SACRAMENTO METROPOLITAN

AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT

STAFF REPORT

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW

Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Prepared by: Marc Cooley

Associate Air Quality Engineer

Reviewed by: Kevin J. Williams, Ph.D.

Program Coordinator

Aleta Kennard

Program Supervisor

Approved by: Brigette Tollstrup

Division Manager
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 2

BACKGROUND

The District is currently designated as a nonattainment area for both state and federal ozone,

PM101and PM2.52standards. A strategy to control air pollution is to reduce emissions from

new and modified stationary sources through a New Source Review (NSR) program. The

federal Clean Air Act (CAA) and its associated regulations contain requirements for the District

to adopt and implement a State Implementation Plan (SIP)-approved NSR program for minor

stationary sources and major stationary sources and major modifications. Similarly, the

California Clean Air Act sets requirement to offset the impact of new sources. Under the

California Health and Safety Code (HSC) and California Code of Regulations, the District is

required to establish a no net increase program for emissions of nonattainment pollutants from

all new or modified stationary sources which emit, or have the potential to emit, 10 tons or more

per year.

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, was first adopted on September 20, 1976 and was last

amended on October 28, 2010. Rule 202 applies to both minor and major sources. Until

recently, the version of Rule 202 as amended on November 20, 1984, was the District’s SIPapproved NSR rule. The 1984 version contained requirements mandated by the CAA for both

NSR and Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) programs.

In October 2010, the District adopted new Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, which

contains the NSR requirements for federal major sources. In January 2011, the District adopted

amendments to Rule 203, PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION. Both of these

actions were necessary to meet deadlines established by the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) for the District to submit rules for approval by EPA that are consistent with the

current federal regulations for NSR and PSD. EPA took action to approve the SIP submittals,

and effective August 19, 2011, Rules 214 and 203 replaced the 1984 version of Rule 202 in the

SIP.

EPA’s action on Rule 214 was a limited approval and a limited disapproval. EPA identified

deficiencies in Rule 214 that prevent full approval. The limited disapproval does not prevent the

District from implementing the rules as adopted. However, the limited disapproval started a

sanctions clock. The sanctions clock requires the District to correct the rule deficiencies and

obtain full SIP approval of the rule within 18 months (by February 19, 2013); otherwise, EPA is

required to promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) within 24 months (by August 19,

2013).

Staff proposes to stop the sanctions clock by amending Rule 214 to correct the deficiencies

identified in EPA’s evaluation. Staff is also proposing new Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE

REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS, to make federally enforceable the public noticing

requirements for new source review of minor sources, remedying a deficiency identified in

EPA’s evaluation of Rule 214. Finally, Staff is proposing similar amendments to Rule 202 to

preserve consistency and numbering with Rule 214.

1

Particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns or less, 40 Code of Federal Regulations

(CFR) 50.6.

2

Particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 microns or less, 40 CFR 50.7.
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 3

HEALTH IMPACTS

Ground level ozone is a secondary pollutant formed from photochemical reactions of NOx and

volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in the presence of sunlight. Ozone is a strong irritant that

adversely affects human health and damages crops and other environmental resources. As

documented by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the most recent Criteria

Document for ozone (U.S. EPA 2006), both short-term and long-term exposure to ozone can

irritate and damage the human respiratory system, resulting in:

 decreased lung function;

 development and aggravation of asthma;

 increased risk of cardiovascular problems such as heart attacks and strokes;

 increased hospitalizations and emergency room visits; and

 premature deaths.

According to the U.S. EPA, health studies have linked exposure to particulate matter, especially

fine particles, to several significant health problems, including:

 increased respiratory symptoms, such as irritation of the airways, coughing, or difficulty

breathing;

 decreased lung function;

 aggravated asthma;

 development of chronic bronchitis;

 irregular heartbeat;

 nonfatal heart attacks; and

 premature death in people with heart or lung disease.

Exposure to PM pollution can cause coughing, wheezing, and decreased lung function even in

otherwise healthy children and adults. EPA estimates that thousands of elderly people die

prematurely each year from exposure to fine particles. In addition, a recent study (Dominici et.

al, 2006) of the correlation between PM2.5 concentrations and hospital admission rates

concluded that short-term exposure to PM2.5 increases the risk of hospitalization for

cardiovascular and respiratory diseases.

LEGAL MANDATES

Federal Mandates

Federal Clean Air Act requirements (general): The Clean Air Act3requires state implementation

plans to include provisions to "...require permits for the construction and operation of new or

modified major stationary sources anywhere in the nonattainment area4..." Sacramento County

is nonattainment for federal ozone, PM10, and PM2.5 standards.

3

Including CAA Sections 110(a)(2)(C), 172(c)(5), 173, and 182(d)(2), codified at 42 USC 7410(a)(2)(C),

7502(c)(5), 7503, and 7511a(d)(2) respectively.

4

42 USC 7502(c)(5).
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 4

In addition to the provisions for major stationary sources, the Clean Air Act contains preconstruction requirements for minor sources. The minor source pre-construction requirements

include public notice, public comment period, and a demonstration that a minor source will not

contribute to a violation of any national standard or area control strategy for attainment5.

NSR Ozone Reclassification Requirements: The District’s reclassification from “serious” to

“severe-15” for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard was effective June 4, 20106. EPA established

deadline of June 4, 2011 for submittal of revisions to the SIP to meet the NSR requirements of a

“severe-15” area. The District met this deadline with the submittal of Rule 214 (as adopted

October 28, 2010), on December 7, 2010. Rule 214 satisfies the NSR requirements for a

severe-15 ozone area.

EPA Comments and Approvability Issues: On August 19, 2011, EPA’s rule for the limited

approval and limited disapproval of Rule 2147became effective. EPA identified the deficiencies

that resulted in the limited disapproval in a Technical Support Document8(TSD). The TSD

examined the SIP-approvability of Rule 214. The changes to Rule 214 and new Rule 217

correct all the issues identified by EPA in the TSD. The deficiencies EPA identified are as

follows:

 Missing definitions for the following terms: begin actual construction, federally

enforceable, and necessary preconstruction approvals or permits;

 Missing public noticing requirements9for minor sources;

 Missing requirement10 for sources or modifications that become major due to a

relaxation of a federally enforceable limitation are subject to new source review “as

though construction had not yet commenced”;

 Missing requirements for NSR sources that may have an impact on visibility in any

mandatory Class I Federal Area11; and

 A cross reference to Rule 207, TITLE V FEDERAL OPERATING PERMIT PROGRAM,

must be removed because Rule 207 is not SIP approved nor has it been submitted for

SIP approval.

EPA Sanction Clock: The August 19, 2011 effective date of EPA’s final limited disapproval

started a sanctions clock12 triggering penalties unless EPA approves subsequent SIP revisions

that correct the identified rule deficiencies within 18 months of the effective date (by February

19, 2013). An emission offset sanction, increasing the emission offset ratio to 2:1, will occur

5

40 CFR § 51.160 – 51.164.

6

“Designations of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; California; San Joaquin Valley, South Coast

Air Basin, Coachella Valley, and Sacramento Metro 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Areas;

Reclassification”, Federal Register 75:86 (May 5, 2010) p. 24409.

7

“Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality

Management District”, Federal Register 76:97 (May 19, 2011) p. 28942.

8 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX, Air Division. Technical Support Document for EPA’s

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for the California State Implementation Plan, Sacramento Metropolitan

Air Quality Management District. By Laura Yannayon. May 6, 2011.

9

40 CFR § 51.160 – 51.164.

10 40 CFR § 51.165(a)(5)(ii).

11 40 CFR § 51.307(b).

12 Under authority of CAA sections 110(k)(3), codified at 42 USC 7410(k)(3),and 40 CFR 52.31.
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 5

first. The second sanction, a highway fund sanction, is applied 24 months after the effective

date (August 19, 2013). Sacramento County would lose funding for transportation projects if the

funds have not been obligated by the Federal Highway Administration by the date the highway

sanctions are imposed. Projects that have already received approval to proceed and had funds

obligated may proceed. In addition, EPA must promulgate a FIP unless the SIP revisions are

approved by August 19, 2013.

State Mandates

Chapter 4.5 Protect California Air Act 2003 / SB 288 Requirements: On December 21, 2002,

the U.S. EPA promulgated regulations that substantially weakened the basic federal new source

review program13. In an effort to minimize the impact of this regulation, the state legislature

passed Senate Bill (SB) 288, the Protect California Air Act of 200314. SB 288 is intended to

minimize the impact of the relaxation of the federal new source review program on air quality in

California.

