# 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 D IVISION 

### S T 

### ., S UITE 

### 206, L ANCASTER 

### , C ALIFORNIA 

### 93535-4649 P HONE 

### (661) 723-8070 FAX (661) 723-3450This 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 Rule s & 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 Fede ral Submittals)........................6 a. Satisfaction of Underlying Federal Requireme nts ...............................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 F ollowed.....................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...........

................................................... ..9TC

- 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 LAND FILL 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 D ocumentation ....................................... .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 Anal ysis ............................................... .......E-1

1. Revised Best Available Control Technology A nalysis...............................E-2 2. Rule 431.1 SO2 Emission Calculation Workshe et...................................E-41 3. SO x Ambient Air Quality Analysis...................... .....................................E-45

Appendix F - Bibliography..........................

................................................... ............................. F-1AVAQMD 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. I ts 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 docu ment. In addition, a staff report ensures that the correct procedures and proper documentation for app roval or adoption of a document have been performed. Finally, the staff report provides evid ence for defense against legal challenges regarding the propriety of the approval or adoption of the do cument.

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 provi de 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 b een developed. AVAQMD staff, in consideration of today’s sulfur control technologies, proposes to am end Rule 431.1 by raising the sulfur limit for LFG to from 40 ppmv to 250 ppmv, calculated as hydrogen sulfide (H 2 S). This proposed amendment was presented at the May 16, 2012 Governing Board Meeti ng. At the direction of the Board, the proposed amendment was continued to allow Board members addi tional time in making their decision on the proposed amendment.

On July 1, 1997 the Antelope Valley Air Pollution C ontrol 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 Count y 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 resc inded them. On January 1, 2002 the Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District (AV AQMD) was created pursuant to statute (H&S Code §41300 et seq.) to replace the AVAPCD. Once a gain 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 res ponsibility 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 stat ionary sources of air pollution within the desert portion of Los Angeles County as described in H&S C ode §41300 1 . 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 SO x 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 a s hydrogen sulfide (H 2 S). The AVAQMD is proposing amendments to Rule 431.1 to provide relie f 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 ga s monitoring provision for a person burning LFG or sewer digester gas, and eliminated the Optional Fac ility Compliance Plan (OFCP), considered an economic incentive program (EIP), because it does n ot conform to the requirements of a USEPA EIP program. Additionally, obsolete rule language is p roposed to be deleted and for rule clarity, existin g rule language is proposed to be revised, and defini tions will be updated.

The Lancaster Landfill and Antelope Valley Recyclin g & Disposal Facility are both located in the AVAQMD in the cities of Lancaster and Palmdale resp ectively. They are approximately 12.3 miles apart from one another. The operations and equipme nt utilized at each landfill are similar, and both feature a landfill gas collection and flaring syste m. At each site, LFG is continuously extracted fro m the landfill via vertical collection wells and then piped to an enclosed flare where the LFG is combusted. Products of LFG combustion include carb on monoxide, unburned hydrocarbons, oxides of nitrogen, sulfur dioxide (SO x ), and particulate matter (PM 10 ). Only SO x and PM 10 emissions are expected to increase. PM 10 emission increases are expected to be insignifican t, however, based on the constituents of LFG from each site as well as atmos pheric conditions in the Antelope Valley which limit secondary PM 10 formation.

The proposed amendments will result in a maximum am ount of emissions reductions of sulfur oxides (SO x ) forgone in the amount of about 10 pounds per day and about 2 tons per year. SO x emission calculations are presented in Appendix E.

Facilities subject to Rule 431.1 generally include utilities, oil and gas production facilities, publi cly owned treatment works (POTWs), and wastewater treat ment 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 produc tion 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. Becaus e of the intervening reaction of carbon dioxide wit h the reagents for removal of sulfur compounds in LFG , the sulfur removal technologies now available in refineries cannot be directly transferred to landfi lls. Historically, it has been stated that “after reviewing available techniques, conducting an exten ded literature search and conducting research demonstration projects for cost-effective technolog ies 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 s ulfur 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 technologie s available, the cost, using SCAQMD methodology and cost criteria, is prohibitive. Therefore, the AVAQMD concludes that a cost effective sulfur contr ol for LFG is presently not available. A more detaile d 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 AV AQMD adopt the proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 – Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels and approve the appropriate California Environment al Quality Act Documentation. This action is necessar y 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 re quired for the procedurally correct amendment of Rule 431.1 – Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels . Each item is discussed, if applicable, in Sectio n V below. Copies of documents are included in the app ropriate 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 ReviewAVAQMD 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 stat utory requirements that apply to the proposed amendment of Rule 431.1. These are actions, that n eed 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 r egulation, the Governing Board of the AVAQMD is required to make findings of necessit y, authority, clarity, consistency, non-duplication, and reference based upon relevant information presented at the hearing. The information below is provided to assist the Gov erning 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 §4070 2 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 meani ng.
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 regulati on, federal law or regulation, or court decisions because they update the rule consis tent with local and statewide LFG standards.

e. Non-duplication:

The proposed amendment of Rule 431.1 does not impos e the same requirements as an existing state or federal law or regulation b ecause there are no existing applicable laws or regulations for sulfur content o f LFG.6 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 f. Reference:

AVAQMD has the authority pursuant to H&S Code §4070 2 to adopt, amend or repeal rules and regulations.

g. Public Notice & Comment, Public Hearing:

Notice for the public hearing for the proposed amen dment of Rule 431.1 was published April 5, 2012 for the May 15, 2012 meetin g. This proposed amendment was presented at the May 16, 2012 Governi ng Board Meeting. At the direction of the Board, the proposed amendment was continued to allow Board members additional time in making their decis ion on the proposed amendment. This item was continued from May 16, 20 12 to June 19, 2012 and again to July 17, 2012 and finally to August 21, 20 12. See Appendix “B” for a copy of the public notice. See Appendix C for copi es 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 la w 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 sulfu r content of gaseous fuels. The 05/06/1983 SCAQMD version of Rule 431.1 was approved into the SIP 2 at 49 FR 41028 on 10/19/1984. The proposed amendm ents 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 doc umentation will satisfy the completeness requirements.

