1
Board Of Directors 2 Lake County Air Quality Management District 3 Resolution Adopting Changes To Sections 602 & 605 And Adding 4 Sections 228, 237.5 And 602.3 To The Lake County Air Quality 5 Management District Rules And Regulations 6 Resolution No. 98—195 7 8 Whereas, Health and Safety Code Sections 40001, 40702 and 40910 give the 9 District the responsibility

to adopt and enforce regulations

to maintain air quality that 10 consistently meets the federal and state ambient air quality standards; and 11 Whereas, the Lake County Air Quality Management District (AQMD) Rules and 12 Regulations are incorporated into the state implementation plans with the goal to 13 ensure the protection
of the air quality and the maintenance
of Ambient Air Quality 14 Standards
in the Lake County Air Basin; and 15 Whereas, Health and Safety Code Section 40001 requires the District
to enforce 16 and administer federal, state and local air pollution control laws and regulations; and 17 Whereas,

in each state, such air management programs must be adopted by law 18 and regulation

to protect the public health; and 19 Whereas, under state law, the District

is the public agency of the state with the C) 20 responsibility

to implement
an air quality management program addressing stationary 21 air pollution sources to include federal law requirements

of Section 112(g) the Clean 22 Air Act Amendments

of 1990 incorporating maximum available control technology 23 for identified Hazardous Air Pollutants; and 24 Whereas, pursuant

to state law, the District presently administers the 25 construction review and operating permits program for non-vehicular sources of air 26 contaminants; and 27 Whereas, the proposed changes will improve and are requirements

of Section 28 112(g) the Clean Air Act Amendments

of 1990; and 29 Whereas, the District staff has worked
in consultation with the staff of the 30 Federal EPA, Air Resources Board, affected parties and public in developing the 31 proposed regulation changes; and 32 Whereas,
on June 9, 1998, the District staff held
a public workshop

to explain 33 the proposed regulation changes
to affected industry and interested members of the 34 public, and to receive and consider comments; and 35 Whereas, the Air Quality Management District Board, has held
a properly 36 noticed hearing on the proposed adoption of these règulations
on June 23, 1998, as 37 required by Health and Safety Code Section 40725; and 38 Whereas, the Air Quality Management District Board finds that the proposed 39 amendment complies with Health and Safety Code Section 40727 requirements
for 40 necessity, clarity, and avoiding duplication
of existing District, state or federal 41 regulation
or law. -page lof4-1 continued exhibit A Modification

of Section 605: part “B” to read: 2/ 3 sources. The public shall have thirty (30) days beginning
on the date of (fl 4 publication

to submit their comments. Copies of this notice should be forwarded--‘
S to the United States Environmental Protection Agency, the California Air 6 Resources Board, and all adjoining air pollution control officers
in other air 7 basins. 8/ 9
/ 10
/ 11

1 12

/ 13

I 14

1 15

1 16

1 17

I 18
/ 19

1 20

1 21

/ 22

1 23

1 24/

/

-page
4 of 4-:Ageñda Date 6/23/98 BOS AGENDA ITEM TRANSMITTAL 1. DEPARTMENT TITLE: Air Quality Manaernent District fl a SUBJECT OF AGENDA ITEM: Adoption of District rules change to Incorporate Title III required changes for Section 112 (g). Specifically dealing with Maximum Available Control Technology (MACT) deteminations when penitting air emission sources. 3. Estimated Amount
of time needed:

30 minutes 4. Recommend Item Be Placed onConsent Agenda? QYes No 5. Date(s) BOS Previously Discussed: n/a but related Title V numeroustimes 6. Is an Expenditure Required?

YES QNO Current year expenditure amount: $4,000 Annual expenditure

in future years:

7 Is it Currently Budgeted?

YES QNO Impact on revenue,

if applicable, and/or other relevant financial information: Required element of the delegated Federal Air Program, and thus not optional but the potentional for afinancial drain is high. 7. Will additional staff be required?

DYES NO If “yes”, will the additional staff be: Q Permanent

QExtra Help 8. This item has been reviewed by: Q Personnel

QRisk Management QData Processing 9. Recommended Beard Action: Adopt the proposed rule as provided
in the attached exhibit. If concern exists, as it maybecauseof timing continue for aweek for final action. 10. Agenda DescriQtion Preparation: Prepared by:Bob Reynolds, APCO Reviewed by:John Thompson, AQE Time

3 Minutes Time

3 Minutes 11. Department Contact Person:
Bob Reynolds Supervisorial. District The Item Primarily Impacts
(If all districts impacted, write UAIIU):

* All The Origi.a1 aid
9 copies of this fcm xmist accraxythe back-up ateria1 sibiiicted
tothe clerk’s9/95 office for agenda its. Attach this fcm asthe last pageof each copyof your back-up znaterial.For Definitions, Add: (fl’)Section 228: Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP): Those pollutants thatarelisted inthe Federal Clean Air Act’s Section 112(b) List of Hazardous Air Pollutants. Section 237.5. Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MA CT): An emission limitation which isnotless stringent than the emission limitation achieved
in practice by thebest controlled similar source,and which reflects the maximum degree of reduction
in emissions that the District, taking into consideration
the costof achieving such emissions reduction, and anynonair quality health and environmental impacts and energy requirements, determines

f achievable
bythe constructed
orreconstructed major source (40 CFR 63.41 “Definitions”). For Chapter IV, Article

I, Add asfollows: Section 602: The Air Pollution Control Officer deny an Authority

toConstruct for anynew stationary sourceormodification

ofan existing source specified
in subparagraph

Aofthis Section unless he determines that the emissions from the newsourceormodification

is maynot be expected
toresult inthe violation
ormeasurable contribution

tothe continued violation of any local, stateornational ambient air quality standard and provided thatthe best available control technology

asdefined, orMA CT,if applicable, will be used onthe contaminant emitting equipment. 602.3 MACT Determinations:
TheAir Pollution Control Officer shall apply the provisions of this Section
to any proposed new,ormodified sourcewith estimated (based on proposed throughput and hours of operation),
oractual HAP emissions often (10) tons per yearof any single HAP;or twentyFive (25) tons peryearfortwoormoreHAPs. Except for sources already regulated
byaCAA 1990 section 112(d) MACT standard, the Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) shall be determined and required (f more stringent than required byaBACT determination). This includes an existing sourcethat proposes
toaddanew processor production uni4 or proposes

amodification, which hasa capital cost exceeding 50 percentofa comparable new processline orunit. Such procedures shall be carried outin accordance with adopted Federal EPA procedures for 40 CFR Part 63.40 through 63.44, or subsequently modified bythe Federal EPA. Section 605: Before granting or denying an Authority

toConstruct for any stationary sourceor modification subject tothe provisions
ofthis Article, the Air Pollution Control Officer shall: A. Require the applicant
tosubmit information sufficient
todescribe the natureand amountof emissions, location, design, construction and operation ofthe source,and tosubmit any additional information necessary
tomake the analysis required bythis Article. B. Require the applicant

tosubmit any projected expansion plans forthe stationary source described
inthe application for the Authority

toConstruct for the ten (10) year period subsequent tothe date of application for the Authority
toConstruct. C. Analyze the effect of the new stationary sourceormodification

onair quality. Such analysis shall consider expected air contaminant emissions and air quality inthe vicinity oftheLake County Air Quality Management District Robert L. Reynolds 883 Lakeport Blvd Phone: (707) 263-7000
Air Pollution Control Officer j Lakeport, California 95453 Fax: (707) 263.0421 Internet: bobr@pacific.net