SB 288 requires that a district’s NSR program cannot be relaxed from the NSR rule that had

been adopted by the district governing board on or prior to December 30, 2002, and that had

been submitted to the EPA by the state board for inclusion into the SIP15. California Air

Resources Board website16 indicates that the February 26, 1991 version of Rule 202 is the

District’s NSR baseline rule for SB 288. The requirements of SB 28817 prevent the District from

amending Rule 202 to be less stringent than the baseline rule. Amendments or revisions

cannot exempt, relax or reduce the obligations of a stationary source for any of the

requirements listed below:

 Applicability determination for NSR

 Definition of modification, major modification, routine maintenance, or replacement

 Calculation methodology, thresholds or other procedures of NSR

 Any definitions or requirements of the NSR regulations

 Any requirements to obtain NSR or other Permits to construct

 Any requirements for BACT, Air Quality Impact Analysis, recordkeeping or public

participation

 Any requirements for regulating any air pollutant covered by the NSR rules and

regulations

The purpose of these amendments is to address EPA comments on rule approvability. As part

of the amendments, the noticing procedures of Rule 202 will be moved to Rule 217 as part of

the District’s New Source Review program. Moving the noticing procedures to a new rule under

the District’s New Source Review program is not a relaxation. The proposed amendments to

the public noticing procedures are consistent with the existing requirements and the 1991

version of Rule 202. Additional public noticing requirements are proposed for the protection of

Class I Areas that are needed to obtain EPA approval. The procedures to protect Class I areas

13 67 FR 80186, Dec. 31, 2002.

14 HSC §42500 et seq.

15 HSC §42505.

16 California Air Resources Board, District NSR Rules as they existed on December 31, 2002, last

accessed April 13, 2012, http://www.arb.ca.gov/nsr/sb288/rules/rules.htm#24.

17 HSC §42504.
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 6

(including public noticing and an applicant provided analysis), and the minor source noticing

procedures are not contained in the SB288 baseline rule. In addition, to streamline the final

notification procedures, the written notification to the applicant, the California Air Resources

Board (ARB), and EPA is maintained. The written publication of the final action will be placed

onto the District’s website.

As part of the proposed amendments to Rules 202 and 214, several definitions are proposed

needed to meet federal requirements. These terms are already in use in the current rule but

EPA is requiring the terms to be defined. None of these definitions were in the 1991 version of

Rule 202. Adding these definitions does not make the proposed rule amendments less

stringent than the 1991 version of Rule 202.

The following chart summarizes and compares the SB288 baseline rule (the 1991 Rule 202

version) with the proposed rules and discusses why the proposed amendments do not violate

SB288:

Requirement SB288 Baseline Rule (1991) Proposed Rules and Discussion

Additional

definitions

Definitions were not contained in the

1991 rule.

None of the definitions were in the 1991

rule and all pertain to the definition of

major source. The 1991 rule referred to

“EPA definition” for major source (see

Section 103). The definitions for these

terms were not changed by the NSR

Reform efforts by EPA in 2002.

Definitions included match the pre 2002

versions and are consistent with 40 CFR

Section 51.165.

Minor source

noticing

Noticing was required unless

emissions were less than 100

pounds per day (lbs/day) nitrogen

oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx) ,

and volatile organic compounds

(VOC); 80 lbs/day particulate matter

of 10 microns of less (PM10); and

550 lbs/day carbon monoxide (CO).

The proposed Rule 217 has quarterly

exemption thresholds rather than daily

exemption thresholds used in the 1991

rule. Assuming 92 days per quarter, the

1991 exemption thresholds would be

less than 9,200 lbs/qtr NOx, SOx, and

VOC; 7,360 lbs/qtr PM10; and 50,600

lbs/qtr CO.

The proposed Rule 217 has exemption

thresholds of less than 5,000 lbs/qtr

NOX and VOC; 9,200 lbs/qtr SOx; 7,300

lbs/qtr PM10; and 49,500 lbs/qtr CO.

These thresholds are at least as

stringent as the 1991 version of Rule

202. In addition, any source that is

required to provide offsets must also

provide a public notification.

Final action

notification

Publication in a newspaper of

general circulation was required for

both the preliminary decision and

The proposed Rule 217 will maintain

public inspection procedures and final

action notification in writing to same
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 7

Requirement SB288 Baseline Rule (1991) Proposed Rules and Discussion

final decision in the 1991 rule. All

supporting documents were

required to be available for public

inspection and provided to ARB,

EPA, and to any party that requests

such information.

parties as the 1991 required. The

publication of final action will be

published on the District’s website.

Notification on the District’s website has

been considered an equivalent

alternative18 when maintaining

newspaper publication for the

preliminary decision as is required by

state law.

PM2.5

interpollutant

offset ratios

Only PM10, not PM2.5, was

regulated by the 1991 rule.

PM2.5 interpollutant offset ratios

removed as required by EPA guidance.

Interpollutant trading is unchanged for

PM10. The proposed rule is more

stringent by removing the option for

interpollutant offset trading of PM2.5.

Visibility

requirements for

sources that

may affect a

Class I Areas

Visibility requirements were not

contained in the 1991 rule.

Visibility requirements add more

evaluation and notification procedures

for potential impacts. The added

visibility requirements are consistent with

40 CFR 51.307(b).

Definition of

major stationary

source

Definition of major stationary source

was not contained in the 1991 rule.

The 1991 rule referred to “major

stationary sources or major

modifications under the EPA

definition.”

Added to the major source definition the

list of source types for which fugitive

emissions must be included to determine

if a source is major. The fugitive

emissions categories were not changed

by 2002 NSR Reform19.

Applicability for

stationary

sources that

become major

due to a

relaxation in

any federally

enforceable

limitation

Requirement was not included in the

1991 rule.

Adding this requirement to Rule 202

makes the rule more stringent than 1991

rule by treating “sham” permit

modifications as new sources20. This

applicability requirement is identical to

40 CFR 51.165(a)(5)(ii).

18 McCabe, Janet. “Minor New Source Review Program Public Notice Requirements under 40 CFR

51.161(b)(3).” Memo to Regional Administrators, Regions 1 – 10. Environmental Protection Agency,

Washington D.C., April 17, 2012.

19 “Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment New Source Review (NSR) Final

Rule and Proposed Rule”, Federal Register 67:251 (December 31, 2002) p. 80186.

20 Hunt, Terrell E., & Setiz, John S. Memo to Addressees. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,

D.C. June 13, 1989.
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 8

In conclusion, the proposal is not relaxing any NSR requirement that existed in the SB 288

baseline rule. In fact, the additional requirements are more stringent than the SB 288 baseline

rule and therefore the proposal satisfies the requirements of SB 288.

SUMMARY OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

Overview: The proposed amendments are:

 Added definitions for:

o Begin actual construction

o Class I area

o Federal Land Manager (FLM)

o Federally enforceable

o Necessary preconstruction approvals or permits

 Revised exemption in Rule 214 from only PM10 to exempt all regulated air pollutant and

its precursors that Sacramento County has been designated as attainment or

unclassified for a National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). Sacramento County

attained the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in 2011 and anticipates submitting a redesignation

request to EPA in 2012. Attainment pollutants are subject to Prevention of Significant

Deterioration not non-attainment New Source Review.

 Added the list of the 28 source categories where fugitive emissions are included in the

determination to definition of major stationary source. In Rule 214, reference is made to

this list in the definition of potential to emit.

 Added 40 tons per year of nitrogen oxides as a precursor emission of PM2.5. This is

consistent with EPA’s implementation of NSR for PM2.521. The precursor definition

already included nitrogen oxides as PM2.5 precursor consistent with Federal regulation,

see Rule 214, Section 239.

 Added requirements for sources affecting Class I areas to provide a visibility analysis

when submitting a permit application. Additional procedures must be followed for

sources that may have an impact to Class I areas pursuant to 40 CFR § 51.307 and

51.166. These procedures require new major sources or major modifications to provide

the Air Pollution Control Officer with an analysis of impairment to visibility to any Class I

areas, noticing to the applicable officials and agencies related to any affected Class I

area, and permit denial procedures for proposed sources or modifications with an

adverse impact to visibility in a Class I area.

 Revised applicability such that any source that becomes major due to a relaxation in any

federally enforceable limitation, such as hours of operation, or the capacity of the source

to emit, the source must be subject to the requirements of New Source Review as

though construction of the source has not yet commenced. This is required by 40 CFR

51.165(a)(5)(ii). EPA has issued guidance documents interpreting this requirement22, 23.

 Removed interpollutant offset ratios for NOx and SOx to PM2.5 consistent with EPA’s

21 “Implementation of the New Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5

Micrometers (PM2.5)”, Federal Register 73:96 (May 16, 2008) p. 28321.

22 Hunt, Terrell E., & Setiz, John S. “Guidance on Limiting Potential To Emit in New Source Permitting.”

Memo to Addressees. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. June 13, 1989.