b. Public Notice and Comment:

Notice for the public hearing for the proposed adop tion of Rule 431.1 was published on April 5, 2012 for the May 15, 2012 mee ting. This proposed amendment was presented at the May 16, 2012 Governi ng Board Meeting. At the direction of the Board, the proposed amendment was continued to allow Board members additional time in making their decis ion on the proposed amendment. This item was continued from May 16, 20 12 to June 19, 2012 and again to July 17, 2012 and finally to August 21, 20 12. 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 accom panying draft staff report will be made available to the public on or before A pril 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 adop tion of Rule 431.1 was published on April 5, 2012 for the May 15, 2012 mee ting. This proposed amendment was presented at the May 16, 2012 Governi ng Board Meeting. At the direction of the Board, the proposed amendment was continued to allow Board members additional time in making their decis ion 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 su ch acts as may be necessary or proper to execute the duties imposed upon the AV AQMD.

g. Applicable State Laws and Regulations Were Follo wed:

Public notice and hearing procedures pursuant to H& S Code §§40725-40728 have been followed. See Section (V)(A)(1) above fo r compliance with state findings required pursuant to H&S Code §40727. See Section (V)(B) below for compliance with the required analysis of existing r equirements pursuant to H&S Code §40727.2. See Section (V)(C) for compliance w ith economic analysis requirements pursuant to H&S Code §40920.6. See Se ction (V)(D) below for compliance with provisions of the California Enviro nmental 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 sa me equipment or source type as the rule proposed for modification by the district. The pro posed amendments to Rule 431.1 will remove obsolete rule language, revise existing rule langua ge 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 Pollut ants 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart AAAA, are8 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 applicable to both local landfills. The requiremen ts found in either federal regulation, however does not interfere or conflict with the requirement s of Rule 431.1, and vice versa. Therefore, additional analysis of existing pollution control r equirements is not required.

C. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

1. General

The proposed amendments to adjust the sulfur dioxid e requirements are intended to provide economic relief to landfill owner/operators . Current LFG sulfur control technologies have not proven to be cost effective t o install and operate in meeting current rule emission limits (See “BACT Analysis” i n Appendix E). Adjusting gaseous fuel sulfur limits upwards provides a cost effectiv e solution for landfill owner/operators.

2. Incremental Cost Effectiveness

Pursuant to H&S Code §40920.6, incremental cost eff ectiveness calculations are required for rules and regulations which are adopte d or amended to meet the California Clean Air Act requirements for Best Available Retro fit Control Technology (BARCT) or “all feasible measures” to control volatile comp ounds, oxides of nitrogen or oxides of sulfur. The incremental cost effectiveness calcula tion is not applicable to this action as the proposed amendments do not impose more stringen t or additional control requirements.

D. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS (CEQA)

Through the process described below, it was determi ned that a Negative Declaration would be the appropriate California Environmental Quality Ac t (CEQA) process for the proposed amendment of Rule 431.1.

1. The proposed amendment of Rule 431.1 meets the C EQA definition of “project.” They are not “ministerial” actions.

2. The proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 are not ex empt from CEQA review because the proposed amendments could potentially r esult in environmental impacts, especially in the area of “Air Quality”, s o no statutory or categorical exemptions apply.

3. Because the proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 we re determined to be subject to CEQA review, an Initial Study was performed. Ba sed upon the results of the Initial Study a Negative Declaration has been prepa red. 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 re sult 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), a s 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 fue ls containing sulfur compounds in excess of 16 parts per million by volume (ppmv) cal culated as hydrogen sulfide (H 2 S) 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 ar ea of Los Angeles County outside the South Coast Air Basin. The SCAQMD rules in eff ect within the jurisdiction of the AVAPCD remained in effect until the AVAPCD Governin g Board superceded or amended them. Rule 431.1 as amended by SCAQMD on N ovember 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 rul es 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 Gover ning Board since November 17, 1995, therefore, it is current version effectiv e within the AVAQMD.

The AVAQMD version of the rule in the State Impleme ntation 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 engine ered 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 te chnology 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 a lmost necessarily result in the requirement to install emission control equipment t o 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 remov ing provision that only permitted equipment need comply. Rule is now applicable to a ll stationary equipment.

Section (A)(2) – Further defined applicability by c larifying 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 definition s, 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. Modifie d Table 1, Landfill Gas H 2 S limit increased to 250 ppmv averaged on a daily basis. W ill use rule effective date as date of compliance. Modified language enabling landfill ga s and sewage digester gas production facilities increased monitoring flexibli lity of gaseous fuel produced.

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

Section (C)(4) − “OFCP” provision eliminated becaus e 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 requiremen t to install and operate a CFGMS or a CEMS. Stipulates specific gases which do requ ire 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 monito ring requirements that may be used in lieu of CFGMS or CEMS.

5. Section (E) − Reporting and Recordkeeping Requireme nts
Section (E)(1) − Stipulates duration records to be kept.

Section (E)(2) − Minor modification to clarify lang uage as well as to specify information required and approved for use in the an nual report.

Section (E)(3) − Minor modification for terms and l anguage 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 lang uage.
Section (F)(2) −No Changes.

Section (F)(3) −No Changes.