June 30, 1998 Middletown Times-Star P.O. Box 608 Middletown, CA 95461 Dear Editor, Please publish this legal notice in the earliest possible edition of the Middletown Times Star. Thank you. Sincerely Robert

.nolds The Lake County Air Quality Management District made legal notice of a proposed rule to implement Section 112(g) of the federal Clean Air Act Amendments

of 1990 addressing reconstruction

orconstruction permitting review of a major sourceof-hazardous air pollutants on May 20, 1998. Tbis.is

a subsequent publication

to inform the public that the workshop washeld onJune 9, 1998, to discuss the rule with the public.
A final public hearing before the Board of Directors washeld on June 23, 1998, to discuss, take testimony and make

adecision onanaction of rule changes implementing
the required Section 112(g) program addressing the maximum available control technology for major sourcesof toxic air pollutants. On the 23rd of June, 1998, the Board unanimously adopted rules implementing Section 112(g) which wifi be administered
by the Lake County Air Quality Management District. The purposeof this notice
is to provide additional public notice of the implementation

of the program,and to ensuresuch notice
is consistent with federal requirements

of 40 CFR 63.42. The effective date for which activities covered will be subject to review
is June 23, 1-998.Lake County Air Quality Management District Robert L. Reynolds 883 Lakeport Blvd Phone: (707) 263-7000
AirPollution Control Officer_____ Lakeport, California 95453 Fax: (707) 263-0421 Internet: bobr@pacific.net

June 30, 1998 Clearlake Observer-American P.O. Box 6328 Clearlake, CA 95422 Dear Editor, Please publish this legal notice in the earliest possible edition of the Clearlake Observer. Thank you. Sincerely, Robert L. Reynolds O

Legal Notice The Lake County Air Quality Management District made legal notice of a proposed. rule to implement Section 112(g) of the federal Clean Air Act Amendments

of 1990 addressing reconstruction

orconstruction permitting review of a major sourceof hazardous air pollutants
on May 20, 1998. This is a subsequent publication

to inform the public that the workshop washeld onJune 9, 1998, to discuss the rule with the public.
A final public hearing before the Board of Directors washeld on June 23, 1998, to discuss, take testimony and make

adecision onanaction of rule changes implementing
the required Section 112(g) program addressing the maximum available control technology for major sourcesof toxic air pollutants. On the 23rd of June, 1998, the Board unanimously adopted rules implementing Section 112(g) which will be administered
by the Lake County Air Quality Management District. The purposeof this notice is to provide additional public notice of the implementation

of the program,and to ensuresuch notice
is consistent with federal requirements

of 40 CFR 63.42. The effective date for which activities covered wifi be subject to review
is June 23, 1998.Lake County Air Quality Management District Robert L. Reynolds 883 Lakeport Blvd Phone: (707) 263-7000
Air Pollution Control Officer Lakeport, California 95453 Fax: (707) 263-0421 Internet: bobr@paciflc.net

May 15, 1998 Clearlake Ob rver-American P.O. Box 6328 Clearla.ke, CA 95422

H‘ \—.; I L’ Dear Editor, Please publish the attached notice in the earliest possible edition of the Clearlake Observer-American. Thank you very much. Sincerely,VVV

John D. Thompson, AQE Legal Notice The Lake County Air Quality Management District Board of Directors will hold
a public hearing in the Lake County Board of Supervisors Chambers, 255 N. Forbes St., Lakeport, CA, on June 23, 1998 at 9:30 AM to consider adopting changes
to the Lake County Air Quality Management District’s Rules and Regulations.

A workshop will be held at 883 Lakeport Blvd., Lakeport on June 9, 1998 at 2:00 PM. The proposed rule addresses the Federal EPA mandated Maximum Available Control Technology (MACT) for controlling toxic emissions from major sources. For more information regarding the proposed rule, contact the LCAQM])

at (707) 263-7000,
or visit the office at 883 Lakeport Blvd., Lakeport CA. The proposed Rules and Regulations changes are as follows (bold italic is new text):V Defmitions, Add: Section 228: Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP): Those pollutants that are listed in the Federal Clean Air Act’s Section 112(b) List of Hazardous Air Pollutants. Section 237.5: Maximum Achievable C’ozztrol Technology (‘MACTj.): An emission limitation which
is not less stringent than the emission limitation achieved
in practice by the best controlled similar source, and which reflects the maximum degree of reduction

in emissions that the District, taking into consideration
the cost of achieving such emissions reduction, and any non air quality health and environmental impacts and energy requirements, determines

if achievable
by the constructed

or reconstructed major source.‘1 .1. 0 For Chapter 1V Article

I, Add as follows: Section 602: The Air Pollution control Officer shall deny an Authority

to construct for any new stationary source or modification
of an existing source specfled
in subparagraph

A of this Section wiless he determines that the emissions from the new source or ;nodfication may not be expected
to result in the violation or measurable contribution

to the continued violation of any local, state or national ambient air quality standard and provided that the best available control technology
as defined, or MA CT, if applicable, will be used on the contaminant emitting equipment. 602.3 MACT Determinations:

