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-
11 1

12 /

13 I

14 1

15 1

16 117 I

18 /

19 1

20 1

21 /

22 1

23 1

24/

/

- page 4 of 4 -
on Consent Agenda? QYes No

5. Date(s) BOS Previously Discussed: n/a but related Title V numerous times

6. Is an Expenditure Required? YES Q NO Current year expenditure amount: $4,000 Annual expenditure in future years: 7 Is it Currently Budgeted? YES Q NO 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 a financial drain is high.

7. Will additional staff be required? D YES NO

If “yes”, will the additional staff be: Q Permanent Q Extra Help

8. This item has been reviewed by: Q Personnel Q Risk Management Q Data Processing

9. Recommended Beard Action:

Adopt the proposed rule as provided in the attached exhibit. If concern exists, as it may because of timing continue for a week 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

write

Supervisorial. UAIIU): District The Item Primarily Impacts (If all districts impacted,

*

All

9/95

The

office

Origi.a1

for agenda

aid 9

its.

copies of

Attach

this fcm xmist accraxy the back-up ateria1 sibiiicted to the clerk’s this fcm as the last page of each copy of your back-up znaterial.
g such emissions reduction, and any non air quality health and environmental impacts and energy requirements, determines

fachievable by the constructed or reconstructed major source (40 CFR 63.41 “Definitions”).

For Chapter IV, Article I, Add as follows:

stationary

Section 602: The Air Pollution Control Officer deny an Authority to Construct for any new source or modification of an existing source specified in subparagraph

A of this Section unless he determines that the emissions from the new source or modification is 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 any proposed new, or modified source with estimated (based on proposed throughput and hours of operation), or actual HAP emissions of ten (10) tons per year of any single HAP; or twenty Five (25) tons per yearfor two or more HAPs.

Maximum

Except for sources already regulated by

a CAA 1990 section 112(d) MACT standard, the Achievable Control Technology (MACT) shall be determined and required (fmore stringent than required by

a BACT determination). This includes an existing source that proposes to add

a new process or production uni4 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 subsequently modified by the Federal EPA.

modification

Section 605: Before granting or denying an Authority to Construct for any stationary source or 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
wn, 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 or construction permitting review of a major source of

- hazardous air pollutants on May 20, 1998. Tbis.is a subsequent publication to inform the public that the workshop was held on June 9, 1998, to discuss the rule with the public. A final public hearing before the Board of Directors was held on June 23, 1998, to discuss, take testimony and make a decision on an action of rule

maximum

changes implementing the required Section 112(g) program addressing the available control technology for major sources of 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 purpose of this notice is to provide additional public notice of the implementation of the program, and to ensure such 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.
, 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 or construction permitting review of a major source of hazardous air pollutants on May 20, 1998. This is a subsequent publication to inform the public that the workshop was held on June 9, 1998, to discuss the rule with the public. A final public hearing before the Board of Directors was held on June 23, 1998, to discuss, take testimony and make a decision on an action of rule changes implementing the required Section 112(g) program addressing the maximum available control technology for major sources of 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 purpose of this notice is to provide additional public notice of the implementation of the program, and to ensure such 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.
Clearlake Obrver-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,

V

V

V 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 areas 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.
, 

pp

, w

ll 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 witIi 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 ofthe 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

=

•0

4

flu,

j .

I I

fl

C

2
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 3
• 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 staffs 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 3
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 3
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
“41N

Ht

c)

1•

I%

1’

•1’
TO: MACT Rule File, Chron

FROM: John &son, AQE

DATE: June 9, 1998

RE: MACT Proposed LCAQMD Rule Workshop Minutes/Notes

The above referenced workshop was held at the District conference room located 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.

‘sJ

• The workshop started at 2:00 P.M. with introductions and circulation of an attendance 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 any additional comment.

• The workshop was opened for questions and answers. None of the parties attending had any questions.

• Request from 3. Thompson that any additional comments, suggestions, or requests be submitted to the District in writing ASAP and within a week.

The workshop concluded at 2:30 P.M.

‘V
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 (40 CFR 63.41 “Definitions”).

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 of this 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, or MACT, 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, or modified spurce with estimated (based on proposed throughput and hours of operation), 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.