7. Section (G) − Exemptions12 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 Section has had minor formatting changes which incl ude removing expired definitions, clarifying language, and removing references to SCA QMD 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 Ant elope Valley region was the Los Angeles County APCD that had a jurisdiction covering the en tire 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 Managem ent District (SCAQMD) came into existence pursuant to statute on February 1, 1 976 and originally covered only the areas within South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). The leg islation was thereafter amended to allow non SCAB areas to “opt in”. Los Angeles Coun ty exercised this option and thus the Antelope Valley became a part of SCAQMD. On Ju ly 1, 1997 the Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District (AVAPCD) replaced th e 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 wit hin the MDAB. The MDAB was formerly known as the Southeast Desert Air Basin (S EDAB). 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 jurisdi ctional boundaries of local air districts, when the local air district boundaries change the S IP as approved by USEPA for that area up to the date of the change remains as the SI P in that particular area. Thus, upon creation of the AVAPCD on July 1, 1997 the AVAPCD a cquired 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 effe ctive 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 Nove mber 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, Sept ember 11, 1992, October 2, 1992, and November 17, 1995. The November 17, 1995 amend ment is the version of the rule retained by the AVAPCD upon its creation and also r etained by the AVAQMD upon its creation. The AVAQMD could find no evidence that t his 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 t his category the AVAQMD will request that it be superseded. In order to replace existin g SIP rules the AVAQMD is required to show that the proposed amendments are not less stri ngent than the provisions currently in the SIP.

This rule amendment proposes to return LFG sulfur l imits 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 SCAQ MD 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 change s to an existing rule may be easily found. The man ner of differentiating text is as follows:

1. Underline identifies new or revised language.

2. Lined out text identifies language which is bei ng deleted.

3. Normal text identifies the current language of t he current rule which will remain unchanged by the adoption of the proposed amendments.

4. Italicized text

identifies explanatory material that is not part o f 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

( a A) General

(1 ) Purpose

(a) The purpose of this rule is to reduce sulfur oxides (SO x ) emissions from the burning of gaseous fuels in stationary equipment requiring a permit to operate by the South Coa st 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 s ulfur compounds in excess of 16 parts per million by volume (ppmv), calculated a s 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 Di strict 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 Distr ict permit required pursuant to the provisions of District Rule 201 which must be obtai ned prior to the building, erecting, installation, alteration or replacement of any Perm it Unit. Such permit may act as a temporary PTO pursuant to the provisions of Distric t Rule 202. [Derived from AVAQMD Rule 1301(K)]

(3) Burn – To combust any gaseous fuel, whether for useful heat o r 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 a 4) “California Air Resources Board” (CARB) – The California State Air Resources Board the powers and duties of which are described in Part 2 of Divi sion 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 ne cessary to directly determine concentrations and/or mass emissions of selected po llutants, and which meets all of the requirements of Attachment A, Section II.

( 3) CONTINUOUS FUEL GAS MONITORING SYSTEM 6) 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, S ection I.

( 4) DAILY AVERAGE is an 7) “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 gui deline 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 an y process upset or breakdown.

( 6) GASEOUS FUEL is any 11) Gaseous Fuel – Any gaseous material which releases heat when burned including, but not limited to, any natu ral, refinery, field produced, process, synthetic, landfill, sewage digester, or waste gase s with a gross heating value of 2670 kilocalories per cubic meter (300 BTU per cubic foo t) or higher, at standard conditions.

( 7) LANDFILL GAS is any 12) Landfill Gas – Any gas derived through any biological process from the decomposition of organic waste bur ied 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 to tal gaseous fuel consumption rate for that month.

( 9) NATURAL GAS is a 14) Natural Gas – A mixture of gaseous hydrocarbons, with at least 80 percent methane (by volume), and of pipeli ne quality, such as the gas sold orAVAQMD 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 SO x FACILITY is a facility that has been included in t he RECLAIM (Regional Clean Air Incentives Market) 15) “Permit to Operate” (PTO) – A District permit required pursuant to the provisions of Distr ict Rule 203 which must be obtained prior to operation of a Permit Unit. An ATC may fun ction 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 REC LAIM Facility Permit and is subject to the requirements of Rule 2011, "Requirem ents for Monitoring, Reporting, recinded from AVAQMD by its removal from AVAQMD Rul es and Recordkeeping for Oxide s of Sulfur (SO x ) Emissions".

(11) REFINERY GAS is any Regulations] (16) Refinery Gas – Any combustible gaseous by-product generated from a petroleum refinery proc ess 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 with in its containment.

( 13) SMALL REFINER means any person owning or operating a fac ility in California that produces materials from processing of petroleum cru de provided such facility: 18) “South Coast Air Quality Management District” – Th e 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 tim e since September 1, 1988, owned or controlled by a ny refiner that at the same time owned or controlled r efineries in California with a total combined crude oil capacity of more than 55,000 bar rels per stream day; and

(C) has not been at any time since Se ptember 1, 1988, owned or controlled by any refiner that at the same time owned or controlled r efineries 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 f or refinery gas due to expiration of extra compliance with California Air Resources Board's Phase II Refo rmulated 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 60 o ° 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 i n the jurisdiction covered by of the District natural gas containing sulfur compound s , calculated as H 2 S, in excess of 16 parts per million by volume (ppmv) calculated as hydrogen sulfide

.

[Deleted- Provision expired by its own terms] (2) Small Refiners Refiner y gas
Anytime prior to May 4, 1996, a small refiner shall not:

(A) sell any refinery gas containing sulfur compounds i n excess of 80 ppmv calculated as hydrogen sulfide, or

(B) burn or discharge to any fuel gas system or vent ga s disposal system, refine ry gas containing sulfur compounds in excess of 800 ppmv c alculated 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 para graph.

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 ve nted 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 specifi ed in Table 1, a A 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 fu el containing sulfur compounds

, calculated as ppmv hydrogen sulfide asH 2 S , in excess of the concentration limits as measured over the averaging periods for various gas eous 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 Period s 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 or 250 Daily or November 17, 1995

Sewage Digester Gas 40 and 500 or Monthly and 15

- minutes Daily or November 17, 1995

Other Gases 40 and 500 4 hrs Monthly 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 complies Other Gases 40 4 hrs