The Air Pollution Control Officer shall apply the provisions
of this Section
to azzy proposed new, or modified source with estimated
or actual HAP emissions
of: ten (10) tons per year of any single HAP; or twenty Five (25) tons per year for two or more HAPs. Except for sources already regulated
by a CAA 1990 section 112(d) MACT standard, the Maximum Achievable Control Techno logy (MACT) shall be determined and required (if more stringent than required
by a BACT determination). This includes an existing source that proposes

to add
a new process or production unit, or proposes

a modification, which has
a capital cost exceeding
50 percent of a comparable new process line or uzzit. Such procedures shall be carried out in accordance wit Ii adopted Federal EPA procedures for 40 CFR Part 63.40 through 63.44, or procedures subsequently modified by the Federal EPA. Section 605: Before granting or denying an Authority
to Construct for any stationary source or modification subject to the provisions
of this Article, the Air Pollution Control Officer shall: A. Require the applicant

to submit information sufficient

to describe the nature and amount of emissions, location, design, construction and operation of the source, and to submit any additional information necessary

to make the analysis required by this Article. B. Require the applicant
to submit any projected expansion plans for the stationary source described
in the application for the Authority

to Construct for the ten (10) year period subsequent

to the date of application for the Authority

to Construct. C. Analyze the effect of the new stationary source or modification

on air quality. Such analysis shall consider expected air contaminant emissions and air quality in the vicinity of the new source or modification within the Air Basin and within adjoining air basins at the time the source or modification

is proposed
to commence operation. Such analysis shall be based on application
of existing state and local control strategies. D. Make available for public inspection

at the District office the information submitted by applicant, the Air Pollution Control Officer’s analysis of the effect of the source on air quality and the pieliminary decision
to grant or deny the Authority
to Construct. This will include all relevant information except that protected

as a trade secret. E. Publish

a notice pursuant
to Section 6061 of the Government Code in a newspaper
of general circulation
in the District stating where the public may inspect the information required in Section 605 D, and any notice of MACT approval. The public shall have thirty (30)-, days beginning on the date of publication

to submit their comments. Copies of this notice should be forwarded

to the United States Environmental Protection Agency, the California Air Resources Board, and all adjoining air pollution control officers in other air basins. F. Consider the public comments submitted. page
2 of 2-C,x.a>9=•04flu,.jIIflC20V° LAKE COUNTY AIR QUALITY______ Management District n

I 883 Lakeport Blvd Phone: (707) 263-7000 Lakeport, CaJiforna 95453 Fax: (707) 263-0421 -MEMO RAND UM TO: BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Date: June 12, 1998 Louise Tàlley, Chair Carl Larson Karan Mackey Bill Merriman Ed Robey Jr. FROM: Bob Reynolds, APCO John Thompson, AQE RE: Agenda Item 6/23/98

@ 09:30 AM: Adoption
of Changes
to District Regulation Staff Report.-A proposal
to enact new Regulation Section 228, 237.5 and 602.3, and chan°e in Sections 602 and 605 in. order to implement EPA Title III Q requirements

as required by Title V delegation and specifically addressing the requirement for Maximum Available Control Technology (MACT). Background The federal register, 40 CFR Parts 63.40 through 63.44 became final on December 27, 1996 for implementing section 112(g).
A brief description
of the final regulation
on 112(g) and which is summarized below. The District has in place Section 602 BACT (Best Available Control Technology) which essentially does the same thing but is more comprehensive, covers all sources, and is more protective of air quality. The MACT provision

is a federal mandate. Section 112(g) is designed
to regulate major sources of hazardous air pollutants CHAPS)
so that these HAPs are controlled using well known methods. EPA is calling these determinations maximum achievable control technology (MACT). EPA is in the process of determining MACT for many industrial and commercial sources of HAPS, but will not be able to complete this task for seveial years. The program will incorporate NESHAPS and parts of NSPS. Some MACT standards already developed include dry cleaners for the control of perchloroethylene, pulp mills for methanol, large gasoline bulk terminals for benzene, and cooling towers for chromium. These will have no effect other than perhaps requiring additional reporting requirements within he LCAQMD presently.. Paej of 3BOD MACT Rule 6/98 n EPA will not be able to complete MACT determinations
for all possible categories
of HAPs for several years. Therefore, these 112(g) regulations are intended
to catch those major new and reconstructed sources of HAPs for which

a MACT has not been established. Major is defined
at 25 tons per year for total HAPs emitted or 10 tons per year for single HAPS. • MACT will be determined
by the District for any major new or reconstructed source of HAPs for which the EPA has not promulgated

a MACT. The requirements

in 40 CER Part 63.40 through 63.44 will be followed. • If a MACT determination

by the District for a new major source of HAPs, later has a MACT developed by the EPA, the District source will have time to comply with any changes that are necessary. Discussion The District staff s herein requesting further changes
in the rules as part of the Title III and associated Title V rule implementation process. Legal notice,

a workshop for discussion and opportunity for review by EPA and the ARB has been accomplished. According

to EPA lawyer dictumlopinion
we must make findings that we are,_- implementing 112(g) and further make legal notice that we are doing such subsequent

to (. the proposed rule adoption. The subject rule inaction and modifications

to Section 602.3,“MACT Determinations,”
and associated definitions Sections 228 and 237.5 is to update our rules to reflect and incorporate Section 112(g) of the Clean Air Act Amendments

of 1990. The overall Title III & V process has been demanding and a staff resource drain to accomplish even the simplest of tasks, and while we did receive interim approval effective August 13, 1995 of our Title V submittal, the interim approval

is still subject to several inappropriate conditions and a threat of sanctions
if the conditions are not met. This action falls into that category “of necessary actions” with
a Tune 29, 1998 deadline. There has purportedly been
a change in EPA’s approach, though such is not obvious
to me in this or previous actions.- This rule change needs to be enacted
to allow maior sources to deal directly with the District
as part of Title V permitting and not to additionally apply to the Federal EPA.. The specific proposed changes are shown in Attachment
#1 with strilcouts for deleted and italics for added verbiage.

It adds definitions and requires additional review as part of our historic process
to ensure federal requiréments
are met.: .These requirements
are commonly open to interpretation, càurt decisions and changes over short periods of () time and we have thus simply referenced the federal processes. The MACT
is iii reality more appropriately referred
to as mediocre available control technology, and not Page 2. of 3BOO MACT Rule 6/98 0 maximum by many air quality technologists. This particular rule change will modify the New Source Review process, but should only effect major sources under the Title ifi &V programs (which
is still somewhat undefined). We are attempting

to exempt almost all smaller sources by using the DNMS rule so that interactions with the Federal EPA can be minimized. The proposed rule was legally noticed (see attached). The EPA commented

in writing, and several inquired verbally
in response
to a reminder of the proposal after the workshop and generally stated they were in favor of the proposed approach verses the more common volumous rule change alternative. Commonly we send out notices to all large sources, but may not have done so initially this time. We made

a subsequent attempt
to ensure

a chance to comment, incorporate request, and believe we have accomplished that goal to all parties satisfaction. The level of interest and concern over Title V & III remains high, and the present state of the implementation

is best characterized
by the recent CAPCOA, ARB and your Board’s resolutions

as regards issues on this program. A workshop was held on 6/9/98. The agenda and minutes of that workshop are provided 0 as attachments
#2 & #3. Brief clarifying suggestions were made and are reflected
in the rule change. The ARB and EPA were provided

a copy of documents timely and this one will likewise be forwarded

to them. Written comments were received from the EPA and are provided
in attachment
#4 and incorporated. Two industry representatives also made clarifying comments and their suggestions were discussed and largely incorporated (attachment #5). The proposed rule is not expected
to impact currently permitted sources. MACT determinations will likely be less stringent than that required by existing BACT or ATCMs. Recommendation The District recommends that the Board of the Air Quality Management District adopt the attached District Rule Sections 228, 237.5, 602, 602.3, and 605 (Exhibit A), using the prepared resolution. Page

