate, sensitive or 

special status species in local or 

regional plans, policies, or regulations 

or by the California Department of 

Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service? 

 X 

b) Have a substantial adverse effect on 

any riparian habitat or other sensitive 

 X 
Initial Study/Negative Declaration 11

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

unless 

Mitigated 

Less than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impac

t 

natural community identified in local 

or regional plans, policies, and 

regulations or by the California 

Department of Fish and Game or U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service? 

c) Have a substantial adverse effect on 

federally protected wetlands as 

defined by §404 of the Clean Water 

Act (including, but not limited to, 

marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) 

through direct removal, filling, 

hydrological interruption, or other 

means. 

 X 

d) Interfere substantially with the 

movement of any native resident or 

migratory fish or wildlife species or 

with established native resident or 

migratory wildlife corridors, or 

impede the use of native wildlife 

nursery sites? 

 X 

e) Conflict with any local policies or 

ordinances protecting biological 

resources, such as a tree preservation 

policy or ordinance? 

 X 

f) Conflict with the provisions of an 

adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, 

Natural Community Conservation 

Plan, or other approved local, 

regional, or state habitat conservation 

plan? 

 X 

Discussion of Biological Resources: 

The proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 are not expected to adversely affect existing plant or animal 

species/communities or unique/endangered plant or animal species. No additional significant adverse 

impacts to biological resources are expected to result because the amendments to the rule are not 

expected to disturb any resources that have not already been disturbed. 

6. Cultural Resources. Would the project:

a) Cause a substantial adverse change in 

the significance of a historical 

resource as defined in Public 

Resources Code §15064.5? 

 X 

b) Cause a substantial adverse change in 

the significance of an archaeological 

resource pursuant to Public Resources 

 X 
12 Initial Study/Negative Declaration 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

unless 

Mitigated 

Less than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impac

t 

Code §15064.5? 

c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique 

paleontological resource or unique 

geologic feature? 

 X 

d) Disturb any human remains, including 

those interred outside of formal 

cemeteries? 

 X 

Discussion of Cultural Resources: 

Effects of implementation of the proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 will not occur at any major 

sites within the AVAQMD. As a result significant impacts to cultural resources are not expected 

because the proposed amendments do not require the destruction of existing buildings, sites or 

geologic features with prehistoric, historic, archaeological, religious or ethnic significance. 

Therefore, the proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 are not expected to have a significant adverse 

impact on cultural resources. 

7. Geology and Soils. Would the project:

a) Expose people or structures to 

potential substantial adverse effects, 

including the risk of loss, injury or 

death involving: 

i) Rupture of a known earthquake 

fault, as delineated on the most 

recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake 

Fault Zoning Map issued by the 

State Geologist for the area or 

based on other substantial 

evidence of a known fault? 

 

X 

ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X 

iii) Seismic-related ground failure, 

including liquefaction? 

 X 

iv) Landslides? X 

b) Result in substantial soil erosion or 

the loss of topsoil? 

 X 

c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil 

that is unstable, or that would become 

unstable as a result of the project, and 

potentially result in on- or off-site 

landslide, lateral spreading, 

subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? 

 

X 

d) Be located on expansive soil, as 

defined in Table 18-1-B of the 

Uniform Building Code (1994), 

creating substantial risks to life or 

property. 

 

X 
Initial Study/Negative Declaration 13

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

unless 

Mitigated 

Less than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impac

t 

Discussion of Geology and Soils: 

The proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 adjust the limits of gaseous fuel sulfur for Landfill Gas. 

There are no provisions in the rule as proposed which would call for disruption of soil, changes in 

topography or any disruption of existing geology causing erosion or change in siltation rates. The 

proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 will not increase the exposure of people or property to geologic 

hazards. 

8. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. 

Would the project:

a) Create a significant hazard to the 

public or the environment through the 

routine transport, use or disposal of 

hazardous materials? 

 

X 

b) Create a significant hazard to the 

public or the environment through 

reasonably foreseeable upset and 

accident conditions involving the 

release of hazardous materials into the 

environment? 

 

X 

c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle 

hazardous or acutely hazardous 

materials, substances, or waste within 

one-quarter mile of an existing or 

proposed school? 

 

X 

d) Be located on a site which is included 

on a list of hazardous materials sites 

compiled pursuant to Government 

Code §65962.5 and, as a result, would 

it create a significant hazard to the 

public or the environment? 

 

X 

e) For a project located within an airport 

land use plan, or where such a plan 

has not been adopted, within two 

miles of a public airport or public use 

airport, would the project result in a 

safety hazard for people residing or 

working in the project area? 