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

shall be determined based on readings obtained from the approved CFGMS or as calculated from the approved CEMS readi ng.
(B) Optional Facility Compliance Plan ("OF CP")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 achiev ing equivalent sulfur oxides (SO x ) emission reductions within the facility, provided that the applicant submits and complies with an Optional Facility Comp liance 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 c ontrol, including but not limited to: (I) A list of equipm ent 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 e ach 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 SO x emissions under the OFCP from all sources within the facility regulated under Rule 43 1.1 would be less than or equal to SO x emissions that would have been emitted based on actual total SO x emissions from each source, or the sulfur content l imits of this rule, whichever results in lower SO x emissions. The total SO x emissions generated from the subject fuel shall be determined using a continuous emission moni toring system (CEMS) specified in subdivision (d). The total emi ssions may be determined by monitoring the sulfur dioxide emissions from at lea st 70 percent of the total fuel gas consumed as obtained from a totalizing meter, a nd calculating the total emis sions using the CEMS data; (iii) Demonstrate that the permit units subject to the sp ecified rule emission limitations are in expired compliance with all applicable District rules or are on an approved schedule of compliance; and dates] (iv) Demonstrate tha t continuous monitoring requirements of SO x emissions specified in subdivision (d) of this rule are compl ied with. (4) [“OFCP” provision eliminated because in its present form did not conform to USEPAs economic incentive program (EIP). There are currently no fa cilities in the District opting to use an OFCP as a means to comply with the emission limits of Rule 43 1.1.] (3) Previously Exempt or Previously Compliant Facilities A person burning gaseous fuel containing sulfur com pounds in excess of the

limits specified in Table 1 and whose facility had been previously exempt from this rule pursuant to paragraph (g)(8 subsection (G)(6 ); or any person who, without the use of any sulfur removal or control system, had been previous ly 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

designee APCO within 30 days from the time of exceedance or non- compliance, a plan to demonstrate compliance with the requireme nts of the rule;

(B) submit (b) Submit to the Executive Officer or designee APCO an application for a fuel gas control system within si x months of the time of exceedance of the exemption criteria specified in paragraph (g)(8 subsection (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 ga s Except as provided in subsection (D)(3), a person burning gaseous fuels, other than exclusively natural gas, in stationary equipment requiring a permit to operat e PTO by the District shall install and have a properly operate a operating continuous fuel gas monitoring system (CFGMS) to determine the sulfur content , calculated as H 2 S, of the fuel gas prior to burning, or a continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS) to det ermine SO x emissions after burning. Such All continuous monitor monitors, require District approval, which shall be approved according to based on the requirements as set forth specified in Attachment A. An alternative method that ensures adequate com pliance 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 la ndfill gas in Table 1, ( a perso n burning landfill gas may comply with the monitoring require ments 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 dig ester gas in stationary equipment requiring a District pe rmit to operate shall install and properly operate a the CFGMS to determine the total sulfur content upstream of any mixing of the gaseous fuel prior to burning, or a CEMS to determine the sulfur oxid es431.1-8 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels

D1b: 03/29/12 (SOx) emissions after burning according to the appl icable requirements set forth in Attachment A. A person shall not mix refinery gases with natural gas, propane or other fuels upstream of the monitori ng 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 install comply with subsections (D)(1) and properly operate a CFGMS to determin e the sulfur content in the fuel gas prior to combu stion, 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 moni tor shall be approved according to the requirements of Attachment A, or an alternative met hod 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 desig nees for a sulfur removal system or comply with subsection (D)(3)

. ( 4 c) 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 monitor Continuous Monitor shall submit to the District for approval, a quality assurance procedure as specified in US EPA 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix F, Procedure 1 for CEMS and, as applicable , for CFGMS.

( A a ) The quality assurance procedure specified above s hall 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.

( B b ) Any CFGMS or CEMS deemed to be out of control, as specified in Attachment A, according to the facility quality assurance proc edure approved by the Executive Officer or designee APCO shall be corrected within 72 hours , as demonstrated by meeting the performance specificati on for which it wa s deemed out of control

. (i) The person operating the CFGMS or CEMS shall no tify the Executive Officer or designee APCO by telephone or facsimile of any breakdown(s) of the monitoring systems if the duration of the br eakdown 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 reco rd 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 (ii subsection (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 err or, neglect or improper operation or maintenance procedures

. (3) A person burning landfill gas or sewage digeste r gas, or who is subject to subsection (C)(3) of this rule may use an alternative monitori ng method, in lieu of the requirements in subsections (D)(1) and (D)(2), that ensures comp liance with the daily total sulfur content limitation as specified in Table 1. Altern ative 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 Envir onmental 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 r ule shall submit an alternative monitoring method for approval no later than 45 day s after the date an ATC for a sulfur removal system is issued.

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

(d) District personnel shall use the approved alter native 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 maintain ed 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 an d refineries, a person burning gaseous fuel

, other than exclusively natural gas

, in stationary equipment requiring a District permit to operate PTO , shall submit to the Executive Offic er or designee APCO annual reports of the monthly fuel consumption and the tot al sulfur content of the fuel consumed. Such The 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 device Continuous Monitor or approved alternative monitori ng method as specified in paragraph (d subsections (D )(1), ( d D )(2), or ( d D )(3) of this rule, and total SO x emissions , calculated as SO 2
. ( 2) 3) A person burning gaseous fuel in stationary equipm ent located at electric utility generating facilities or refineries shall submit to the Executive Officer or designee APCO monthly reports of the daily fuel consumption, the monthly weighted431.1-10 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels

D1b: 03/29/12 average sulfur content (except for natural gas), an d the maximum four ( 4 ) -hour average sulfur content of the fuel consumed, as determined by the device specified in paragraph (d subsection (D )(2) of this rule and the total SO x emissions , calculated as SO 2 . The report shall be submitted within no 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 le ast two years, and be made available to the Distric t 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 designee APCO to verify compliance with the provisions of this rule:

(1) For determination of compliance with sulfur con tent requirements of subdivision (c section (C ):

(A (a ) The reference method for determining the concentr ation of sulfur compounds in a gaseous fuel, calculated as hydrogen sulfide, shall be District H 2 S, shall be South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Method 307-91 - Determination of Sulfur in a Gaseous Matrix, or any other method demonstrat ed by the applicant to be equivalent and approved in writing by the Executive Officers of the District APCO , the CARB, and the Regional Administrator of the EPA, Re gion 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 (d section (D ) and as approved by the Executive Officer or designee APCO pursuant to the guidelines requirements 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 d etermined 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 p erson seeking the exemption supplies proof and verification upon request of applicable criteri a to the satisfaction of the Executive Officer or designee APCO , the provisions of this rule shall not apply to th e following cases :
(1) A person selling, for use in the jurisdiction o f the District, any gaseous fuel not complying with paragraphs (c) subsections (C) (1) through (c and (C )(3) provided that:

( A a ) The gaseous fuel is delivered directly to a sulfu r removal unit which is in full operation and which reduces the sulfur content to t he limits specified in paragraphs (c subsections (C )(1) through (c and (C )(3); and

( B b ) The seller notifies the Executive Officer or designee APCO 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 Construct ATC and/or Operate PTO for the sulfur removal unit that will be used to treat the purchased gas.