23 U.S. EPA, “New Source Review Workshop Manual, Prevention of Significant Deterioration and

Nonattainment Area Permitting.” Page c.6. October 1990.
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 9

revised policy reconsidering interpollutant trading provisions for PM2.524. Ratios for

interpollutant trading for primary PM2.5 are not allowed for any pollutants unless an

offset ratio is established in either a PM2.5 attainment demonstration or maintenance

plan, in case of PM2.5 attainment, approved by EPA into the State Implementation Plan.

 Proposed new Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS,

containing the public notice requirements needed to satisfy federal and state

requirements. Removed the public noticing requirements from Rule 202 and Rule 214

and replaced with reference that all applications are subject to the requirements of Rule

217. Rule 217 will be submitted to the SIP which will require minor sources to issue

public notices as a federal requirement.

Rule 217, Public Notice Requirements for Permits: Federal regulations25 require a SIP rule that

provides public an opportunity to comment on non-major permit decisions. Rule 214 only

applies to major stationary sources and consequently did not meet the minor source noticing

requirement. Staff is proposing Rule 217 to provide the necessary SIP public noticing

procedures for both major and non-major sources.

Rule 217 includes notification procedures relevant to new major sources and major

modifications that may affect visibility of any Class I area. According to a letter dated March 9,

2011 from EPA Region 4 to the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural

Resources26, notification to the Federal Land Manager (FLM) must be provided for any

proposed new major stationary source or major modification that would be located within 100

kilometers of Class I area. Additional notifications may be required for other sources that would

be located further than 100 km from a Class I area when other factors (such as the proposed

source’s size) raise concerns about potential visibility impacts. Guidance provided by the FLMs’

Air Quality Related Values Work Group (FLAG)27 states that, “the permitting authority should

notify the FLM of all new or modified major facilities proposing to locate within 100 kilometers of

a Class I area.”

The proposed rules satisfy the federal and state mandates, and correct the deficiencies

identified by EPA in the Technical Support Document.

COST IMPACTS

Section 40703 of the California Health and Safety Code requires that the District consider and

make public its findings relating to the cost effectiveness of implementing an emissions control

measure.

24 McCarthy, Gina. “Memo to the Regional Air Division Directors, Regions 1-10,” Environmental Protection

Agency, Washington, D.C. July 21, 2011.

25 40 CFR 51.161(a).

26 Banister, Beverly H., Letter to Ms. Shiela C. Holamn, North Carolina Department of Environment and

Natural Resources. March 9, 2011.

27 U.S. Department of the Interior. "Federal Land Managers’ Air Quality Related Values Work Group

(FLAG) Phase I report – Revised (2010).” October 7, 2010.
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 10

Impact on Businesses in Sacramento: The impact of the proposed rule amendments is not

expected to be a burden to businesses. The rule amendments implement administrative

procedures that are already required by federal regulations. Some of these procedures are

already required under Rule 202.

Public noticing requirements for minor sources are in Rule 202 but are not in Rule 214. Minor

sources that trigger public notification will be moved from Rule 202 to Rule 217 which will be

submitted as a SIP revision and therefore be subject to the Clean Air Act’s requirements for

federal enforcement. Since these sources were required to notice under the previous version of

Rule 202, this change has no cost impact to businesses. The lowering of the SOx public

notification exemption thresholds does not have an impact to business. Most likely, any source

that would exceed the SOx threshold levels would already have triggered a public notification

under the NOx threshold (which has not been changed). NOx and SOx emissions are formed

when fuel is burned, with SOx emissions associated with the burning of fuels containing sulfur.

Additional noticing requirements are required for major sources or major modifications that may

impact a Class I area. For these projects, the additional public noticing procedures include: 1) a

mandatory public hearing allowing the public to appear and submit comments, 2) availability of

all comments for inspection, 3) an enhanced public noticing timeline, and 4) public notification to

all relevant officials and agencies having cognizance over any affected Class I area(s). In

addition, the source must provide an analysis of the project’s air quality impact to any Class I

areas when submitting a permit application. These requirements have been mandated by

federal regulations. The District has few sources that could possibly impact a Class I area28

when making a significant modification, and any additional administrative procedures are not

expected to be significant.

Impacts on District: There is no cost impact expected for the District. The adoption and

subsequent SIP approval of Rule 217 will make federally enforceable public noticing procedures

already required by Rule 202. In addition, the amendment requires final actions to be published

on the District website. Website notifications of final actions are already being implemented.

The level of effort required for notifications to Federal Land Managers are not expected to be

significant in part due to very few if any sources that may trigger this notification. No additional

staff time is needed.

EMISSIONS IMPACT

There is no change to the emission standards in the proposed amendments.

28 The Class I areas of concern to sources in Sacramento County are Desolation Wilderness in El Dorado

County and Mokelumne Wilderness in Alpine County. These Class I areas are as close as

approximately 75 kilometers from the eastern side of Sacramento County.
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 11

SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS

HSC Section 40728.5 requires a district to perform an assessment of the socioeconomic

impacts before adopting, amending, or repealing a rule that will significantly affect air quality or

emission limitations. The District Board is required to actively consider the socioeconomic

impacts of the proposal and make a good faith effort to minimize adverse socioeconomic

impacts. The proposed amendments to Rule 202, Rule 214, and new Rule 217 are

administrative in nature and do not affect air quality or emissions standards or limitations.

Therefore, Section 40728.5 of the Health and Safety Code does not apply.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND COMPLIANCE

Staff finds that the adoption of the proposed rules is not subject to the California Environmental

Quality Act because it is an activity that will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable

indirect physical change in the environment29.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

Staff held a public workshop to discuss the proposed amendments on July 10, 2010. A public

notice was mailed and e-mailed to interested parties, including the affected sources, and was

posted on the District website. The draft rules and staff report were available for public review

at that time.

Staff received questions at the workshop and written EPA comments. All comments and

responses are included in Appendix B. In response to EPA comments, Staff added the

significance threshold for nitrogen oxides (for PM2.5 purposes) in the definition of major

modification and made a few minor editorial and grammatical changes.

EPA comments requested an explanation of how and why the public noticing thresholds in Rule

217, Section 110 were selected. The thresholds match the current noticing threshold levels and

are less than half the major source emission levels for all pollutants except carbon monoxide.

Staff performed additional analysis of the minor source public noticing thresholds to characterize

what those thresholds represent in terms of the contribution of emissions from permitted

sources to Sacramento’s air quality problems. The sources that will not be subject to noticing

account for less than 5% of the total District emissions inventory for all pollutants except for

SOx.

The analysis shows the amount of emissions from sources subject to public noticing

requirements account for approximately 40% of the VOC, 62% of the NOx, 43% of the SOx,

39% of the CO, 40% or the PM10, and 29% of the PM2.5 of the total District permitted

emissions.

Results of the analysis are shown in the table below. For more details about the calculation see

Appendix C.

29 Public Resources Code §21084(a) and Preliminary Review, State CEQA Guidelines §15060(c)(2).
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 12

ROG

(tpy)

NOx

(tpy)

SO2

(tpy)

CO

(tpy)

PM10

(tpy)

PM2.5

(tpy)

1 Public Noticing threshold 30 10 10 18.4 99 14.6 10

2 Major source threshold31 25 25 100 100 100 100

3 Notification threshold is _% of major

source threshold (Line1/Line 2) 40% 40% 18% 99% 15% 10%

4 2010 Total Actual Emissions from all

Permitted Sources32 & 33 1559 567 68 1018 344 283

5 2010 Actual Emissions from sources

w/ PTE at or above noticing

thresholds32 & 33 627 351 29 395 133 81

6 Total Emissions not subject to public

noticing (Line 4-Line 5) 932 216 39 623 201 202

7 2010 Emissions Inventory34 21159 25414 237 113936 16474 5072

8 % of emissions inventory from

permitted sources (Line4/Line7) 7.4% 2.2% 28.6% 0.9% 2.0% 5.6%

9 % of emissions from permitted

sources not subject to public

notification (Line 6/Line 7) 4.4% 0.9% 16.2% 0.5% 1.2% 4.0%

10 % of permitted emissions subject to

notice (Line 5/Line 4) 40% 62% 43% 39% 40% 29%

The total emissions from all stationary sources that are not subject to public notification account

for less than 5% of the total emissions inventory for Sacramento County for all pollutants except

SO2. The SO2 noticing thresholds are appropriate, in spite of the relatively higher percentage of

non-noticed SO2 permits, because Sacramento is attainment for SO2 and because its precursor

contribution to particulate matter pollution in Sacramento is very small. Sacramento County, in

fact all of California, has been in attainment for the 1971 annual and 24-hour standards for SO2

since the late 1980s. California has recommended that Sacramento be designated

attainment/unclassifiable for the 1-hour standard of 75 ppb35 because the SO2 design value of

Sacramento County is 4 ppb36. While SO2 is a precursor to both PM10 and PM2.5, analyses

indicate that the contribution of SO2 to PM10 and PM2.5 levels is Sacramento County is very

small, 1.3%37 of PM10 and 2% on PM2.538.