3 of 3f Lake County Air Quality Management District Robert L. Reynolds 883 Lakeport Blvd Phone: (707) 263-7000
Air Pollution Conirol Officer /‘

:Lakepoz-t, California 95453 Fax: (707) 263-0421 -‘ Internet: bobr@paciflc.net MACT RULE PUBLIC WORKSHOP JUNE 9, 1998 2:00 PM AGENDA 1. Public Workshop called to Order 2.si-rn Sheet Circulated 3. AQMD presents overview of the proposed nile changes Definitions Section 228, 237.5 (new) Section 602 (modified) Section 602.3 (new) Section 605 (modified) 4. Open Discussion 5. Questions and Answers 6. Close Public Workshop and Adjourn

# “4 

# 1 N 

# Ht
c) 

# 1•I% 

# 1’

•1’LAKE COUNTY AIR QUALITY Management District_______.883 Lakeport Blvd Phone: (707) 263-7000 j Lakeport, California 95453 Fax: (707) 263-0421. InternetMail: bobr@paciflc.net Robert L. Reynolds, Air Pollution Control Officer -MEMORANDUMTO: MACT Rule File, Chron FROM: John &son, AQE DATE: June 9, 1998 RE: MACT Proposed LCAQMD Rule Workshop Minutes/Notes The above referenced workshop washeld at the District conference roomlocated at 883 Lakeport Blvd., on Tuesday June 9, 1998 at 2:00 P.M. In attendance was Frank Grub, Melissa ThibeaulLakeport citizens, Rachel Ellcins/tJCCE, and John Thomps0nJLCAQMD. •The workshop started at 2:00 P.M. with introductions and circulation
of an ‘sJattendance sheet, agendas and proposed rules. A brief introduction

to the proposed rule was given by 3. Thompson. •The workshop was opened for discussion. None of the parties attending offered anyadditional comment. •The workshop was opened for questions and answers.None of the parties attending had any questions. • Request from 3. Thompson that anyadditional comments, suggestions,

or requests be submitted

to the District in writing ASAP and within

aweek. The workshop concluded

at 2:30 P.M.

‘V(with Kathy’s (EPA) comments
in BOLD CD Section 228: Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP); Those pollutants that arelisted inthe Federal Clean Air Act’s Section 112(b) List of Hazardous Air Pollutants. Section 237.5: Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT): An emission limitation which
isnotless stringent than the emission limitation achieved
in practice bythe best controlled similar source,and which reflects the maximum degree of reduction
in emissions that the District, taking into consideration
the costof achieving such emissions reduction, and anynonair quality health and environmental impacts and energy requirements, determines

if achievable bythe constructed

orreconstructed major source(40 CFR 63.41 “Definitions”). Section 602: The Air Pollution Control Officershall denyan Authority
toConstruct for any new stationary sourceormodification
ofan existing source specified
in subparagraph

Aofthis Section unless he determines that the emissions from thenewsourceormodification maynotbe expected
toresult inthe violation ormeasurable contribution

tothe continued violation of any local, stateornational ambient air quality standard and provided that the best available control technology

asdefined,
orMACT,
if applicable, will be used onthe contaminant emitting equipment. 602.3 MACT Determinations:
The Air Pollution Control Officer shall apply the provisions
of this Section
to any proposed new,ormodified spurcewith estimated (based on proposed throughput and hours of operation),

oractual HAP emissions of:ten (10)tons per yearof any single HAP; ortwentyFive (25) tons per yearfortwoormoreHAPs. Except for sources already regulated byaCAA 1990 section 112(d) MACT standard, the Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) shall be determined and required (ifmore stringent than required byaBACT determination). This includes an existing sourcethat proposes toadd anew processor production unit, or proposes

amodification, which hasa capital cost exceeding
50 percentofa comparable new processline orunit. Such procedures shall be carried outin accordance with adopted Federal EPA procedures for40 CFR Part63.40 through 63.44, or proccdurcs subsequently modified bythe Federal EPA. Section 605: Before granting or denying an Authority
toConstruct for any stationary sourceor modification subject tothe provisions of this Article, theAir Pollution Control Officer shall: A. Require the applicant

tosubmit information sufficient
todescribe the natureand amountof emissions, location, design, construction and operation
ofthe source,and tosubmit any additional information necessary
tomake the analysis required by this Article. B. Require the applicant
tosubmit any projected expansion p]ans forthe stationary source described
inthe application for the Authority
toConstruct for the ten (10) year period subsequent tdthe date of application forthe Authority
toConstruct. C. Analyze the effect of the new stationary sourceormodification
onair quality. Such analysis shalt consider expected air contaminant emissions and air quality in the vicinity of the newsourceormodification within the Air Basin and within adjoining air basins atthe timethe sourceormodification

is proposed
to commence operation. Such analysis shall be based on application
of existing stateand local control strategies.D. Make available for public inspection

at the District office the information submitted by applicant, the Air Pollution Control Officer’s analysis of the effect of the source on air quality and the preliminaiy decision
to grant or deny the Authority
to Construct. This will include all relevant information except that protected
as atrade secret. E. Publish

a notice pursuant
to Section 6061 of the Government Code in a newspaper
of general circulation

in the District stating where the public may inspect the information required
in Section 605 D, and any notice of MACT approval, per 40 CFR Part 63.43, “Maximum Achievable Control Technology” (M.4CT) determinations for constructed and recoizstructed major sources. The public shall have thirty (30) days beginning on the date of publication

to submit their comments. Copies of this notice should be forwarded

to the United States Environmental Protection Agency, the California Air Resources Board, and all adjoining air pollution control officers
in other air basins. F. Consider the public comments submitted. 0JUN—15—9 ON 2:14 FM ESC0

FAX !iO. 707 546 913S -9 1998 2:eytA FR4 LCAO 7ø7G421

P.2 §c ia 7 cS’eS 4-cKr FQr Deflnlt!ons, Add: 22& Hazardoti3 Air PaIIzdcnts (2L4P): Thoe poZttan1 that are listed in the Fcdcra