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

(3) Waste gases being burned provided that:

( A a ) The gross heating value of such gases is less tha n 2670 kilocalories per cubic meter (300 British Thermal Units per cubic foot) at standard conditions; and

( B b ) Any supplemental fuel used to burn such waste gas es does not contain sulfur or sulfur compounds in excess of the amount specified in this rule.

(4) Gases being burned from fluidized catalytic crackin g 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]

( 6 4 ) Gases vented to a control system pursuant to Dist rict Rule1173 .[Deleted- Rule 466 and 1173 or Regulation XX. rescinded]

( 7 5 ) 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.

( 8 6 ) Any facility which emits less than five ( 5 ) pounds per day total sulfur compounds, calculated as hydrogen sulfide H 2 S , from the burning of gaseous fuels other than natu ral gas. Emissions of total sulfur compounds shall be measured based on fuel analysis, using the test method specified in paragraph (f subsection (F )(1), and the maximum daily431.1-12 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 (c subsection (C )(1).

( 9 7 ) A person is exempt from the requirements of paragraph (d subsection (D )(1) and (d)(2) if the person demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Executive Officer or designee APCO that the supplier of the gaseous fuel has complied with the requirements of subdivision (d section (D ) for such fuel.

(10) Until November 17, 1997, any gaseous fuel sold or p urchased in a transaction bet ween a RECLAIM SO x 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 submi t to the Executive Officer or desig nee monthly written report of the quantities and da ily averages of the total sulfur contents of the gaseous fuel sold to the buy er or purchased from the seller. The daily average of total sulfur contents of gase ous fuels shall be monitored and reported to the District in a manner and format specified by t he Executive Officer or designee. Such report shall be submitte d within 30 calendar days following the end of the reporting month; and

(B) the RECLAIM SO x facility reports to the District and includes all SO x emissions generated from the burning of such gaseous fuel, as part of the facility's total SO x emissions pursuant to Rule 2004. (11 () [Deleted-RECLAIM program recinded from District Rul es 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 requi rements of paragraph (c subsection (C )( 4 3 ) provided that: the alternative monitoring method pursuant to paragraph (d section (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
ppm by 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/S howDocument.aspx?documentid=921

[SIP: Submitted as amended 11/17/95 on 1/31/96; S ubmitted 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 concentrati on by volume (dry basis) of sulfur compounds in ppmv as H 2 S 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 s ystem 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 analyz er full scale span, the monitoring system shall be deemed to be out of control and subject to the requirements of subparagraph (d subsection (D )(4)( B b ) 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 compound s calculated as hydrogen sulfide H 2 S

.

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 concentrati on by volume (dry basis, zero percent excess air) of sulfur compounds in ppmv as SO 2 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 emissio ns; (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 an d 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 sulfu r compound content of 40 ppm calculated as hydrogen sulfide in the gaseous fuels; (5) Use District Methods 100.1 or 6.1 (as applicabl e for sulfur compound analysis) and District SCAQMD Method 3.1 (for oxygen content analysis), or District SCAQMD Method 2.1431.1-14 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels

D1b: 03/29/12 (for flowrate determination), whichever is applicab le, or any other methods demonstrated by the applicant to be equivalent and approved in writing by the Executive Officers of the District APCO and the CARB, and the Regional Administrator of th e EPA, Region IX, or their designees, for conducting the relative accuracy eva luations. The relative accuracy limit shall be 1 ppm and zero drift (2-hour and 24-hour) and calib ration 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 s ystem 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 analyz er full scale span, the monitoring system shall be deemed to be out of control and subject to the requirements of subparagraph (d subsection (D )(4)( B b ) of this rule. (7) Facilities burning fuel gas subject to this rul e shall comply with the requirements of Rule 218 and 218.1(proposed) except where specific requirements have been incorp orated into this rule.

SECTION III

- – GUIDELINES FOR APPROVAL OF ALTERNATIVE MONITORING PLAN

BY THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER APCO

In lieu of a continuous fuel gas monitoring system (CFGMS) or a continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS), a person subject to this rule may su bmit an alternative monitoring plan to the Executive Officer or designee APCO, the California Air Resources Board (CARB), an d the Regional Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agenc y (EPA), Region IX, or their designees. for his their 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 Executiv e Officer or designee shall approve or disapprove o f such plan no later than 90 days pr ior to the applicable compliance date set forth in Table 1 based upon whether the alternative monitoring plan includes al l of the following:

(1) A test program to determine the correlation bet ween hydrogen sulfide H 2 S and total sulfur in the fuel gas using District SCAQMD Method 307-91. If a correlation is established, a colorimetric test, or other alternative method approved by the Executive Officer or designee APCO as being equivalent or better in establishing such correlati on, may be conducted regularly to determine total sulfur using hydrogen sulfide H 2 S as a surrogate. (2) An error analysis between colorimetric, or othe r approved alternative method readings and the total reduced sulfur analysis obtained from District SCAQMD Method 307-91. To demonstrate equivalency between the two methods of analyses, th e relative accuracy shall not exceed 20 percent of average District SCAQMD Method 307-91 readings. (3) A schedule for a daily or more frequent analysi s of the fuel gas for hydrogen sulfide ( H 2 S ) using the colorimetric test, or other approved alte rnative method, and a minimum weekly analysis of the fuel gas using District SCAQMD Method 307-91. A different frequency of analysis may be used if the Executive Officer or designee APCO determines that such frequency is adequate to will ensure compliance with the daily total sulfur limi ts 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 level sulfur content requirements of Table 1 as determined by the colorimetric or other alterna tive method, a procedure to obtain at minimum a daily sample to be tested according to District SCAQMD Method 307-91 until three consecutive daily samples show that total sulfur is below the 40 ppmv limit sulfur 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 blankAVAQMD 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 PressB-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: 01/08/13B-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: 01/08/13B-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 ResultsAVAQMD Rule 431.1 C