30 Rule 217, Section 110 - shown in tons per year (tpy) here

31 40CFR51.165(a)(1)(iv)(A)

32 SMAQMD. “Consolidated Active Permits with Emissions.xlsx”, July 19, 2012.

33 SMAQMD. “Backup Information for Permitted Emissions Calculations.xlsx”, July 23, 2012.

34 Annual average emissions for 2010, tons per day times 365 days/year, CEPAM: 2009 Almanac –

Standard Emissions Tool. California Air Resources Board. April 13, 2009. Web. July 18, 2012.

http://www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/fcemssumcat2009.php

35 “Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Sulfur Dioxide; Final Rule”, Federal Register 75:119

(June 22, 2010) p. 35520.

36 California Air Resources Board. “Recommended Area Designations for the 2010 Federal Sulfur Dioxide

(SO2) Standard Staff Report.” June 2011.

37 SMAQMD, “PM10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento

County”, October 28, 2010, Table 6.3

38 SMAQMD, “Staff Report – Rule 421 Mandatory Episodic Curtailment of Wood and Other Solid Fuel

Burning” September 9, 2009, page 16
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 13

No changes to the public notification thresholds were made as a result of this analysis.

FINDINGS

The California Health and Safety Code (HSC), Division 26, Air Resources, requires local

districts to comply with a rule adoption protocol as set forth in Section 40727 of the Code. This

section has been revised through legislative mandate to contain six findings that the District

must make when developing, amending, or repealing a rule. These findings, effective January

1, 1992, and their definitions are listed in the next several tables.
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 14

Rule 202 – Required Findings

Finding Finding Determination

Authority: The District must find that a provision of

law or of a state or federal regulation permits or

requires the District to adopt, amend, or repeal the

rule.

The District is authorized to adopt and amend Rule 202

by California Health and Safety Code (HSC) Sections

40001, 40702, 41010, and 42300.

[HSC Section 40727(b)(2)]

Necessity: The District must find that the rulemaking

demonstrates a need exists for the rule, or for its

amendment or repeal.

Rule 214, Federal New Source Review is being

amended to gain full approval by EPA into the State

Implementation Plan. It is necessary to adopt the

proposed amendments to maintain the consistency of

Rule 202 with Rule 214 to avoid conflicting requirements

for sources that are subject to both rules.

[HSC Section 40727(b)(1)]

Clarity: The District must find that the rule is written

or displayed so that its meaning can be easily

understood by the persons directly affected by it.

Staff has reviewed the proposed rule and determined

that it can be understood by the affected parties. In

addition, the record contains no evidence that people

directly affected by the rule cannot understand the rule.

[HSC Section 40727(b)(3)]

Consistency: The rule is in harmony with, and not in

conflict with or contradictory to, existing statutes,

court decisions, or state or federal regulations.

The proposed rule does not conflict with, and is not

contradictory to, existing statutes, court decisions, or

state or federal regulations. [HSC Section 40727(b)(4)]

Non-Duplication: The District must find that either:

1) The rule does not impose the same requirements

as an existing state or federal regulation; or (2) that

the duplicative requirements are necessary or proper

to execute the powers and duties granted to, and

imposed upon the District.

The proposed rule implements federal regulations for

permitting programs (40 CFR Part 51.165). Rule 214,

Federal New Source Review, contains duplicative

requirements that are necessary in order to execute the

powers and duties imposed upon the District because

the federal Clean Air Act (42 USC 7410(a)(2)(c)) requires

New Source Review to be included in the State

Implementation Plan. Rule 202, which contains the

federal as well as state requirements, is necessary to

execute the power and duties imposed upon the District,

and Rule 202 is being amended to maintain consistency

with Rule 214.

[HSC Section 40727(b)(5)].

Reference: The District must refer to any statute,

court decision, or other provision of law that the

District implements, interprets, or makes specific by

adopting, amending or repealing the rule.

In adopting the proposed rule, the District is

implementing the requirements of HSC Sections 40919,

41010(b) and 42504, and the federal Clean Air Act (42

USC 7410(a)(2)(C), 7502(c)(5), 7503, and 7511a(d)(2)).

[HSC Section 40727(b)(6)]

Additional Informational Requirements: In

complying with HSC Section 40727.2, the District

must identify all federal requirements and District

rules that apply to the same equipment or source

type as the proposed rule or amendments.

The proposed rule does not impose a new emission limit

or standard, make an existing emission limit or standard

more stringent, or impose new or more stringent

monitoring, reporting, or recordkeeping requirements.

Therefore, a written analysis of federal regulations and

other District rules is not required.

[HSC Section 40727.2(g)]
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 15

Rule 214 – Required Findings

Finding Finding Determination

Authority: The District must find that a provision of

law or of a state or federal regulation permits or

requires the District to adopt, amend, or repeal the

rule.

The District is authorized to adopt and amend Rule 214

by California Health and Safety Code (HSC) Sections

40001, 40702, 41010, and 42300.

[HSC Section 40727(b)(2)]

Necessity: The District must find that the rulemaking

demonstrates a need exists for the rule, or for its

amendment or repeal.

It is necessary to adopt the proposed amendments to

Rule 214 to correct the deficiencies identified in EPA’s

technical support document, and thus comply with 40

CFR 51 and the federal Clean Air Act (42 USC 7410).

This will allow the rule to be fully approved by EPA under

the federal Clean Air Act (42 USC 7410(l)).

[HSC Section 40727(b)(1)]

Clarity: The District must find that the rule is written

or displayed so that its meaning can be easily

understood by the persons directly affected by it.

Staff has reviewed the proposed rule and determined

that it can be understood by the affected parties. In

addition, the record contains no evidence that people

directly affected by the rule cannot understand the rule.

[HSC Section 40727(b)(3)]

Consistency: The rule is in harmony with, and not in

conflict with or contradictory to, existing statutes,

court decisions, or state or federal regulations.

The proposed rule does not conflict with, and is not

contradictory to, existing statutes, court decisions, or

state or federal regulations. [HSC Section 40727(b)(4)]

Non-Duplication: The District must find that either:

1) The rule does not impose the same requirements

as an existing state or federal regulation; or (2) that

the duplicative requirements are necessary or proper

to execute the powers and duties granted to, and

imposed upon the District.

The proposed rule duplicates federal regulations for

permitting programs (40 CFR Part 51.165). The

duplicative requirements are necessary in order to

execute the powers and duties imposed upon the District

because the federal Clean Air Act (42 USC

7410(a)(2)(c)) requires New Source Review to be

included in the State Implementation Plan.

[HSC Section 40727(b)(5)]

Reference: The District must refer to any statute,

court decision, or other provision of law that the

District implements, interprets, or makes specific by

adopting, amending or repealing the rule.

In adopting the proposed rule, the District is

implementing the requirements of the federal Clean Air

Act (42 USC 7410(a)(2)(C), 7502(c)(5), 7503, and

7511a(d)(2)). [HSC Section 40727(b)(6)]

Additional Informational Requirements: In

complying with HSC Section 40727.2, the District

must identify all federal requirements and District

rules that apply to the same equipment or source

type as the proposed rule or amendments.

The proposed rule does not impose a new emission limit

or standard, make an existing emission limit or standard

more stringent, or impose new or more stringent

monitoring, reporting, or recordkeeping requirements.

Therefore, a written analysis of federal regulations and

other District rules is not required.

[HSC Section 40727.2(g)]
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 16

Rule 217 – Required Findings

Finding Finding Determination

Authority: The District must find that a provision of

law or of a state or federal regulation permits or

requires the District to adopt, amend, or repeal the

rule.

The District is authorized to adopt Rule 217 by California

Health and Safety Code (HSC) Sections 40001, 40702,

41010, and 42300.

[HSC Section 40727(b)(2)]

Necessity: The District must find that the rulemaking

demonstrates a need exists for the rule, or for its

amendment or repeal.

It is necessary to adopt Rule 217 to correct the

deficiencies identified in EPA’s technical support

document, and thus comply with 40 CFR 51 and the

federal Clean Air Act (USC 7410). This will allow the

District’s New Source Review program to be fully

approved by EPA under the federal Clean Air Act (42

USC 7410(l)).

[HSC Section 40727(b)(1)]

Clarity: The District must find that the rule is written

or displayed so that its meaning can be easily

understood by the persons directly affected by it.

Staff has reviewed the proposed rule and determined

that it can be understood by the affected parties. In

addition, the record contains no evidence that people

directly affected by the rule cannot understand the rule.

[HSC Section 40727(b)(3)]

Consistency: The rule is in harmony with, and not in

conflict with or contradictory to, existing statutes,

court decisions, or state or federal regulations.

The proposed rule does not conflict with and is not

contradictory to existing statutes, court decisions, or

state or federal regulations.