I Clean AlMa: Scc’on 112(5) L13t of Hazcrdo Mr PfLdantr 5ctirn232,5 Max(mwm Achievable Control Technology (MACT); An emistiars Zi,n(tafloiz WILLCIZ I; flal ((U St71?7?I1 then the emi UiOJ1 t1lfatlon &ievcd
in practice by the trt controlled iimtar sourcs, and whfth reffects the mar(irwm degros of.reducrlon

in rrnirs(on that the DETtrC4 tc.ng L’ito cozzstderctian the cost of achkrlng zuch emissnj reduction, azud aJLY nonair .ziaThhea(th ar4 envfronn taZLinpactrandenej.. reu (rein en Is, Jet ernth:e: ach icvable by the corAsfracferrcOrs!.d4te7r\urce. For Chapter W, Artfclc
I, Add a foIIow: V ciio 60Z The Air PoThitioi Control Olflcegball cyan Authority
to Co tzq’ for eny new siationary source or rnc.diflc.aiion
of en existing souxe specifl irt subparagrçl4

A of this ,7 Section unless he deftrrnlnes that thee issics from the new source or modification jb_d cxpectd to,4iiz in the violation or rnasunbIc cotribut5on

tothe continued violatJouxT.ny Jocal, suat or national ambient air quality sLzr4e.rd and providr4 1b2t the best available eont.rol echnolo&y

as fine4, or !4ACT if applicable, will be. used othe cotitaminant entitting equipment. 73 MA Cfler-pthuaforis;

The A irPoltutlon Control Offlcerilthll apply the proVISIOM of this Sccclozz to a.rJy propased flew, or rnod(fledrazirce with erfirnz(ed oractual HAP emistons oft (en (10) kits pcr year of any tingle HAP; or twenty Ftt’c (25) tozus per year for twa ormore 114 Fr. Except far rources already reguktsJ
by a CAA 19.90 sectIon 112(d) MACF :f.and’grd, the nzwr 4chiera5le Control Technology (1.L4CT) shall be detar7ntned andrequfred ((finore .sirlz gent ((La?; rqufred by aBACT detentination). ThLr lnctrude an etheing source that .re.r
to add anew process or production wilt, or propotes

a modificallon, which liar a capital cart exceedtig SOpercc.el of a conipc.raMe iww procers line or unit. Such procedures shall be carried cut itt aceorduirce with dopre 2 Federal EFA procedures for 4C) CFR Part 63.42 through 63.44, orproce4’uzss threue,tt& modified by the Fcdcra (EPA. ectfon 605: Before grnting Ord zyhtg an Authority
to Constrict for any stat!ona.ry source or rnodicaUon stibject tothe provi.rions of this Artk.1o the Air Pollution Coutiol Officer thafl: A. RequJre the applicant
to subntit inforxat3on u3cknz
to d scrTho the nature. and amount of aIoe.s, location, dcsig!t, constucdon and operation of the source, and to submit ny additional tnfonatäon e*SS2ry
to make the analysis requ!re by th!; Ar<. 13. Require the’ applicant
to rubmit any projected expansion plans fo the stationary source in the ippllcatlcn for tbe Authorhy
to Construct for the ten (10) year pcalocl sbscqucnt to the date of appi ation for the Authcuity
to Constroct. C. Analyze th. effect of the new stationary source or riodiflcation
out air quality. Such ana1sis shall consider expected air ootamInant nisslons end air quziky in the vicinity of the newaouzte or modifici on within the Air Basin and within idjoin!iig air ba.clni at the time the sourceot zxdlilcattort

Is proposed
to cotnruence vpeitlon. uc1i analysis sha3l be based out appllc.s.ion of cxistinE state and TQc:a! control te5eS.JUNl5-93 MON 2:15 FM G-&-T99 2274 PRCH LCAQ 7ø7263i21
FAX NO. 707 546 9139

?.
3 p.3

•1 1• D. faJcc avalIsb]e fvr pubik iztsp.ctlon

;t the l.uict offlce the 1nforration submitted
bj pp1icant. tha Air PollutIon Control Offlce(: nalyLis of the effect of the scurco on air qa1ity the prc)3miny decision
to grant or deny the. MtbozL:y toC9nsEzuct.
will lncludc all ‘I relevant infoniatlon except that protc.ctcd
is a trade i4’6 B. Publish

a noiice purruazt
to Stction 6061 of heovcrnezt Code ir a nerpape of geerzl circudon
Lu thc DtrIct stating whea tha pubt3c may Inspect the information required
in ‘Secti 605 ,:onceof .3fACr approvaL The public shall have thirty (30) days beginning onth’-ic
of ub1icatoa

To submit ther cOnmens. Cocs of this notice s.hould be forwarded
to the nitcd States !nv ztmentai Protection Agcnc’, the California Ms Resources Eoardq and all ad.6ining air po]lutfon control officcia inobirbash. F. Consider the uWc coutnnL sobmIr4.
2US EPA AIR DIV

001 tJD

I ‘

I .JOYiA 4 ñJr FA.X 415 744 1076 ----. ORGANIZAT)ON IAJL STOP FAX NUMBER

L ô q

1 VERIF)CA11ONNO.

Zi •U.S.ENV1RONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EGION9 AIR DMSION 75 HAWTHORNE STREET SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105 NAME BRANCWSECTON MMLSTOP 41 5. —

-,,.“.. PNONENUMBER
415

-744- /Z3Z oa *: FAXNUMBER415 744- .10 -.j

•“.

... VERHRCAT)ON NO.415 744- j.

I #OF PAGES:

-3

..4R4CLLJD*’IG COVER) €UBJECT:

.1J IOTES: J)14 y,t41-4dc i•J/2

i ..

.JL4 /t/
.A/Pf,. IiJ—L L4 jjlA4O At7/A DATE: r-,

-—,—‘-— ...—..

•- -•-;———-;—— .•‘-

..—•-:-•———
-.-—— •

S

•

•

.