- 3

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 No response required. ARB made “No Comment.” Response to ARB Staff Rule Review ResultsC-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 ReviewC-6 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13AVAQMD 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 aver aging times are applicable to limits. 3. Removed “OFCP”, considered an economic incentiv e 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 wi ll be prevented twofold, by permit condition, as a CFGMS or CEMS will be required to be maintaine d in good operating condition or a violation of the permit will occur. Language limiting the numbe r of breakdowns was not included. 5. EPA expressed concern regarding the datedness o f rule 218. This is addressed with rule updates of Rule 218 (and new 218.1). 6. Advisement noted on EPA suggestion regarding ac ceptable alternative monitoring plans. 7. Typo corrected. District response to EPA Preliminary Rule ReviewC-8 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 This page intentionally left blankAVAQMD Rule 431.1 C

- 9

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 3. EPA Final Rule ReviewC-10 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13AVAQMD Rule 431.1 D

- 1

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 EPA comments surround the BACT analysis. Specifica lly, EPA notes that carbon adsorption was not included in the Districts BACT analysis and may ser ve as a cost effective control for LFG H2S as SCAQMD recently issued an Experimental Permit to Co nstruct a carbon adsorption system at Puente Hills Landfill. Indeed this technology was not con sidered as it was not believed to be proven or achi eved in practice control for LFG at the time of rule dev elopment. Depending on the outcome of the suitabil ity of carbon to control H2S at Puente Hills landfill, the District may consider this as a possible contro l technique and a reason to revisit the BACT analysis in the future. District Response to EPA Final ReviewAVAQMD 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 DECD-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 Discussio n .................................................. ........ 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 .......... .................................. 1510. 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 ................................ .................................................. 1 7 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.......... .................................................. 2 0 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 – SO x Ambient Air Quality Analysis...................... ................................................ B-1 Appendix C – Control Technology Cost Effectiveness Analysis ........................................... .... C-1Initial 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 pollu tion from all sources other than vehicular sources (Health & Safety Code (H&S Code) §§39000, 4 0000). It is the agency responsible for developing and enforcing air quality rules for stat ionary sources of air pollution within the desert portion of Los Angeles County as described in H&S C ode §41300 3 . Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq .), this document analyzes the potential adverse enviro nmental 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 25 0 parts per million by volume (ppmv), calculated as hydrogen sulfide 4 (H 2 S). Other noteworthy amendments to Rule 431.1 include providing an alternative fuel gas monitoring provis ion 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 r equirements 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”). Bot h landfills burn LFG to control emissions of methane and nonmethane organic compounds (NMOC), an d due to the content of the landfill such LFG often contains sulfur in excess of the cur rent 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 SO x emissions reductions forgone 5 in the amount of 10 pounds per day and 2 tons per year . SO x emissions were estimated using a “worst case” scenario- calculated by assuming conti nuous operation of both landfills (Lancaster Landfill and Antelope Valley Recycling & Disposal F acility) over the course of one year, at maximally permitted exhaust flow and a maximum sulf ur 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 ref erred to herein are calculated as H 2 S. 5 Please note that Lancaster landfill has only been in intermittent compliance with the 40ppmv sulfur limit since it became applicable in July 199 7. Lancaster landfill has been under a compliance agreement in an attempt to gain complian ce, however, due to the fluctuations in sulfur content of the LFG and lack of cost effectiv e 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 r ule 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 SO x emissions are predicted to be much less.

All environmental areas were examined for significa nt adverse environmental impacts as a result of the proposed amendments with no significant adve rse 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 g aseous fuels that require a permit to operate by the AVAQMD. Generally, Rule 431.1 appli es 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 mor e defined landscape of applicability, adjusting the LFG sulfur limits, pro vide for alternate monitoring methods from the installation of Continuous Fuel Gas Monito ring System (CFGMS) or Continuous Emission Monitoring System (CEMS), delet ing obsolete rule language, deleting the OFCP, containing added definitions for regulatory bodies, and standardizing rule format. Changes beyond the sulfur limit and C FGMS and CEMS monitoring provisions are for general rule cleanup and consist ency with AVAQMD rule development practices. All definitional additions are for clar ification purposes as well as for ease of use and to conform to AVAQMD standard formatting pr ovisions.

The sulfur limits table (Table 1) will be updated w ith the revised LFG sulfur limit. Below, Table 1 lists the current and proposed sulfu r limits for each fuel type. As is evident in Table 1, only the LFG sulfur limit is pr oposed 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, 1995Initial 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 pro posed in order to reflect a currently feasible emission limit for landfill gases. Amendm ents are also proposed to allow additional time for facilities to obtain approval o f 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 w ithin the jurisdiction of the AVAQMD. In general, this area includes the desert portion of Los Angeles County commonly referred to as the Antelope Valley. Spec ifically 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 Bern ardino 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 l ine common to R.13W and R.14W; then north and west along the Angeles National Fore st 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 alon g 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 s outh boundaries of Sections 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, T.7N, R.16W; then north along the r ange 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 sout h boundary of the Rancho La Liebre Land Grant; then west and north along this land gra nt boundary to the Los Angeles-Kern County boundary. (AVAQMD Rule 103(B)(1))

The offices of the AVAQMD are located at 43301 Divi sion Street, Suite 206, Lancaster, CA 93535-4649.

