e ®®i 

® 

the employer's 222 Berkeley Street " P .O . Box 763 

voice&resource Boston, MA 02117-0763 

_-- ~ = 617-262-1180 " Fax: 617-536-6785 

ASSOCIATED INDUSTRIES OF MASSACHUSETTS www.aimnet.org 

BRIDGEWATER BURLINGTON HOLYOKE MARLBOROUGH WASHINGTON, D.C. 

March 22, 2007 

Department of Environmental Protection 

Bureau of Waste Prevention 

One Winter Street 

Boston, MA 02108 

ATTN: Ms. Karen Re gas 

Re : Amendments to 310 CMR 7 .00 - For the Control of Air Pollution 

Dear Ms . Regas: 

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed amendments as stated above. 

Associated Industries of Massachusetts (A.I .M.) is the largest employer association in 

Massachusetts with over 7500 members. A.I .M. members include large and small 

employers from the industrial, commercial and service sectors, including many people 

affected by this proposed rule. 

Since most of the proposed regulations are clarifications and updates, our comments will 

be focused on the Boiler Environmental Results Program (ERP) of the proposed 

regulation ((310 CMR 7.26 (30)-(36)), which has substantive changes. 

A.I .M. is a huge supporter of the ERP model and has been since its beginning. We 

believe that the ERp model is working and has reduced the burden on. DEP and on 

regulated sectors with absolutely no reduction in environmental protection . DEP has 

collected better data through these programs and as a result has freed themselves from 

mundane tasks that offer no environmental benefit. The ERP model, combined with 

DEP's continued focus on electronic data initiatives, has saved the business community 

hundreds of thousands of dollars in fees and consultant time. 

As a side note, we hope the legislature continues to support the efforts of DEP in their 

electronic initiatives by making sure the next steps in DEP's information technology 

investment are adequately funded and resources are available to allow DEP to continue to 

make these customer service strides. Having been associated with DEP's information 

technology program since its inception, (including the participation of our members in 

several feedback sessions), A.I .M. has seen incredible improvement by DEP. However, 

what is left is the most complicated parts of DEP's programs . In order to truly finish this 
project, DEP needs stable and predictable investment in this area. The return on 

investment is huge both in terms of customer satisfaction, efficiency and environmental 

improvement. A.I .M. pledges our assistance in these efforts. 

The Boiler ERP contained is the proposed regulation is an update of the original proposal 

from 2000, which A.I .M. supported. In fact, some of the suggestions we submitted in our 

original 2000 comments are now being incorporated here, which in our opinion 

demonstrates that regular review of regulations is good regulatory policy. 

While we support most of the proposal, we believe there are a few minor areas where 

DEP should consider changes. Both comments deal with Section 7.29 (33)a(3) - Fuel of 

Use/Emission Limitations. 

First, we believe that the July 1, 2007 deadline for the prohibition of using non ultra low 

sulfur distillate oil (ULSD), which will be just a few months after these regulations are 

promulgated, is far too soon for companies to make this switch since the ULSD may have 

cost and availability issues . Also, by the time these regulations are finalized, some 

companies may have already contracted for their oil supply for next year. We believe 

changing that deadline until July l, 2008 would be more appropriate for outreach and 

availability issues and will have little effect on environmental quality. 

This section is also confusing in that it prohibits burning of low-sulfur distillate fuel as of 

July 1, 2007 (or July 1, 2008 in our suggestion). We assume DEP meant that the 

regulation would prohibit the purchase or delivery after that date, not the burning since it 

is reasonable to presume that companies need to work off their inventory. We believe 

DEP should clarify this statement. 

Finally, it is our understanding that the upper threshold limit for the boiler ERP 

applicability (40 million Btu per hour) is due primarily to the fact that larger boilers 

would trigger the 50-ton NOx threshold for Title V Operating Permit applicability. 

A.I .M. has long been critical of this threshold and suggests that DEP rethink this 

threshold. In 2005, A.I .M. sent a letter to then Commissioner Bob Golledge (attached) 

suggesting that DEP change the definition of major source under the Appendix C 

Operating Permit Program from 50 tons of tiOx to 100 tons of NOx to reflect the fact 

that as of June 2005 Massachusetts was redesignated by the EPA as a "moderate" 

nonattainment area for the new 8-hour ozone standard, a change from the previous 

designation of "serious". As such, the thresholds for determining major-source 

applicability for facilities for NOx can increase from potential emissions of 50 tons per 

year to potential emissions of 100 tons per year. 

A.I .M.'s only intent is to change the threshold for purposes of determining a major source 

under the Appendix C Operating Permit Program and not under any other program. We 

do not propose any emission limit changes for any sources nor are we proposing any 

changes for the VOC threshold. Since the Operating Permit program is basically a 

paperwork exercise without additional environmental requirements, this regulation 

change can be accomplished with minimal issues . Although there are only a few major 

sources that would drop from the operating permit program (estimate 1 or 2) A.I .M. 
believes there are likely many sources that have accepted Restricted Emissions Status 

(RES) in order to stay below the 50-ton threshold but have potential emissions of 

between 50-100 tons. These sources would drop from RES sources to minor sources, 

where they really belong and their reporting schedule would drop from annually to every 

three years, a huge savings in data management for DEP. This would also allow DEP to 

allow larger boilers to use the ERP without much worry, since they will be using the 

cleanest fuels currently available on the market. 

DEP has done an excellent job streamlining their regulations and A.I .M. supports the 

changes proposed in this package with the comments above. Ongoing streamlining by 

DEP and a commitment by the legislature to fund continued electronic initiatives is good 

for existing businesses as well as good for marketing Massachusetts to potential out of 

state companies interested in moving here . Without continued IT investment, the much 

talked about permitting reforrn not realize its full potential . 

Thank you for allowing us to comment on these regulations and we look forward to 

working with you as you continue to update DEP's regulations to further reflect the 

changes occurring in Massachusetts. 

Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me at 617-262-1180. 

Sincerely, 

Robert A. Rio, Esq . 

Vice President 

Government Affairs