 

X 

f) For a project within the vicinity of a 

private airstrip, would the project 

result in a safety hazard for people 

residing or working in the project 

area? 

 

X 

g) Impair implementation of or 

physically interfere with an adopted 

 

X 
14 Initial Study/Negative Declaration 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

unless 

Mitigated 

Less than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impac

t 

emergency response plan or 

emergency evacuation plan? 

h) Expose people or structures to a 

significant risk of loss, injury, or 

death involving wildland fires, 

including where wildlands are 

adjacent to urbanized areas or where 

residences are intermixed with 

wildlands? 

 

X 

Discussion of Hazards and Hazardous Materials: 

Since the proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 are to an already existing and enforced rule for a 

particular source category there is expected to be no change in the amounts, types or other 

characteristics regarding the hazard and hazardous materials involved in gaseous fuel sulfur 

regulation. 

9. Hydrology and Water Quality. Would 

the project:

a) Violate any water quality standards or 

waste discharge requirements? 

 X 

b) Substantially deplete groundwater 

supplies or interfere substantially with 

groundwater recharge such that there 

would be a net deficit in aquifer 

volume or a lowering of the local 

groundwater table level (e.g. the 

production rate of pre-existing nearby 

wills would drop to a level which 

would not support existing land uses 

or planned uses for which permits 

have been granted)? 

 X 

c) Substantially alter the existing 

drainage pattern of the site or area, 

including through the alteration of the 

course of a stream or river, in a 

manner which would result in 

substantial erosion or siltation on-or 

off-site? 

 X 

d) Substantially alter the existing 

drainage pattern of the site or area, 

including through the alteration of the 

course of a stream or river, or 

substantially increase the rate or 

amount of surface runoff in a matter 

which would result in flooding on-or 

 X 
Initial Study/Negative Declaration 15

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

unless 

Mitigated 

Less than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impac

t 

off-site? 

e) Create or contribute runoff water 

which would exceed the capacity of 

existing or planned stormwater 

drainage systems or provide 

substantial additional sources of 

polluted runoff? 

 X 

f) Otherwise substantially degrade water 

quality? 

 X 

g) Place housing within a 100-year flood 

hazard area as mapped on a federal 

Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood 

Insurance Rate Map or other flood 

hazard delineation map? 

 X 

h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard 

area structures which would impede 

or redirect flood flow? 

 X 

i) Expose people or structures to a 

significant risk of loss, injury or death 

involving flooding, including flooding 

as a result of the failure of a levee or 

dam? 

 X 

j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami or 

mudflow? 

 X 

Discussion of Hydrology and Water Quality: 

Impacts on hydrology and water resources are not expected to be impacted by the implementation of 

the proposed amendments to Rule 431.1. The proposed amendments do not require specific 

alterations to land or terrain or otherwise require actions which could create or change runoff 

patterns, impact storm water drainage or expose persons or property to risk of flood, seiche, tsunami 

or mudflow. 

10. Land Use and Planning. Would the 

project:

a) Physically divide an established 

community? 

 X 

b) Conflict with any applicable land use 

plan, policy, or regulation of an 

agency with jurisdiction over the 

project (including, but not limited to 

the general plan, specific plan, local 

costal program, or zoning ordinance) 

adopted for the purpose of avoiding or 

mitigating an environmental effect? 

 X 

c) Conflict with any applicable habitat X 
16 Initial Study/Negative Declaration 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

unless 

Mitigated 

Less than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impac

t 

conservation plan or natural 

community conservation plan. 

Discussion of Land Use and Planning: 

There are no provisions in the proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 that would affect land use plans, 

policies, or regulations. It is also not expected to affect infrastructure development or require 

changes to existing zoning designations. Local governments such as cities and counties determine 

land use and other planning considerations. Changing the gaseous fuel sulfur limits for Landfill Gas 

will not alter land use or planning requirements. Therefore, present or planned land use in the 

AVAQMDwill not be affected by the implementation of the proposed amendments. 

11. Mineral Resources. Would the project:

a) Result in the loss of availability of a 

known mineral resource that would be 

of value to the region and the 

residents of the state? 

 X 

b) Result in the loss of availability of a 

locally-important mineral resource 

recover site delineated on a local 

general plan, specific plan or other 

land use plan? 

 X 

Discussion of Mineral Resources: 

The proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 are not expected to interfere in the availability or nonavailability of mineral resources. The proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 do not impose additional 

requirements which would not cause non-renewable resources to be used in a manner different from 

present uses. The proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 are not likely to lead to additional energy use. 

 

12. Noise. Would the project:

a) Result in exposure of persons to or a 

generation of noise levels in excess of 

standards established in the local 

general plan or noise ordinance, or 

applicable standards of other 

agencies? 