C. Project Objective4 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 fr om 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 C ontrol 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 resp onsibilities from the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) for the area o f 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 Governin g 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 pursuan t to statute (H&S Code §41300 et seq.) to replace the AVAPCD. Once again the rul es in effect at the time of the change remained in effect until the District Governing Boa rd 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 curren t version effective within the District.

Rule 431.1 was originally adopted by SCAQMD on Nove mber 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, 199 2, October 2, 1992, and November 17, 1995. The November 17, 1995 version is the ver sion of the rule retained by the AVAPCD upon its creation and also retained by the A VAQMD 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 a pproved 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 AVA QMD.

In summary, the November 17, 1995 version of Rule 4 31.1 is the version currently in the AVAQMD rule book and enforced by the AVAQMD. The M ay 6, 1983 rule is the version contained in the SIP within the jurisdictio n of the AVAQMD. This Initial Study generally analyzes the potential environmental impa cts of changes proposed to the AVAQMD Rule Book version of November 17, 1995 unles s otherwise specifically indicated. USEPA may be required to perform its ow n environmental review for actions it may take in the future to approve the proposed R ule 431.1 into the SIP.

III. Initial Study

A. Background InformationInitial 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 th e 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 po tentially 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 SignificanceInitial Study/Negative Declaration 7

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 February 8, 2012 C. Determination8 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 n ot require any changes to the physical environment at all. There will be no obstruction o f scenic vistas or creation of aesthetically offens ive 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 inconversion of Farmland to nonagricultural use? XInitial 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 juri sdiction of the AVAQMD by the proposed amendments and it does not require conversion of fa rmland to any other use. It does not conflict with any other zoning for agricultural use or cause chan ges 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 PM 10 . The AVAQMD has been designated nonattainment under the CCAA and unclassified under the FCAA for PM 10 . In determining whether or not the proposed project is significant, the AVA QMD followed the AVAQMD California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Federal Confor mity Guidelines, specifically the AVAQMD Significance Thresholds as stated in the AVAQMD CEQ A & Conformity Guidelines.

The Lancaster Landfill and Antelope Valley Recyclin g & Disposal Facility are both located in the AVAQMD in the cities of Lancaster and Palmdale resp ectively. They are approximately 12.3 miles apart from one another. The operations and equipme nt utilized at each landfill are similar, and both feature a landfill gas collection and flaring syste m. At each site, LFG is continuously extracted fro m the landfill via vertical collection wells and then piped to an enclosed flare where the LFG is combusted. Products of LFG combustion include carb on monoxide, unburned hydrocarbons, oxides of nitrogen, sulfur dioxide (SO x ), and particulate matter (PM 10 ). Only SO x and PM 10 emissions are expected to increase. PM 10 emission increases are expected to be insignifican t, however, based on the constituents of LFG from each site as well as a tmospheric conditions in the Antelope Valley which limit secondary PM 10 formation.

The proposed amendments will result in a maximum am ount of emissions reductions of sulfur oxides (SO x ) forgone in the amount of about 10 pounds per day and about 2 tons per year. SO x emission10 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 emis sions reductions forgone are less than the AVAQMD significance level of 25 tons per year for S O x . 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 SO 2 Ambient Air Quality Standard. The analysis consis ted of modeling combustion emissions from the Landfill Gas Flares using the Un ited States Environmental Protection Agency SCREEN3 modeling program. SCREEN3 is a single sourc e 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 impa cts from the Flare and comparing the maximum offsite ground level emissions with that of the Sta te and Federal ambient air quality standards. Results of the analysis demonstrate that the propos ed project will not generate a violation of an ambient air quality standard (See Appendix B). Giv en the amount of emissions reductions forgone, the estimated actual emissions increase and the res ults of the air quality model, this proposed projec t 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 Greenhous e 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 XInitial 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 expec ted to adversely affect existing plant or animal species/communities or unique/endangered plant or a nimal species. No additional significant adverse impacts to biological resources are expected to res ult because the amendments to the rule are not expected to disturb any resources that have not alr eady 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 X12 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 amendment s to Rule 431.1 will not occur at any major sites within the AVAQMD. As a result significant i mpacts 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, archa eological, religious or ethnic significance. Therefore, the proposed amendments to Rule 431.1 ar e 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. XInitial 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 li mits of gaseous fuel sulfur for Landfill Gas. There are no provisions in the rule as proposed whi ch would call for disruption of soil, changes in topography or any disruption of existing geology ca using 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 X14 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 XInitial 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 ex pected to be impacted by the implementation of the proposed amendments to Rule 431.1. The propose d 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 per sons 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 X16 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 gov ernments such as cities and counties determine land use and other planning considerations. Changi ng 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 expec ted to interfere in the availability or nonavailability of mineral resources. The proposed ame ndments to Rule 431.1 do not impose additional requirements which would not cause non-renewable re sources 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 XInitial 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 equip ment capable of producing sound. This equipment is already present and in operation at th e 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 LF G sulfur content allowed to be burned, revise definitions, provide for limited exemption for CGFM S and CEMS, as well as general rule clean-up. There are no provisions in Rule 431.1 which would e ncourage 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 expec ted relocation impacts.