•

S

S

•

•S

•

I

•

•

...Ltr..i1KDIV

P.2 —:-‘•‘ t.L.J i* .LUIQ For Def1niozs, Add: Section 228: Hazardous Air PothdanZ (HAP):Those pollutants thatarelisted inthe Federal CleaizAir4ct’s Section112(b)List afHazardousAfrPailutcznts. Sectioiz27S:MaximumAthievableCantrol TechnoIoy (MACT):Anemission

F limilationwhichLvnotless stringentthantheemissionlimitationachieved
in practice bythebestcontrolledsimilarsource,andwhichreflectsthemarimrs1mdegreeofreduction
inemisxiwzsthatthDi&k4 takingintoconsideruonthecost ofachkving guchemissions reduction, and anynonairqualityhealthandenvL’onmenial impactcand requirements, determines

fachievable
bytheconstructed
or For Chapter IV,Article
I,Addasfollows: Section602:TheAirPollutionControlOftic4halI denyanAuthority

toConstructforany 1neWstationarysourceormodification
ofanexistingsourcespecit!ed
in subparagraph

Aofthis )‘SectionunleSshedeterminesthattheemissionsfromthenewsourceormodification maynotbekY expected
toresultintheviolationormeasurablecontribution

tothecontinuedviolationofanylocal,stateornationalambientairqualitystandardand providedthatthebestavailablecontrol technology

asdefined,or?JACT,if applicable,willbeusedontheccntaminant emitting equipment

u602.3MACTDeterzaticrzc:TheAirPottutionControlOfficershallapplythe provisionsofthis Sectioiz toanyproposed nrvFiiz,dxfledsourcewith extinzatedoractualHAPemissionsoftten (20)tonsperyearofanyii1e HAP;ortwentyFive(25)tonspery.!arfortwoormore1L42s. Exceptforsourcesalready reutateJ
byaCAA1990section 112(d)M4CTsiandardthe MaximzmAchievableControl Technology (?4CT)shallbedeterminedand required(f more rtringe,zE than required byaBACT determination).Thisincludesanexistingsourcethat proposes
toaddanewprocessor production unityorproposes

amodxfiction,whichhasacapitaltort exceeding50 percentofacomparablenewprocesslineoruni.Such proceduresshallbe carried ord in accordancewith adaptedFederalEPA proceduresfor40CFRPart63.40 through63.4 .prJin-er n,rrgrrnrly me4ffc’f

y Section60$:Before grantingordenyinganAuthority
toConstructforanytationaxysourceormodiflcadon subjecttothe provisionsofthisArticle,theAirPollutionControlOfficershall:A.. Requirethe applicant
tosubmitinfonnationsufficient
todescribethenatureandaxtountofemissions, location, designconstructionand operationofthesource,andtosubmitanyadditionalinfoxnacion necessaxy
tomaketheanalysis required bythisArticle.. B. Requirethe applicant
tosubmit anyprojected expansion plansforth stationarysourcedescribed
inthe applicationforthe Authority
toConstructfartheten(10)yearperiod subsequenttothedateof applicationforthe Authority
toConstruct. C. Analyzetheeffectofthenewstationarysourceormodification
onair quality.Such analystsshallconsider expectedaircontaminantemissionsandair qualityinthe vicinityofthenewsourceormodificationwithintheAirBasinandwithin adjoiningairbasinsatthetimethesourceormodification

isproposed
tocommenceoperation.Such arialysit;shallbebasedonapplication
of existingstateandlocalcontrol strategies.

t.jf06/10/98WED 15:41FAX 415 744 1075USPA AIR DIV

003 I).Make available for public inspection

atthe District office the information submitted by app1icant the Ar Pollution Control Offlce?s analysis ofthe effect ofthe ;ourceonair quality andthe pre]iminaxy decision
to grantordeny the Authority
toConstruct. This will include all relevant information exceptthat protected
asatradesecret. B. Publith

anotice pursuant
toSection 6061ofthe Government Code ina newspaper
of general circulation
in the District stating where the public may inspect the information recpircd
in Section 605 D,and anynotk. of MACT çpravatThe public shall h.sve thirty (30) days beginning onthe date of publication

tosubmit their mrnents. Copies ãf this notice should be forwarded
tothe United States EnvironmentalProrec on Agency, the Caliibrnia Air Resources Board, and all adjâining air pollution control officers

iother air basins.

,F. Consdex the public commentssubmitted.

o’ •4t; (h)1V

4 (TV

b o4t

‘•.u//9
WED 17:01 FAX 415 744 1076

US EPA AIR DIV

00i dieqo.i12—

Page

1 1 Tob (2okL.s 5I13f J (#i1

p4’C ‘c 243-OLf UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION
IX 75 Hawtboine Street San Francisco 1 CA 94105 Re: Final Rule on Case-by-Case MACT Determination Dear On December 27, 1996, the EPA published the final rule entitled “Hazardous Air Pollutants: Regulations Governing Constructed

or Reconstructed Major Sources” pursuant
to section 112 (g) of the Clean Air Act Amendments
of 1990 (CAAA).

A copy of the federal register and fact sheet on this rule wa; earlier sent to your office. The purpose of this letter is to de:scribe the (D requirements your office must comply with. After the effective date of section 112(g), all owners or operators
of major HA? sources that construct
or reconstruct will be required
to install maximum achievable control tchno1ogy (MACT). unless specifically exempted, provided they are located in a State or District with anpved title
V permit program. Section 112(g) shall be effective
on the date that the permitting authority, under title
V of the Act, places its implementing program for section 112(g) into effect. Permitting authorities have until June 29, 1998 to initiate pjenjing_pcpgr.ams.

It is the EPA’s view that the Act directly confers on the permitting authority the obligation

to implement section 112(g) and to adopt a program which conforms
to the requirements

of the final rule. Therefore, the permitting aüthortty need not apply for approval 4 under section 112 (1) in order to use its orograjto...imp1ement / ‘ ect

1-

i fy that notifthe EPA t, that effect. In addition, prior to the effctivede
for thispögrain,
the permitting authority wilA need to publish

a nQti statinghat has adopted

a pro rem to implement 112E(T dthe effective da o

e program.— •The permitting authority has several options in developing

a program to implement section 112(g), including relying on05/!3/98 WED 17:02 FAX 415 744 1076

US EPA AIR DIV

ID02 12

Page 2J (‘ existing New Source Review programs that can meet or be amended to meet the requirements

of the final 112 (g) rule, adopting

a new program
to implement 112(g), doDtina the_Ee.tlP

or utilizing the title
V program if its title
V program includes the requirements

of the final 112(g) rule, including the preconstruction element. After June 29, 1998, if a permitting authority
is unable to initiate

a section 112(g) program
to implement this rule, it may request the EPA Regional office to implement

a transition1 program for ear. During this trañition period, there are two ó.ons for obtaining

a MACP approval; either
1) the EPA will issue section 112(g) determination
for up to one year; or 2) the permitting authority will make section 112(g) determinations according
to the final 112(g) rule, and issue

a Notice of MACT Approval that will become final and legally enforceable after the EPA concurs in writing with the permitting authority’s determination. Since continued failure by the permitting authority
to adopt a program
to implement section 112(g) with respect to construction

or reconstruction

of major HAP sources would be a failure by the permitting authority

to adequately administer and enforce its title

V permitting program, EPA Region

:) wants to work closely with you to put in place programs by June 29, 1998. If you have any questions regarding these requireme:its

or if our office can be of any assistance, please contact Nahid Zoueshtiagh of my staff at (415) 744—1261. Sincerely, Natt Haber Chief, Permits Office Air DivisionLake County Air Quality Management District Robert L. Reynolds 883 Lakeport Blvd Phone: (707) 263-7000
Air Pollution Control Officer Lakeport, California 95453 Fax: (707) 263-0421 i. cCP&Internet: bobr@paciflc.net