 X 

b) Result in exposure of persons to or 

generation of excessive groundborne 

vibration or ground borne noise 

levels? 

 X 

c) Result in a substantial permanent 

increase in ambient noise levels in the 

project vicinity above levels existing 

without the project. 

 X 

d) Result in a substantial temporary or 

periodic increase in ambient noise 

 X 
Initial Study/Negative Declaration 17

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

unless 

Mitigated 

Less than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impac

t 

levels in the project vicinity above 

levels existing without the project? 

e) For a project located within an airport 

land use plan or, where such a plan 

has not been adopted, within two 

miles of a public airport or a public 

use airport, would the project expose 

people residing or working in the 

project area to excessive noise levels? 

 X 

f) For a project within the vicinity of a 

private airstrip, would the project 

expose people residing or working in 

the project area to excessive noise 

levels? 

 X 

Discussion of Noise: 

The proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 involve equipment capable of producing sound. This 

equipment is already present and in operation at the sources governed by the Rule. Therefore no 

change in noise is anticipated. 

13. Population and Housing. Would the 

project:

a) Induce substantial population growth 

in an area, either directly (e.g. by 

proposing new housing and 

businesses) or indirectly (e.g. through 

extension of roads or other 

infrastructure)? 

 X 

b) Displace substantial numbers of 

existing housing, necessitating the 

construction of replacement housing 

elsewhere? 

 X 

c) Displace substantial numbers of 

people, necessitating the construction 

of replacement housing elsewhere? 

 X 

Discussion of Population and Housing: 

The proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 adjust the LFG sulfur content allowed to be burned, revise 

definitions, provide for limited exemption for CGFMS and CEMS, as well as general rule clean-up. 

There are no provisions in Rule 431.1 which would encourage or otherwise effect population growth 

either directly or indirectly. Since the proposed amendment does not require or cause disruption of 

housing or relocation of persons there are no expected relocation impacts. 

14. Public Services. 

a) Would the project result in substantial 

adverse physical impacts associated 

 X 
18 Initial Study/Negative Declaration 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

unless 

Mitigated 

Less than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impac

t 

with the provision of new or 

physically altered governmental 

facilities, need for new or physically 

altered governmental facilities, the 

construction of which could cause 

significant environmental impacts, in 

order to maintain acceptable service 

rations, response times or other 

performance objectives for any of the 

public services: 

i) Fire protection? X 

ii) Police protection? X 

iii) Schools? X 

iv) Parks X 

v) Other public facilities? X 

Discussion of Public Services: 

Rule 431.1 is a limitation rule for sulfur content of gaseous fuels. The proposed amendments to Rule 

431.1 will not affect or disrupt any public service. In addition, the proposed amendments do not 

cause relocation of persons so impact on general public services should not occur. 

15. Recreation. 

a) Would the project increase the use of 

existing neighborhood and regional 

parks or other recreational facilities 

such that substantial physical 

deterioration of the facility would 

occur or be accelerated? 

 X 

b) Does the project include recreational 

facilities or require the construction 

or expansion of recreational facilities 

which might have an adverse physical 

effect on the environment? 

 X 

Discussion of Recreation: 

No recreational facilities within the AVAQMD are expected to be adversely affected by the proposed 

amendments to Rule 431.1. The rule will not cause increases in population or use of recreational 

facilities. The rule also does not require construction of recreational facilities. 

16. Transportation and Traffic. Would the 

project:

a) Cause an increase in traffic which is 

substantial in relation to the existing 

traffic load and capacity of the street 

system (i.e. result in a substantial 

increase in either the number of 

 X 
Initial Study/Negative Declaration 19

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

unless 

Mitigated 

Less than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impac

t 

vehicle trips, the volume to capacity 

ratio on roads, or congestion at 

intersections)? 

b) Exceed, either individually or 

cumulatively, a level of service 

standard established by the county 

congestion management agency for 

designated roads or highways? 

 X 

c) Result in a change in air traffic 

patterns, including either an increase 

in traffic levels or a change in 

location that result in substantial 

safety risks? 

 X 

d) Substantially increase hazards due to a 

design feature (e.g., sharp curves or 

dangerous intersections) or 

incompatible uses (e.g., farm 

equipment)? 

 X 

e) Result in inadequate emergency 

access? 

 X 

f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? X 

Discussion of Transportation and Traffic: 

The proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 will not cause an increase in transport or trips because 

waste transportation of materials which contribute to the production of sulfur in Landfill Gas will use 

existing shipping methods. Changes in the amounts of waste driving the production of sulfur in 

Landfill Gas shipped to the local landfills are not expected to increase other than minor increases 

accounted for by the normal growth of the landfills. 