[Health & Safety Code Section 40727(b)(4)]

Non-Duplication: The District must find that either:

1) The rule does not impose the same requirements

as an existing site or federal regulation; or 2) that the

duplicative requirements are necessary or proper to

execute the powers and duties granted to, and

imposed upon the District.

The proposed rule duplicates federal regulations for

permitting programs (40 CFR Part 51 Sections 160

through 164). The duplicative requirements are

necessary in order to execute the powers and duties

imposed upon the District because the federal Clean Air

Act (42 USC 7410(a)(2)(c)) requires minor source New

Source Review to be included in the State

Implementation Plan. [HSC Section 40727(b)(5)]

Reference: The District must refer to any statute,

court decision, or other provision of law that the

District implements, interprets, or makes specific by

adopting, amending or repealing the rule.

In adopting the proposed rule, the District is

implementing the requirements of the federal Clean Air

Act (42 USC 7410(a)(2)(C), 7502(c)(5), 7503, and

7511a(d)(2)). [HSC Section 40727(b)(6)]

Additional Informational Requirements: In

complying with HSC Section 40727, the District must

identify all federal requirements and District rules that

apply to the same equipment or source type as the

proposed rule or amendments.

The proposed rule does not impose a new emission limit

or standard, make an existing emission limit or standard

more stringent, or impose new or more stringent

monitoring, reporting, or recordkeeping requirements.

Therefore, a written analysis of federal regulations and

other District rules is not required.

[HSC Section 40727.2(g)]
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 17

REFERENCES

Banister, Beverly H. Letter to Ms. Shiela C. Holman, North Carolina Department of Environment

and Natural Resources. March 9, 2011.

California Air Resources Board, “New Source Review Permitting Programs.”

http://www.arb.ca.gov/nsr/nsr.htm

California Air Resources Board. “Recommended Area Designations for the 2010 Federal Sulfur

Dioxide (SO2) Standard Staff Report.” June 2011.

California Emissions Projection Analysis Model (CEPAM): 2009 Almanac – Standard Emissions

Tool. California Air Resources Board. April 13, 2009. Web. July 18, 2012.

<http://www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/fcemssumcat2009.php>.

“Clean Air Act Attainment Finding; Bullhead City and Payson Nonattainment Areas, AZ;

Sacramento and San Bernardino Nonattainment Areas, CA; Particulate Matter of 10 Microns or

Less (PM–10)”, Federal Register 67:32 (February 15, 2002) p. 7082.

“Designations of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; California; San Joaquin Valley, South

Coast Air Basin, Coachella Valley, and Sacramento Metro 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Areas;

Reclassification”, Federal Register 75:86 (May 5, 2010) p.24409.

Hunt, Terrell E., & Setiz, John S. “Guidance on Limiting Potential to Emit in New Source

Permitting.” Memo to Addressees. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. June

13, 1989.

“Implementation of the New Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulate Matter Less Than

2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)”, Federal Register 73:96 (May 16, 2008) p. 28321.

McCabe, Janet. “Minor New Source Review Program Public Notice Requirements under 40

CFR 51.161(b)(3).” Memo to Regional Administrators, Regions 1 – 10. Environmental

Protection Agency, Washington D.C., April 17, 2012.

McCarthy, Gina. “Revised Policy to Address Reconsideration of Interpollutant Trading

Provisions for Fine Particles (PM2.5).” Memo to the Regional Air Division Directors, Regions 1-

10. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. July 21, 2011.

Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, “Rule 207. Review of New or Modified

Sources”, April 20, 2011.

Placer County Air Pollution Control District, “Rule 502, New Source Review”, October 13, 2011.

“Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment New Source Review (NSR)

Final Rule and Proposed Rule”, Federal Register 67:251 (December 31, 2002) p. 80186.

“Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Sulfur Dioxide; Final Rule”, Federal Register

75:119 (June 22, 2010) p. 35520.
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 18

“Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality

Management District”, Federal Register 76:97 (May 19, 2011) p. 28942.

“Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality

Management District”, Federal Register 76:139 (July 20, 2011) p. 43183.

Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. “Backup Information for Permitted

Emissions Calculations.xlsx”, July 23, 2012. File.

Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. “Consolidated Active Permits with

Emissions.xlsx”, July 19, 2012. File.

Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, “PM10 Implementation/Maintenance

Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County”, October 28, 2010.

Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, “Staff Report – Rule 421 Mandatory

Episodic Curtailment of Wood and Other Solid Fuel Burning” September 9, 2009.

San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, “Rule 2201 New and Modified

Stationary Source Review Rule”, March 17, 2011.

South Coast Air Quality Management District, “Rule XIII – New Source Review”, Various Dates.

U.S. Department of the Interior. "Federal Land Managers’ Air Quality Related Values Work

Group (FLAG) Phase I report – Revised (2010).” October 7, 2010.

U.S. EPA, 40 CFR 51.165, Permit Requirements.

U.S. EPA, 40 CFR 51.166, Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality.

U.S. EPA, 40 CFR 51.307, New Source Review (Subpart P – Protection of Visibility).

U.S. EPA, 40 CFR 51, Appendix S to Part 51 – Emission Offset Interpretative Ruling.

U.S. EPA, 40 CFR 52.28, Protection of visibility from sources in nonattainment areas.

U.S. EPA, 40 CFR 52.281, Visibility protection.

U.S. EPA, “New Source Review Workshop Manual, Prevention of Significant Deterioration and

Nonattainment Area Permitting.” October 1990.

U.S. EPA, Region IX, Air Division. “Technical Support Document for EPA’s Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking for the California State Implementation Plan, Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality

Management District.” By Laura Yannayon. May 6, 2011.
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 19

APPENDIX A

LIST OF CHANGES TO RULES

Rule 202 – New Source Review

NEW

SECTION

NUMBER

EXISTING

SECTION

NUMBER

PROPOSED CHANGES

102 Same Added requirement to applicability that any source or modification

that becomes a major source or major modification solely due to a

relaxation in a federally enforceable limitation, then that source or

modification is subject to the rule as though the source or

modification had not yet commenced construction. This

requirement is consistent with 40 CFR 51.165(a)(5)(ii) and EPA

comment #12 in the TSD.

In addition, updated the applicability note to include that all sources

are subject Rule 217 since the amendments remove the noticing

requirements from this rule and put those requirements into new

Rule 217 as part of the District New Source Review program.

111.3 Same Revised section reference.

N/A 113 Moved section to Rule 217.

113 114 Section renumbered and revised section reference.

114-115 115-116 Sections renumbered.

116 117 Section number reserved to maintain section references consistent

with Rule 214 (adding a new exemption for all attainment and

unclassified pollutants, see Section 116 in Rule 214).

117 N/A Added exemption from visibility analysis requirements (Sections 309

and 413) for all non-major sources and non-major modifications.

204 N/A Added "Begin Actual Construction” definition for the term used in

the definition of construction commences. This definition is

consistent with both the 2002 and the current version of 40 CFR

51.165(a)(1)(xv).

205-207 204-206 Sections renumbered.

208 N/A Added “Class I Area” definition for the term used in the

requirements for sources impacting Class I areas pursuant to

Section 416. This definition is consistent with the Clean Air Act

Section 162(a) and all of 40 CFR Part 81 Subpart D (including 40

CFR 81.405.)

209-212 207-210 Sections renumbered.

213.3b 211.3b Added requirement that creditable emission decreases for all major

stationary sources be “federally enforceable” consistent with EPA

comment #8c in the TSD.

214 212 Section renumbered and revised section reference.

215 213 Section renumbered.

216 214 Section renumbered and revised section reference.

217-218 215-216 Sections renumbered.
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 20

NEW

SECTION

NUMBER

EXISTING

SECTION

NUMBER

PROPOSED CHANGES

219 N/A Added “federal land manager” definition consistent with 40 CFR

51.165(a)(1)(xlii). This term is used in Sections 309 and 416.

220 217 Section renumbered and revised section references.

221 N/A Added “federally enforceable” definition consistent with both the

2002 and the current version of 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(xiv) and EPA

comment #8c in the TSD. This term only applies to major stationary

sources and will be utilized in addition to the term “enforceable as a

practical matter” as needed to address EPA comments in the TSD.

The District’s new source review rules in the SIP include Rule 203,

Prevention of Significant Deterioration.

222-226 218-222 Section renumbered and revised section references.

227 223 Revised the introductory language to mirror the definition of

modification to remove ambiguity and circular reference. In

addition, revised section number, references, and grammar.

227.3b N/A Added nitrogen oxides to the list of precursors for PM2.5 under the

definition of major modification. Nitrogen oxides are correctly listed

as a precursor in the definition of precursor (Section 229).

227.3c-e 223.3b-d Sections renumbered.

227.6 N/A Added list of changes that are not considered a major modification

(or modification) for the purposes of the rule. This is identical

language as in Section 229.3.