June 30, 1998 Felicia Marcus, Regional Administrator EPA Region IX

. 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105-3901 RE: Adoption of a program
to implement the MACT rule, 40 CFR section 63.40-63.44 notice 12/27/96, volume 61. Dear Ms. Marcus, Consistent with the reference federal requirements
the Lake County Air Quality Management District has adopted

a program
to implement section 112(g). The purpose of this letter is to certify that the programmeets the requirements

of 40 CFR 63.40- 63.44. Please find attached

aset of rule changes, additional definitions, and references Qto federal law that will implement the program. Also, find attached the required publication notice(s) stating aneffective date of June 23, 1998, for the program
tobe in effect.
A complete rule package including public comment, workshop, etc., is also attached. We are requesting through the California Air Resources Board that the changes be incorporated into ourSIP. We will make them

a regular part of our permitting reviews. Should this certification not be appropriate for your purposes,
or if youhave any questions,
do not hesitate to contact me. tbL42 Attachments: rule package CC: Dave Howekamp, Regional Director, Air and Toxics Division Kathy DiehiLAKE COUNTY AIR QUALITY Management District _______. 883 Lakeport Blvd Phone: (707) 263-7000 j Lakeport, California 95453 Fax: (707) 263-0421 Internet Mail: bobr@pacific.net Robert L. Reynolds, Air Pollution Control Officer -MEMORANDUMTO: Mr.: Peter Venturini, Chief SSD

May 15, 1998 Air Resources Board (916) 327-7212 From: Johion, AQE Re: MACT Rule Legal Notice Please find the following legal notice request sent out this afternoon. Our rule workshop

is scheduled for June 9, 1998 at 2:00 P.M., at the District office, and the public hearing

is scheduled for June 23, 1998 at 9:30 A.M., at the Lake County Board of Supervisors Chambers. Please feel free to give meacall at (707) 263-7000,

if youhave any questions. CC: MACT Rule file Attachments:
(1) -3 pages total

- --This is a fax memo and an original will not be sent unless requested.

--LAKE COUNTY AIR QUALITY • Management District_______ 883 Lakeport Blvd Phone: (707) 263-7000 j Lakeport, California 95453 Fax: (707) 263-0421 Internet Mail: bobr@pacific.net Robert L. Reynolds, Air Pollution Control Officer -MEMORANDUMTO: Kathy Diebi, EPA

May 15, 1998 415 744,J..W From: JoFm)hompson, AQE Re: MACT Rule Enclosed

is our proposed MACT rule (Section 602.3) for your review and comment. Also, two definitions and two other inclusions will be made to fully reference the MACT rule. Bob or I will give you
a call later on this afternoon to discuss with you. Q CC:Rule file Attachments:
(1) 3 pages total
--This is a fax memo and an original will not be sent unless requested.

--For Definitions, Add: CD Section 228: Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP): Those pollutants that arelisted inthe Federal Clean Air Act’s Section 112(b) List of Hazardous Air Pollutants. Sectkm 237.5: MaximumAchievable Control Technology (‘MACT): An emissio,z limitation which is notless stringent than the emission limitation achieved
in practice by the best controlled similar source,and which reflects the maximum degree of reduction
in emissions that th District, taking into consideration
the costof achieving such emissions reduction, and anynonair quality health and environmental impacts and requirements, determines

f achievable
by the constructed
or For Chapter IV, Article
I, Add asfollows: Section 602: The Air Pollution Control Officershall deny an Authority

to Construct for any new stationary source or modification
of an existing source specified
in subparagraph

A ofthis Section unless he determines that the emissions from the new source or modification may not be expected
to result in the violation
or measurable contribution

to the continued violation of any local, state or national ambient air quality standard and provided that the best available control technology

as defined, orMA CT, if applicable, will be used on the contaminant emitting equipment. 602.3 MACT Determinations:
The Air Pollution Control Officer shall apply the provisions
of this Section
to any proposed new,orinodfled sourcewith estimated oractual HAP emissions of: ten (10) tons per yearof any single HAP; or twentyFive (25) tons per year for twoormore HAPs. Except for sources already regulated
byaCAA 1990 section 112(d) MACT standard, the Maximum Achievable control Technology (MA CT) shall be determined and required (if more stringent than required byaBA CT deterinizzation). This includes an existing sourcethat proposes
to add a new process or production unit, or proposes

a modification, which has a capital cost exceeding
50 percent of a comparable new process line or unit. Such procedures shall be carried out in accordance with adopted Federal EPA procedures for 40 CFR Part 63.40 through 63.44, or procedures subsequently modified by the Federal EPA. Section 605: Before granting or denying an Authority
to Construct for any stationary source or modification subject to the provisions ofthis Article, the Air Pollution Control Officer shall: A. Require the applicant
to submit information sufficient
to describe the natureand amountof emissions, location, design, construction and operation of the source, and to submit any additional information necessary
to make the analysis required bythis Article. B. Require the applicant
to submit any projected expansion plans forthe stationary source described
in the application for the Authority

to Construct for the ten (10) year period subsequent to the date of application for the Authority

to Construct. C. Analyze the effect ofthe new stationary source or modification

on air quality. Such analysis shall consider expected air contaminant emissions and air quality in the vicinity of the new source or modification within the Air Basinand within adjoining air basins at the timethe source or modification

is proposed
to commence operation. Such analysis shall be based on application
of existing stateand local control strategies.D.Make available for public inspection

atthe District office the information submitted by applicant, the Air Pollution Control Officer’s analysis ofthe effect ofthe sourceonair quality andthe preliminary decision
to grantordeny the Authority

toConstruct. Thiswill include all ( relevant information exceptthat protected
asatrade secret. E. Publish

anotice pursuant
toSection 6061 ofthe Government Codeina newspaper
of general circulation

in the District stating where the public may inspect the information required
in Section 605 D,and anynotice of MA CT approvaL The public shall have thirty (30) days beginning
onthe date of publication

tosubmit their comments. Copies ofthis notice should be forwarded

tothe United States Environmental Protection Agency, the California Air Resources Board, andall adjoining air pollution control officers in other air basins. F. Consider the public comments submitted.