17. Utilities and Service Systems. Would 

the project:

a) Exceed wastewater treatment 

requirements of the applicable 

Regional Water Quality Control 

Board? 

 X 

b) Require or result in the construction 

of new water or wastewater treatment 

facilities or expansion of existing 

facilities, the construction of which 

could cause significant environmental 

effects? 

 X 

c) Require or result in the construction of 

new storm water drainage facilities or 

expansion of existing facilities, the 

construction of which could cause 

significant environmental effects? 

 X 
20 Initial Study/Negative Declaration 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

unless 

Mitigated 

Less than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impac

t 

d) Have sufficient water supplies 

available to serve the project from 

existing entitlements and resources, or 

are new or expanded entitlements 

needed? 

 X 

e) Result in a determination by the 

wastewater treatment provider which 

servers or may serve the project that it 

has adequate capacity to serve the 

projects projected demand in addition 

to the providers existing 

commitments? 

 X 

f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient 

permitted capacity to accommodate 

the project’s solid waste disposal 

needs? 

 X 

g) Comply with federal, state and local 

statutes and regulations related to 

solid waste? 

 X 

Discussion of Utilities and Service Systems: 

The proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 will be pinpointed at both local solid waste providers as the 

amendments address sulfur content of Landfill Gas. The amendments pinpointed as they may be 

merely regulate the amount of sulfur in the gas and are not expected to alter the services of the 

landfill itself. Therefore no change is expected in the use of utilities and service systems. 

18. Mandatory Findings of Significance. 

a) Does the project have the potential to 

degrade the quality of the 

environment, substantially reduce the 

habitat of a fish or wildlife species, 

cause a fish or wildlife population to 

drop below self-sustaining levels, 

threaten to eliminate a plant or animal 

community, reduce the number or 

restrict the range of a rare or 

endangered plant or animal or 

eliminate important examples of the 

major periods of California history or 

prehistory? 

 X 
Initial Study/Negative Declaration 21

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

unless 

Mitigated 

Less than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impac

t 

Discussion of Finding a): 

The proposed project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, 

substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to

drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the 

number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples 

of the major periods of California history or prehistory because landfills sites and their associated 

landfill gas control equipment are already in place and in use. 

b) Does the project have impacts that are 

individually limited, but cumulatively 

considerable (i.e. the incremental 

effects are considerable when viewed 

in connection with the effects of past 

projects, the effects of other current 

projects and the effects of probable 

future projects)? 

 X 

Discussion of Finding b): . 

The project does not have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, 

environmental goals. It also does not have impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively 

considerable. 

c) Does the project have environmental 

effects which will cause substantial 

adverse effects on human beings, 

either directly or indirectly? 

 X 

Discussion of Finding c): 

The project does not have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on 

human beings either directly or indirectly. 
22 Initial Study/Negative Declaration 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

This page intentionally left blank.
Initial Study/Negative Declaration A-1

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

APPENDIX "A"

1. Rule 431.1 SO2 Emission Calculation Worksheet 
A-2 Initial Study/Negative Declaration 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

This page intentionally left blank.
Initial Study/Negative Declaration A-3

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 February 8, 2012 

Rule 431.1- SO2 Emission Calculation Worksheet 

Current limit 40 ppmv 64.06(SOx)g/mol*(40ppm/1000000)*1388scf/min*525600min/yr*1ton/2000lb*1lb/453.6g*1 mol/24.0

2.4 Tons/Year

4854.9 Pounds/Year

0.6 Pounds/Hour

13.3 Pounds/Day

Proposed limit 250 ppmv 64.06(SOx)g/mol*(250ppm/1000000)*1388scf/min*525600min/yr*1ton/2000lb*1lb/453.6g*1 mol/24

15.2 Tons/Year

30342.9 Pounds/Year

3.5 Pounds/Hour

83.1 Pounds/Day22.1 Tons/Year

44139.0 Pounds/Year

5.0 Pounds/Hour

120.9 Pounds/Day

1.5 Tons/Year

3013.0 Pounds/Year

0.3 Pounds/Hour8.3 Pounds/Day

25.5 Tons/Year

50976.1 Pounds/Year

5.8 Pounds/Hour

139.7 Pounds/Day

2 Tons/Year

3824 Pounds/Year

0 Pounds/Hour

10 Pounds/Day

Notes; *Actual emission estimate based on most recent comprehensive emission inventory submitted to AVAQMD. 