228 224 Removed reference to Rule 207 and replaced with the list of 28

source categories for which fugitive emissions are included in the

determination of major stationary source. The list of the 28 source

categories is consistent with 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(iv)(C). This is

consistent with EPA comment #14 in the TSD.

229 225 Added reference to the definition of “historic potential emissions.” In

some cases, historic potential emissions will be historic actual

emissions. Also, section renumbered and revised section

reference.

230 N/A Added “necessary preconstruction approvals or permits” definition

consistent with both the 2002 and the current version of 40 CFR

51.165 (a)(1)(xvii) and EPA comment #8c in the TSD. This term is

used is in the definition of ‘construction commences’ (Section 210).

231-233 226-228 Sections renumbered.

234 229 Changed the term “enforceable as a practical matter” to “federally

enforceable” consistent with EPA comment #8c in the TSD. In

addition, this section only applies to major stationary sources;

therefore, “federally enforceable” is the correct term.

235-236 230-231 Revised to match EPA’s recent change in the federal test method to

include condensable emissions for particulate matter (see 77 FR

15656).

237 232 Section renumbered.

238 233 Revised “potential to emit” definition to be consistent with EPA
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 21

NEW

SECTION

NUMBER

EXISTING

SECTION

NUMBER

PROPOSED CHANGES

comment #8c in the TSD. The potential to emit must be incorporate

as a permit condition that is “enforceable as a practical matter” and

“federally enforceable” for all major stationary sources.

239 234 Section renumbered.

240 235 Section renumbered and revised section reference.

241-250 236-250 Sections renumbered.

301 Same Revised section reference.

302.1-

302.3

Same Revised section references.

302.10 Same Revised section reference.

300 Same Revised section reference.

303.1-

303.2

Same Revised chart to remove ambiguity in applying offset ratios for nonmajor modifications at major sources. The offset ratio for minor

modifications at major sources should either be 1.2 to 1.0 if < 15

miles from the source, or 1.0 to 1.0 for same source. This

clarification does not change the applicability or intent and is

consistent with the most recent changes to the NSR rules. Also

revised section reference.

305 Same Removed interpollutant offset ratios consistent with recent EPA

policy (McCarthy, 2011). An offset ratio may be allowed if

established and approved in an attainment demonstration, or

maintenance plan, in the case of attainment and the ratio is

approved by EPA.

309 N/A Added section to allow the Air Pollution Control Officer to deny an

Authority to Construct or Permit to Operate if the Air Pollution

Control Officer finds that a proposed new major stationary source or

major modification would have an adverse impact on visibility of a

Class I area pursuant to 40 CFR 51.307(b). This requirement is

consistent with EPA comment #13 in the TSD.

400 Same Added requirement that all activities regulated by Rule 202 are

subject to Rule 217. Moved all public noticing and comment

requirements to Rule 217. All activities regulated by Rule 202 are

subject to Rule 217 as part of the District’s New Source Review of

all permit applications. Power plants also continue to be subject to

the review requirements of Section 415.

401 Same Revised section reference.

402-402.3 Same Added administrative procedure to require major sources that may

affect visibility of a Class I area to provide an analysis as part of a

complete application. The analysis is necessary for a complete

application when noticing the Federal Land Manager as required by

Rule 217.

N/A 405.1 Moved section to Rule 217.

N/A 406 and

407

Moved sections to Rule 217
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 22

NEW

SECTION

NUMBER

EXISTING

SECTION

NUMBER

PROPOSED CHANGES

407 and

408

409 and

410

Revised section references.

N/A 409.2 Moved section to Rule 217.

408.3c 410.3c Added the term “federally enforceable” consistent with EPA

comment #8c in the TSD. In addition, this section only applies to

major stationary sources; therefore, “federally enforceable” is the

correct term.

409 and

410

411 and

412

Sections renumbered.

411 413 Sections renumbered and revised section references.

N/A 413.1 Moved section to Rule 217.

412 414 Section renumbered and revised section reference.

413 N/A Added administrative requirement for applicants to provide the Air

Pollution Control Officer with an analysis of impairment to visibility of

any Class I area. This is consistent with 40 CFR 51.307 &

51.166(o).

414 415 Revised to maintain consistency of that the section applies to power

plants that are over 50 megawatts.

414.3 415.3 Revised language to clarify the requirement that power plants are

subject to all District rules and regulations that apply to applications

for a permit to construct. For preconstruction review of a permit

application the following rules would include, but are not limited to,

Rules 202, 203, 214, and new Rule 217.

414.5 414.5 Revised language to clarify the reference for public notice and

comment requirements that all District rule requirements must be

met for a power plant to receive a determination of compliance.

This change eliminates the ambiguous reference (i.e. “this” to the

appropriate rule).

Rule 214 – Federal New Source Review

NEW

SECTION

NUMBER

EXISTING

SECTION

NUMBER

PROPOSED CHANGES

(All changes in proposed Rule 202 are similarly proposed for

Rule 214. This table articulates the rationale for differences

from the Proposed Rule 202 Language.)

102 Same Added note that Rule 217 applies to all sources subject to Rule 214.

This is a reminder to applicants that the public notice requirements

are applicable to permit applications subject to new source review.

116 117 Changed exemption to apply to any regulated air pollutant (or

precursors to that pollutant) that Sacramento County has been

designated or re-designated as attainment or unclassified for the

federal NAAQS. Sources are subject to Prevention of Significant

Deterioration for attainment pollutants and continue to be subject to

the NSR requirements of Rule 202.
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 23

NEW

SECTION

NUMBER

EXISTING

SECTION

NUMBER

PROPOSED CHANGES

(All changes in proposed Rule 202 are similarly proposed for

Rule 214. This table articulates the rationale for differences

from the Proposed Rule 202 Language.)

117 N/A Added exemption from visibility analysis requirements (Sections 309

and 413) for non-major modifications. In Rule 214, this exemption

is applicable to non-major modifications at major sources.

213.3b 211.3b Changed the term “enforceable as a practical matter” to “federally

enforceable” consistent with EPA comment #8c in the TSD.

238 233 Replaced reference to Rule 207 with reference to Section 228 that

lists the 28 source categories required to consider fugitive

emissions in the calculation of potential to emit.

303 Same Revised section reference and grammar.

Rule 217 – Public Notice Requirements for Permits

SECTION

NUMBER PROPOSED PROVISION

101 Set the purpose of the rule to provide an administrative mechanism for public

notification and review of permits.

102 Set the applicability of the rule to all sources that require a permit under Rule 201,

GENERAL PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. The applicability section is consistent

with Rule 202.

103 Set the severability section consistent with other District rules.

110 Added exemption from notification requirements, previously from Rule 202 and

Rule 214, for any application for any new or modified emissions unit where the

potential to emit from the project is less than the listed amounts. The exemption

level for SOx has been lowered from 13,650 lbs/qtr to 9,200 lbs/qtr to be

consistent with the 1991 version of the rule as required by SB288. The levels for

exemption are lower than major source thresholds; therefore, this exemption

complies with SB288 and EPA comment #9b in the TSD.

200 Added definition section incorporating definitions from Rule 101, Rule 201, and

Rule 214 by reference. Rule 202 is not references because Rule 217 is going to

be SIP submitted and Rule 202 will not be SIP submitted.

201 Added “final action” definition consistent with the procedures of Rule 202 and

Rule 214. This definition is necessary to provide reference for the noticing

sections that refer to procedures in the new source review rule.

202 Added “potential to emit” definition including fugitive emissions for all sources

consistent with Rule 202. These noticing procedures of this rule match what were

previously in Rule 202. This definition meets the federal definition of potential to

emit found in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(iii).

203 Added “preliminary decision” definition consistent with the procedures of Rule 202

and Rule 214. This definition is necessary to provide reference for the noticing

sections that refer to other new source review administrative procedures.

401 Added “public notification, inspection, and review” section containing the noticing

requirements, from Rule 202, Rule 214, and 40 CFR 51.161.
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 24

SECTION

NUMBER PROPOSED PROVISION

401.1 Added “preliminary decision notification” section containing the noticing

procedures from Rule 202 and Rule 214 consistent with 40 CFR 51.161(b)(1) and

(d).

401.2 Added “publication and public comment” section containing the publication and

comment procedures from Rule 202 and 214, and is consistent with the

procedures of 40 CFR 51.161(b)(2 & 3).

401.3 Added “public inspection” section containing the document inspection procedures

from Rule 202 and Rule 214, and consistent with 40 CFR 51.161(a) and (b)(1).

401.4 Added “authority to construct, final action notification” section similar to the

noticing procedures that were previously in Rule 202 and Rule 214 The final

action notification will now be published on the District’s website rather than in a

newspaper of general circulation. Notification on the District’s website is

considered to be equivalent.