‘A 0LAKE COUNTY AIR QUALITY Management District )_______. 883 Lakeport Blvd Phone: (707) 263-7000 Lakeport, California 95453 Fax: (707) 263-0421 Internet Mail: bobr@pacific.net Robert L. Reynolds, Air Pollution Control Officer -MEMORANDUMTO: Kathy Diehi, EPA

May 15, 1998 415 744-1076 From: John Dson, AQE Re: MACT Rule Legal Notice Pursuant
to your request, please find the following legal notice request sent out this afternoon. Our rule workshop

is scheduled for June 9, 1998 at 2:00 P.M., at the District office, and the public hearing
is scheduled for June 23, 1998 at 9:30 A.M., at the Lake County Board of Supervisors Chambers. Please feel free to give meacall at (707) 263-7000,
if youhave any questions. 0 CC: MACT Rule file Attachments:
(1) -3 pagestotal- 0

--This isafax memoand an original will notbe sentunless requested.

--Lake County Air Quality Management District Robert L. Reynolds 883 Lakeport Blvd Phone: (707) 263-7000
Air Pollution Control Officer Lakeport, California 95453 Fax: (707) 263-0421 Internet: bobr@pacific.net

May 15, 1998 Clearlake Observer-American P0 Box 6328 Clearlake, CA 95422

4 —‘.; —j Dear Editor, Please publish the attached notice in the earliest possible edition of the Clearlake Observer-American. Thank you verymuch. Sincerely, John D. Thompson, AQE Legal Notice The Lake County Air Quality Management District Board of Directors will hold
a public hearing in the Lake County Board of Supervisors Chambers, 255 N. Forbes St., Lakeport, CA, on June 23, 1998 at 9:30 AM to consider adopting changes
to the Lake County Air Quality Management District’s Rules and Regulations.

A workshop will be held at 883 Lakeport Blvd., Lakeport on June 9, 1998 at 2:00 PM. The proposed rule addresses the Federal EPA mandated Maximum Available Control Technology (MACT) for controlling toxic emissions from major sources. For moreinformation regarding the proposed rule, contact the LCAQMD

at (707) 263-7000,
orvisit the office at 883 Lakeport Blvd., Lakeport CA. The proposed Rules and Regulations changes are as follows (bold italic is new text): Definitions, Add: Section 228: Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP): Those pollutants that arelisted in the Federal Clean Air Act’s Section 112(b) List of Hazardous Air Pollutants. Section 237.5: Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT): An emission limitation which
is notless strin gentthan the emission limitation achieved
in practice by the best controlled similar source,and which reflects the maximum degree of reduction

in emissions that the District, taking into consideration
the costof achieving such emissions reduction, and anynonair quality health and environmental impacts and energy requirements, determines

if achievable
bythe constructed

orreconstructed major source.For Chapter IV, Article

I, Add as follows: Section 602: The Air Pollution Control Officer shall deny an Authority
to Construct for any new stationazy source or ;nodfication
of an existing source specified
in subparagraph

A of this Section unless he determines that the emissions from the new source or inodfi cation may not be expected
to result in the violation or measurable contribution

to the continued violation of any local, state or national ambient air quality standard and provided that the best available control technology
as defined, or ?vL4CT,
if applicable, will be used onthe contaminant emitting equipment. 602.3 MACT Determinations:
The Air Pollution Control Officer shall apply the pro visions of this Section
to any proposed new, or modified source with estimated
or actual HAP emissions
of: ten (‘10) tons per year of any single HAP; or twenty Five (25) toizs per year for two or more HAPs. Except for sources already regulated
by a CAA 1990 section 112(d) MACT standard, the Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MA CT) shall be determined and required (if more stringent than required
by a BACT determination). This izzcludes an existing source that proposes

to add
a new process or production unit, or proposes

•a modification, which has
a capital cost exceeding
50 percent of a comparable new process line orunit. Such procedures shall be carried out in accordance with adopted Federal EPA procedures for 40 CFR Part 63.40 through 63.44, or procedures subsequently modified
by the Federal EPA. Section 605: Before granting or denying an Authority
to Construct for any stationary source or modification subject to the provisions
of this Article, the Air Pollution Control Officer shall: A. Require the applicant
to submit information sufficient

to describe the nature and amount of emissions, location, design, construction and operation of the source, and to submit any additional information necessary

to make the analysis required by this Article. B. Require the applicant
to submit any projected expansion plans for the stationary source described
in the application for the Authority

to Construct for the ten (10) year period subsequent

to the date of application for the Authority

to Construct. C. Analyze the effect of the new stationary source or modification
onair quality. Such: analysis shall consider expected air contaminant emissions and air quality in the vicinity of the new source or modification within the Air Basin and within adjoining air basins at the time the source or modification

is proposed
to commence operation. Such analysis shall be based on application
of existing state and local control strategies. D. Make available for public inspection

at the District office the information submitted by applicant, the Air Pollution Control Office?s analysis of the effect of the source onair quality and the preliminary decision
to grant or deny the Authority
to Construct. This will include all relevant information except that protected

asa trade secret. E. Publish

a notice pursuant
to Section 6061 of the Government Code in a newspaper
of general circulation

in the District staring where the public may inspect the information required in Section 605 D, and any notice of MACT approval. The public shall have thirty (30) days beginning
on the date of publication

to submit their comments. Copies of this notice should be forwarded

to the United States Environmental Protection Agency, the California Air Resources Board, and all adjoining air pollution control officers in other air basins. F. Consider the public comments submitted.

-page
2 of 2 -Lake County Air Quality Management District Robert L. Reynolds 883 Lakeport Blvd Phone: (707) 263-7000
Air Pollution Control Officer j Lakeport, California 95453 Fax: (707) 263-0421 Internet: bobr@pacific.net

June 29, 1998 Mr. Harry Metzger, Manager

J U L 7 —1998 Rule Evaluation Section, SSD

RULE EVALUATION SECTIONAir Resources Board

AIR RESOURCES BOARD P.O. Box2815 Sacramento, CA 95812 Re: Adoption
of MACT Rule Sections 602, 605 (changes), and Sections 228, 237.5, and 602.3 (new) Dear Mr. Metzger: Enclosed please fmd the rules and supporting documentation which were adopted onJune 23, 1998 by the Lake County Air Quality Management District Board of Directors. The rule evaluation and SIP submittal form(s) have also been attached. Please feel free to contact John Thompson
or myself at (707) 263-7000,

if you have any questions
or require any further information. Sincerely, L.edV JDT/RLR Attachments: ‘Rule Adoption Package including the signed resolution, BOD package, comments, and proof of publication and several other items. Rule Evaluation Form .51P Submittal Forms