 Daily Average

*Current Actual Emission

Combined Net Increase From Current 

to Proposed Limit

Emissions Delta From Proposed to 

Current Actual

Lancaster Landfill 

Antelope Valley Recycling and Disposal
A-4 Initial Stu

Proposed Ame

This page intentionally left blank. 
Initial Study/Negative Declaration B-1

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

APPENDIX "B"

1. SOx Ambient Air Quality Analysis 
B-2 Initial Study/Negative Declaration 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

This page intentionally left blank.
Initial Study/Negative Declaration B-3

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 February 8, 2012 
B-4 Initial Stu

Proposed Ame

This page intentionally left blank. 
Initial Study/Negative Declaration C-1

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

APPENDIX "C"

1. Control Technology Cost Effectiveness Analysis 
C-2 Initial Study/Negative Declaration 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

This page intentionally left blank. 
Initial Study/Negative Declaration C-3

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 
C-4 Initial Study/Negative Declaration 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 
Initial Study/Negative Declaration C-5

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 
C-6 Initial Study/Negative Declaration 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 
Initial Study/Negative Declaration C-7

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 
C-8 Initial Study/Negative Declaration 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 

February 8, 2012 

This page intentionally left blank.
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 D-45

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 

2. NOTICE OF COMPLETION 
D-46 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 D-47

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 

3. DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME FEE WAIVER
D-48 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 

4. CEQA FILING FEED NO EFFECT DETERMINATION FORM 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 E-1

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

APPENDIX "E" 

BEST AVAILABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY ANALYSIS

1. Revised Best Available Control Technology Analysis 

2. Rule 431.1 SO2 Emission Calculation Worksheet 

3. SOx Ambient Air Quality Analysis 
E-2 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

1. REVISED BEST AVAILABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY ANALYSIS 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

E-3

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

4.
E-4 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

E-5

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
E-6 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

E-7

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
E-8 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

E-9

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
E-10 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

E-11

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
E-12 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

E-13

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
E-14 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

E-15

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
E-16 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

E-17

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
E-18 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

E-19

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
E-20 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

E-21

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
E-22 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

E-23

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
E-24 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

E-25

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
E-26 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

E-27

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
E-28 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

E-29

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
E-30 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

E-31

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
E-32 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

E-33

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
E-34 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

E-35

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
E-36 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

E-37

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
E-38 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

E-39

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
E-40 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 E-41

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

2. RULE 431.1 SO2 EMISSION CALCULATION WORKSHEET
E-42 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

This page intentionally left blank. 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 E-43

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

Rule 431.1- SO2 Emission Calculation Worksheet 

Current limit 40 ppmv 64.06(SOx)g/mol*(40ppm/1000000)*1388scf/min*525600min/yr*1ton/2000lb*1lb/453.6g*1 mol/24

2.4 Tons/Year

4854.9 Pounds/Year

0.6 Pounds/Hour

13.3 Pounds/Day

Proposed limit 250 ppmv 64.06(SOx)g/mol*(250ppm/1000000)*1388scf/min*525600min/yr*1ton/2000lb*1lb/453.6g*1 mol/24

15.2 Tons/Year

30342.9 Pounds/Year

3.5 Pounds/Hour

83.1 Pounds/Day22.1 Tons/Year

44139.0 Pounds/Year

5.0 Pounds/Hour

120.9 Pounds/Day

1.5 Tons/Year

3013.0 Pounds/Year

0.3 Pounds/Hour8.3 Pounds/Day

25.5 Tons/Year

50976.1 Pounds/Year

5.8 Pounds/Hour

139.7 Pounds/Day

2 Tons/Year

3824 Pounds/Year

0 Pounds/Hour

10 Pounds/Day

Notes; *Actual emission estimate based on most recent comprehensive emission inventory submitted to AVAQMD. 

 Daily Average

*Current Actual Emission

Combined Net Increase From Current 

to Proposed Limit

Emissions Delta From Proposed to 

Current Actual

Lancaster Landfill 

Antelope Valley Recycling and Disposal
E-44 

F

This page intentionally left blank. 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 E-45

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 

3. SOX AMBIENT AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS 
E-46 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 

This page intentionally left blank.
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 E-47

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 
E-48 

 Final Staf

This page intentionally left blank. 
AVAQMD Rule 431.1 F-1

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 

APPENDIX "F" 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

The following documents were consulted in the preparation of this staff report and the proposed 

amendment of Rule 431.1: 

1. South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 431.1 − Sulfur Content of Gaseous 

Fuels, amended June 12, 1998. 

2. “Lancaster Landfill And Recycling Center Sulfur Abatement System BACT Analysis 

General”, Waste Management, 2010. 
F-2 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13

This page intentionally left blank.