402 Added “notification for class I visibility and Federal Land Manager consultation

section containing the additional procedures necessary for sources that require a

visibility analysis to be prepared. This section follows the procedures of 40 CFR

51.307 – New Source Review. 40 CFR 51.307 requires review of any major

stationary source or major modification shall be conduct in accordance with 40

CFR 51.166(o), p(1) through p(2), and (q). These are the same procedures

utilized for visibility analyses required by Prevention of Significant Deterioration

regulations.

402.1 Added section for Class I public hearing procedures. For applications that require

a visibility analysis, a public hearing is required pursuant to 40 CFR

51.166(q)(2)(v). All comments at the public hearing must be documented for

consideration as required by Section 402.3.

402.2 Added section for the addition public inspection procedures. In addition to the

public inspection procedures of Section 401.3, the District must make available

for public inspection all written comments as required by 40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(vi).

These addition written comments (beyond Section 401.3) include: all comments

received at any public hearing(s) in making a final decision on the approvability of

an application, these comments would include comment from the Federal Land

Manager.

402.3 Added section for the written notification procedures. The additional procedures

require sending the public notification to additional public officials and agencies

as defined in 40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(iv). These officials and agencies having

cognizance over Class I areas include: any other state or local air pollution control

agencies, the chief executives of the city and county where the source would be

located, any comprehensive regional land use planning agency, and any State,

Federal Land Manager, or Indian Governing body whose lands may be affected

by emissions from the source or modification. The timing of this public notification

is more stringent than a typical public notification.

403 Added “emission calculations” section containing the calculation procedures

previously from Rule 202 and Rule 214 for determining exemption applicability of

Section 113.
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 25

Appendix B

Public Comments

Public Workshop: July 10, 2012, 10:00 a.m.

Attendees: Stu Husband, SMUD

Chelsea Westerberg, Aerojet

John Lane, Teichert

Alfredo Nieto, Procter & Gamble

Comment #1: What is the specific emission offset ratio that would apply if the emission offset

sanction is invoked by U.S. EPA?

Response: Under sanctions the ratio shall be at least 2 to 1 for all distances for major

stationary sources and major modifications. This is required under Section

179(b)(2) of the Clean Air Act.

Comment #2: The U.S. EPA comments on Rule 214 (10/28/11 version) need to be

addressed by February 18, 2013, right? Do you anticipate that the

amendments will be approved?

Response: Yes. We are planning to submit rules that are approvable.

Comment #3: Can you show on a map the applicable Class 1 areas?
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 26

Response:

The Desolation Wilderness and the Mokelumne Wilderness are Class 1 areas

within 100 kilometers of the eastern side of Sacramento County.

EPA comments sent via email dated June 6, 2012

Comment #1 (Rule 202, Sections 309 & 413): This rule does not apply to major sources or

major modifications. Why not mark these sections as reserved?

Response: Rule 202 applies to all sources, both minor and major stationary sources.

No change made.

Comment #2 (Rule 214, Section 101): The word “maintenance” must be retained as required

by 40 CFR 51.160(a)(2).

Response: Change made, the word maintenance will be retained.

Comment #3 (Rule 214, Section 113): A threshold for PM2.5 should be added, otherwise a

large increase in PM2.5 emissions may be exempted.
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 27

Response: The Section 113 thresholds are included solely due to State requirements

(SB288) that prevent backsliding from the 1991 version of Rule 202.

There were no PM2.5 requirements in the 1991 version of Rule 202,

therefore, no PM2.5 thresholds are needed to prevent backsliding. Rule

214 meets federal requirements for significant increases in PM2.5. No

change made.

Comment #4 (Rule 214, Section 116): Revise section to clarify that the rule does not apply

when redesignated until the effective date of the redesignation.

Response: Staff disagrees. Section 116 specifies that Sacramento County must be

designated unclassifiable or attainment “as codified in 40 CFR 81.305”.

That codification will not occur until after the effective date of the

designation or redesignation. No change made.

Comment #5 (Rule 214, Section 221.3): Remove reference to Rule 203 or reference all SIP

approved rules.

Response: Reference to Rule 203 removed.

Comment #6 (Rule 214, Section 227): For PM10 precursors, the Clean Air Act does not

require aggregation for any pollutants except Ozone.

Response: Due to State requirements (SB288) the proposed rule must be at least as

stringent as the 1991 version of Rule 202. The 1991 version of Rule 202

relied on the definition of major modification as was defined in 40 CFR

51.165. Therefore, the proposed rule must be at least as stringent as the

2002 version of 40 CFR 51.165. In the 2002 version of 40 CFR 51.165

the definition of a major modification was defined as a “... significant net

emissions increase of any pollutant subject to regulation under the Act.”

No definition is given for a “significant net emissions increase.” The

definition of net emissions increase39 includes aggregation for all

pollutants. This definition is also consistent with EPA’s NSR guidance

from the 1990 New Source Review Workshop Manual40.

In light of the above, no change made.

Comment #7 (Rule 214, Section 227.2): NOx and VOC are not considered PM10 precursors,

so why include them here?

Response: NOx and VOC are considered precursors in California and in the 1991

rule which listed these pollutants in the definition of precursor. As

39 “Permit Requirements” 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(vi)(A), 2002 edition.

40 U.S. EPA, “New Source Review Workshop Manual, Prevention of Significant Deterioration and

Nonattainment Area Permitting.” Pages F.1- 9. October 1990.
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 28

required by SB288, Staff must retain both NOx and VOC as PM10

precursors.

Comment #8 (Rule 214, Section 227.3): Why isn’t NOx included here too? NOx is a

presumed precursor for PM2.5 and must be included.

Response: Staff agrees. Change made.

Comment #9 (Rule 214, Section 227.6): Add the word “otherwise” for clarity.

Response: Staff agrees. Change made.

Comment #10 (Rule 214, Section 413): What criteria will be used to determine if a project

“may affect” a Class I area? Some criteria must be specified.

Response: Staff intends to follow the EPA guidance from EPA Region IV and the

Federal Land Managers Air Group. These guidance documents state

“that may affect” would include any new major stationary source or major

modification that is within 100km of any Class I area and possibly sources

further than 100km if other factors, such as the size of the stationary

source cause concerns about possible visibility impacts to any Class I

area.

Comment #11 (Rule 214, Section 413): Reference to 40 CFR 51.307 is incorrect because that

section is a plan requirement. The requirement for the source is a

visibility analysis following the procedures in 40 CFR 51.166(o).

Response: The reference to 40 CFR 51.307 is included to avoid confusion about why

a reference to 40 CFR 51.166 Prevention of Significant Deterioration

pertains to this rule which contains the nonattainment NSR requirements.

Comment #12 (Rule 217, Section 110): What is the basis for the public notification

thresholds? Are these the values that were previously in the SIP?

Please include a discussion in the staff report as to how and why these

values were chosen.

Response: An analysis is provided in Appendix C and the Public Comments section

in the Staff report.

Comment #13 (Rule 217, Section 401): Each of the following sections begins with the same

sentence. Consider moving to the beginning of the section introduction

paragraph.

Response: Staff agrees. Changes made.

Comment #14 (Rule 217, Section 402.1): A public hearing is optional based on the APCO

determination of a need or public request.
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 29

Response: Staff disagrees that the APCO may determine that there is no need for a

public hearing, however we agree that our obligation is only to provide an

opportunity for the public to request a public hearing. Section 402.1 has

been changed to match 40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(v) that requires an

opportunity for a public hearing.
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 30

Appendix C

Public Noticing Threshold Analysis

Staff performed additional analysis of the minor source public noticing thresholds to characterize

what those thresholds represent in terms of the contribution of emissions from permitted

sources to Sacramento’s air quality problems. The sources that will not be subject to noticing

account for less than 5% of the total District emissions inventory for all pollutants except for

SOx.

The analysis (as seen in the following two charts and referenced Excel workbooks) shows the

amount of emissions from sources subject to public noticing requirements account for

approximately 40% of the VOC, 62% of the NOx, 43% of the SOx, 39% of the CO, 40% or the

PM10, and 29% of the PM2.5 of the total District permitted emissions. Detailed emissions

calculations can be found in two excel workbooks titled “Consolidated Active Permits with

Emissions.xlsx” and “Backup Information for Permitted Emissions Calculations.xlsx”.

The following chart summarizes the analysis.