14. Public Services. a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated X18 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 pu blic 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 ex pected 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 constru ction 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 XInitial 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 caus e an increase in transport or trips because waste transportation of materials which contribute to the production of sulfur in Landfill Gas will us e 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? X20 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 pinpo inted 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 i n 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? XInitial 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 wildl ife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to elim inate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangere d plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehi story 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, wh ich 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 WorksheetA-2 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1

February 8, 2012 This page intentionally left blank.Initial Study/Negative DeclarationA-3Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1February 8, 2012Rule 431.1- SO2 Emission Calculation WorksheetCurrent limit40 ppmv64.06(SOx)g/mol*(40ppm/1000000)*1388scf/min*525600min/yr*1ton/2000lb*1lb/453.6g*1 mol/24.04 L @STP*28.32L/1CF2.4 Tons/Year4854.9 Pounds/Year0.6 Pounds/Hour13.3 Pounds/DayProposed limit250 ppmv64.06(SOx)g/mol*(250ppm/1000000)*1388scf/min*525600min/yr*1ton/2000lb*1lb/453.6g*1 mol/24.04 L @STP*28.32L/1CF15.2 Tons/Year30342.9 Pounds/Year3.5 Pounds/Hour83.1 Pounds/Day22.1 Tons/Year44139.0 Pounds/Year5.0 Pounds/Hour120.9 Pounds/Day1.5 Tons/Year3013.0 Pounds/Year0.3 Pounds/Hour8.3 Pounds/Day25.5 Tons/Year50976.1 Pounds/Year5.8 Pounds/Hour139.7 Pounds/Day2Tons/Year3824Pounds/Year0Pounds/Hour10Pounds/DayNotes; *Actual emission estimate based on most recent comprehensive emission inventory submitted to AVAQMD.Daily Average*Current Actual EmissionCombined Net Increase From Currentto Proposed LimitEmissions Delta From Proposed toCurrent ActualLancaster LandfillAntelope Valley Recycling and DisposalA-4Initial Study/Negative DeclarationProposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1February 8, 2012This page intentionally left blank.Initial Study/Negative Declaration B-1

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 February 8, 2012 

### APPENDIX "B"

1. SO x Ambient Air Quality AnalysisB-2 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1

February 8, 2012 This page intentionally left blank.Initial Study/Negative DeclarationB-3Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1February 8, 2012B-4Initial Study/Negative DeclarationProposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1February 8, 2012This 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 AnalysisC-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, 2012C-4 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1

February 8, 2012Initial Study/Negative Declaration C-5

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 February 8, 2012C-6 Initial Study/Negative Declaration Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1

February 8, 2012Initial Study/Negative Declaration C-7

Proposed Amendments to Rule 431.1, D1 February 8, 2012C-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 COMPLETIOND-46 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13AVAQMD Rule 431.1 D

- 47

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 3. 

### DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME FEE WAIVERD-48 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 4. 

### CEQA FILING FEED NO EFFECT DETERMINATION FORMAVAQMD 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. SO x Ambient Air Quality AnalysisE-2 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13



### 1. REVISED BEST AVAILABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY ANALYS ISAVAQMD Rule 431.1 E

- 3

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

- 5

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

- 7

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13E-8 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13AVAQMD Rule 431.1 E

- 9

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13E-10 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13AVAQMD Rule 431.1 E

- 11

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13E-12 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13AVAQMD Rule 431.1 E

- 13

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13E-14 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13AVAQMD Rule 431.1 E

- 15

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13E-16 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13AVAQMD Rule 431.1 E

- 17

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13E-18 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13AVAQMD Rule 431.1 E

- 19

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13E-20 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13AVAQMD Rule 431.1 E

- 21

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13E-22 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13AVAQMD Rule 431.1 E

- 23

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13E-24 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13AVAQMD Rule 431.1 E

- 25

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13E-26 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13AVAQMD Rule 431.1 E

- 27

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13E-28 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13AVAQMD Rule 431.1 E

- 29

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13E-30 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13AVAQMD Rule 431.1 E

- 31

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13E-32 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13AVAQMD Rule 431.1 E

- 33

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13E-34 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13AVAQMD Rule 431.1 E

- 35

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13E-36 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13AVAQMD Rule 431.1 E

- 37

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13E-38 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13AVAQMD Rule 431.1 E

- 39

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13E-40 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13AVAQMD Rule 431.1 E

- 41

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 

### 2. RULE 431.1 SO2 EMISSION CALCULATION WORKSHEETE-42 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 This page intentionally left blank.AVAQMD Rule 431.1E-43Final Staff Report: 01/08/13Rule 431.1- SO2 Emission Calculation WorksheetCurrent limit40 ppmv64.06(SOx)g/mol*(40ppm/1000000)*1388scf/min*525600min/yr*1ton/2000lb*1lb/453.6g*1 mol/24.04 L @STP*28.32L/1CF2.4 Tons/Year4854.9 Pounds/Year0.6 Pounds/Hour13.3 Pounds/DayProposed limit250 ppmv64.06(SOx)g/mol*(250ppm/1000000)*1388scf/min*525600min/yr*1ton/2000lb*1lb/453.6g*1 mol/24.04 L @STP*28.32L/1CF15.2 Tons/Year30342.9 Pounds/Year3.5 Pounds/Hour83.1 Pounds/Day22.1 Tons/Year44139.0 Pounds/Year5.0 Pounds/Hour120.9 Pounds/Day1.5 Tons/Year3013.0 Pounds/Year0.3 Pounds/Hour8.3 Pounds/Day25.5 Tons/Year50976.1 Pounds/Year5.8 Pounds/Hour139.7 Pounds/Day2Tons/Year3824Pounds/Year0Pounds/Hour10Pounds/DayNotes; *Actual emission estimate based on most recent comprehensive emission inventory submitted to AVAQMD.Daily Average*Current Actual EmissionCombined Net Increase From Currentto Proposed LimitEmissions Delta From Proposed toCurrent ActualLancaster LandfillAntelope Valley Recycling and DisposalE-44AVAQMD Rule 431.1Final Staff Report: 01/08/13This page intentionally left blank.AVAQMD Rule 431.1 E-45

Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 

### 3. SOX AMBIENT AIR QUALITY ANALYSISE-46 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 This page intentionally left blank.AVAQMD Rule 431.1E-47Final Staff Report: 01/08/13E-48AVAQMD Rule 431.1Final Staff Report: 01/08/13This 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 prepa ration of this staff report and the proposed amendment of Rule 431.1:

1. South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 43 1.1 − Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels , amended June 12, 1998.

2. “Lancaster Landfill And Recycling Center Sulfur Aba tement System BACT Analysis General”, Waste Management, 2010.F-2 AVAQMD Rule 431.1 Final Staff Report: 01/08/13 This page intentionally left blank.