ROG

(tpy)

NOx

(tpy)

SO2

(tpy)

CO

(tpy)

PM10

(tpy)

PM2.5

(tpy)

1 Public Noticing threshold 41 10 10 18.4 99 14.6 10

2 Major source threshold42 25 25 100 100 100 100

3 Notification threshold is _% of major

source threshold (Line1/Line 2) 40% 40% 18% 99% 15% 10%

4 2010 Total Actual Emissions from all

Permitted Sources43 & 44 1559 567 68 1018 344 283

5 2010 Actual Emissions from sources

w/ PTE at or above noticing

thresholds43 & 44 627 351 29 395 133 81

6 Total Emissions not subject to public

noticing (Line 4-Line 5) 932 216 39 623 201 202

7 2010 Emissions Inventory45 21159 25414 237 113936 16474 5072

8 % of emissions inventory from

permitted sources (Line4/Line7) 7.4% 2.2% 28.6% 0.9% 2.0% 5.6%

9 % of emissions from permitted

sources not subject to public

notification (Line 6/Line 7) 4.4% 0.9% 16.2% 0.5% 1.2% 4.0%

10 % of permitted emissions subject to

notice (Line 5/Line 4) 40% 62% 43% 39% 40% 29%

41 Rule 217, Section 110 - shown in tons per year (tpy) here

42 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(iv)(A)

43 SMAQMD. “Consolidated Active Permits with Emissions.xlsx”, July 19, 2012.

44 SMAQMD. “Backup Information for Permitted Emissions Calculations.xlsx”, July 23, 2012.

45 Annual average emissions for 2010, tons per day times 365 days/year, CEPAM: 2009 Almanac –

Standard Emissions Tool. California Air Resources Board. April 13, 2009. Web. July 18, 2012.

http://www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/fcemssumcat2009.php
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 31

The following chart shows the total emissions from permitted sources listed by source category.

Row Labels

Sum of

ROG

Sum of

CO

Sum of

NOX

Sum of

PM10

Sum of

SO2

Sum of

PM2.5

ABRASIVE BLASTING 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.049 0.000 2.115

ADHESIVES 2.407 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

AGGREGATE OPERATION 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

AGGREGATE OPERATIONS 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.040 0.000 0.007

APC - BAGHOUSE 0.000 0.000 0.000 13.470 0.000 6.334

APC - CARBON ADSORPTION 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

APC - CONDENSER 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

APC - CYCLONE 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.219 0.000 0.164

APC - MISCELLANEOUS 0.008 0.126 4.615 0.751 0.000 0.751

APC - OXIDIZER 0.787 12.551 17.563 1.082 0.099 1.065

APC - SCR 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

APC - SCRUBBER 0.031 0.000 0.142 0.150 0.000 0.150

APC - SOIL 0.740 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

BAGHOUSE 0.000 0.000 0.000 22.668 0.000 21.127

ASPHALT PLANT 51.811 45.295 12.271 18.218 1.795 15.001

BOILER 0.024 0.370 0.251 0.033 0.003 0.033

BOILER/HEATER 10.210 144.117 84.698 14.685 1.394 14.685

BOILER/HEATER < 5 MMBTU 2.045 29.358 19.481 2.818 0.224 2.818

BOILER/HEATER = 5 MMBTU 0.036 0.552 0.374 0.050 0.004 0.050

BOILER/HEATER > 5 MMBTU 0.999 24.330 8.885 1.379 0.108 1.379

BOLER/HEATER 0.016 0.249 0.169 0.023 0.002 0.023

BRICK TUNNEL KILN 0.270 13.690 3.990 9.920 8.900 9.920

BULK TERMINAL 8.644 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

CARBON ADSORPTION 0.022 0.050 0.231 0.319 0.001 0.319

CARBON DRUMS 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

CEMENT STORAGE 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.076 0.000 0.076

CHEMICAL PROCESS 11.917 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

CHROME PLATING 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

CLAY HANDLING 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.090 0.000 0.090

CLEANUP - SOIL 26.640 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

CLEANUP - WATER 2.960 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

COATING - ADHESIVES 13.805 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

COATING - AEROSPACE 11.505 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

COATING - AUTO BODY 241.880 0.040 0.050 0.027 0.000 0.014

COATING - DEPAINT 0.016 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

COATING - GENERAL 26.530 0.000 0.000 0.593 0.000 0.296
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 32

Row Labels

Sum of

ROG

Sum of

CO

Sum of

NOX

Sum of

PM10

Sum of

SO2

Sum of

PM2.5

COATING - METAL 63.556 0.081 0.096 0.317 0.000 0.162

COATING - SOLVENT PREP 1.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

COATING - WOOD 74.250 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

COATING OPERATION 5.400 0.000 0.000 0.644 0.000 0.322

COFFEE ROASTER 0.211 3.008 3.049 0.371 0.018 0.371

CONCRETE BATCH PLANT 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.420 0.000 0.280

CONCRETE PLANT 0.000 0.000 0.000 16.964 0.000 11.309

CONDENSER 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

COOLING TOWER 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.273 0.000 2.090

CRUMB RUBBER PLANT 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

CYCLONE 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

DAIRY 28.050 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

DEGREASER 0.608 0.084 0.100 0.008 0.001 0.008

DRY CLEANING UNIT 8.680 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

DRYER 0.333 5.084 7.042 0.537 0.045 0.537

DRYER (NON PROCESS HTR) 0.014 0.210 0.292 0.019 0.002 0.019

DUST COLLECTOR 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.450 0.000 0.450

ELECTRIC TROMMEL SCREEN 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

ETCHING PROCESS 0.000 0.000 1.259 0.000 0.000 0.000

E-WASTE SHREDDING 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.116 0.000 0.062

FIBERGLASS OPERATION 12.220 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

FLARE 13.653 44.297 11.090 7.786 0.596 7.786

Fuel Dispensing (all GDFs) 510.506 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

FURNACE/SMELTER 0.113 0.267 0.397 1.016 0.002 0.961

GASEOUS MATERIAL -

HANDLING 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

GASEOUS MATERIAL - STORAGE 5.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

IC ENGINE 0.019 0.070 0.197 0.008 0.000 0.007

IC ENGINE COMPRESSION - AG 3.386 8.887 10.206 0.519 0.021 0.507

IC ENGINE COMPRESSIONPRIME 6.556 23.169 23.769 3.269 0.149 3.193

IC ENGINE COMPRESSIONSTANDBY 18.185 46.955 81.463 3.254 2.167 3.177

IC ENGINE SPARK - AG 0.003 0.045 0.032 0.002 0.005 0.002

IC ENGINE SPARK - PRIME 34.244 442.979 73.736 17.132 35.726 17.132

IC ENGINE SPARK - STANDBY 0.285 2.163 3.043 0.090 0.165 0.090

INCINERATOR 0.110 0.497 2.313 3.193 0.009 3.193

INCINERATOR/CREMATORY 0.198 0.895 4.163 5.748 0.334 5.748
Staff Report

Rule 202, NEW SOURCE REVIEW, Rule 214, FEDERAL NEW SOURCE REVIEW, and

Rule 217, PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITS

July 23, 2012

Page 33

Row Labels

Sum of

ROG

Sum of

CO

Sum of

NOX

Sum of

PM10

Sum of

SO2

Sum of

PM2.5

LANDFILL GAS COLLECTION 106.994 0.905 1.181 0.211 0.021 0.211

LOADING RACK 15.715 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

MANUFACTURING PROCESS 8.915 7.090 0.008 10.160 0.000 7.722

MATERIAL - HANDLING 1.005 0.081 0.096 2.486 0.000 2.260

MATERIAL - STORAGE 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.942 0.000 0.648

MINING - NONMETALLIC 0.000 0.000 0.000 32.127 0.000 22.873

MINING - NON-METALLIC 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.764 0.000 0.466

MISCELLANEOUS 103.966 30.031 34.997 41.089 3.552 29.092

ORGANIC LIQUID - LOADING 1.460 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

ORGANIC LIQUID - STORAGE 4.956 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

OVEN 0.052 0.791 0.942 0.072 0.006 0.072

OVEN/KILN 27.673 21.829 8.194 2.159 0.177 0.629

OXIDIZER 0.089 1.366 1.627 0.131 0.010 0.131

PHARMACEUTICAL PROCESS 2.124 0.000 0.278 0.000 0.000 0.000

PLASMA CUTTING PROCES 0.000 0.000 0.905 0.066 0.000 0.905

PLATING TANK 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

PRINTING PRESS 3.991 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

PRINTING PROCESS 25.095 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

ROCKET TESTING 0.001 0.411 0.026 0.639 0.000 0.383

SAWDUST HANDLING 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.630 0.000 0.410

SAWDUST HANDLING SYSTEM 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.660 0.000 3.090

SCR 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

SCRUBBER 0.000 0.000 0.013 0.240 0.000 0.240

SEWAGE

HANDLING/TREATMENT 0.012 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

SHREDDER 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.666 0.000 0.355

SOIL MIXING/ BLENDING

PROCESS 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.607 0.000 0.607

SOIL REMEDIATION 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.091 0.000 0.091

SOLVENT HANDLING 1.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

SOLVENT WASTE TANK 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

STERILIZER 5.750 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

STORAGE TANK 1.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

TANK STORAGE 16.249 4.330 1.990 0.000 0.000 0.000

TURBINE 33.036 102.138 141.820 78.616 12.276 78.538

WATER SPRAY 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.630 0.000 0.410

Totals 1559 1018 567 334 68 283