Maximum

Except for sources already regulated by

a CAA 1990 section 112(d) MACT standard, the Achievable Control Technology (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 unit. Such procedures shall be carried out in accordance with adopted Federal EPA procedures for 40 CFR Part 63.40 through 63.44, or pro ccdurcs subsequently modified by the Federal EPA.

modification

Section 605: Before granting or denying an Authority to Construct for any stationary source or 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 p]ans for the stationary source described in the application for the Authority to Construct for the ten (10) year period subsequent td 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 shalt 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.
ts. 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.

0
Zi,n(tafloiz WILLCIZ I; flal ((U St71?7?I1 then the emiUiOJ1 t1lfatlon &ievcd in practice by the trtcontrolled iimtar sourcs, and whfth reffects the mar(irwm degros of.reducrlon in rrnirs(on that the DETtrC4 tc.ng L’ito cozzstderctian the cost ofachkrlng zuch emissnj reduction, azud aJLY non air.ziaThhea(th ar4 envfronn taZLinpactrandenej.. reu(rein en Is, Jeternth:e: achicvable by the corAsfracferrcOrs!.d4te7r\urce.

For Chapter W, Artfclc I, Add

afoIIow:

V ciio 60Z The Air PoThitioi Control Olflcegball cy an 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 to the 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

o the cotitaminant entitting equipment.

73 MA Cfler-pthuaforis; The

A irPoltutlon Control Offlcerilthll apply the pro VISIOM of this Sccclozz to a.rJy propased flew, or rnod(fledrazirce with erfirnz(ed or actual HAP emistons oft (en (10) kits pcryear ofany tingle HAP; or twenty Ftt’c (25) tozus per yearfor twa or more 114Fr.

Exceptfar 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 .sirlzgent ((La?; rqufred by

a BACT detentination). ThLr lnctrude an etheing source that .re.rto add

a new 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 2Federal EFA proceduresfor 4C) CFR Part 63.42 through 63.44, orproce4’uzss threue,tt& modified by the Fcdcra (EPA.

ectfon 605: Before grnting Or d zyhtg an Authority to Constrict for any stat!ona.ry source or rnodicaUon stibject to the provi.rions ofthis 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 Constructfor 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 new aouzte or modifici on within the Air Basin and within idjoin!iig air ba.clni at the time the

source ot zxdlilcattort Is proposed to cotnruence vpeitlon. uc1i analysis sha3l be based out appllc.s.ion of cxistinE state and TQc:a! control te5eS.
•1

1•

g

g 

th

ic 

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.

2
• U.S.ENV1RONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

EGION9

AIR DMSION

75 HAWTHORNE STREET

SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105

NAME

BRANCWSECTON

MML STOP 41 5.

—

- ,,.“ ..

PNONENUMBER 415 - 744- /Z3Z

oa *:

FAXNUMBER 415 744- .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/2i

..

. JL4 /t/.A /Pf,. IiJ—L

L4 jjlA4O At 7/A

DATE:

r -,

-

—, —‘-— ...—..

•- -•-;———-;—— .•‘- .. —•-:- •——— -. -— —

• S • •

. • S S • •S

• I • •

.. .
wzs that thDi&k4

reduction, and taking into consideruon the cost ofachkving guch emissions any non air quality health and envL’onmenial requirements, impactc and determines

fachievable by the constructed or

For Chapter IV, Article I, Add as follows:

Section 602: The Air Pollution Control Oftic4halI deny an Authority to Construct for any

1 neW stationary source or modification of an existing source specit!ed in subparagraph

A of this )‘ kY expected Section unleSs to result he determines that the emissions from the new source or modification may not be

local, state or national

in the violation or measurable contribution to the continued violation of any

technology as defined,ambient air quality standard and provided that the best available control equipment or ?JACT, if applicable, will be used on the ccntaminant emitting

602.3 MACT

Deter zaticrzc: The Air Pottution

u

this Sectioiz Control Officershall apply the provisions of

oft ten (20)

to any proposed nrvFiiz,dxfled source with extinzated or actual HAP emissions

1L42s.

tons peryear ofany ii1e HAP; or twenty Five (25) tons per y.!arfor two or more

Maximzm

Except for

Achievable

sources already

Control

reutateJ by

a CAA 1990 section 112(d) M4CT siandard the

rtringe,zE than Technology (?4CT) shall be determined and required (fmore

proposes to add

required by

a BACT determination). This includes an existing source that

capital tort exceeding

a new process or production unity or proposes

a modxfiction, which has

a

shall be carried

50 percent of

a comparable new process line or uni. Such procedures

63.40 through 63.4

ord in accordance with adapted Federal EPA proceduresfor 40 CFR Part .prJin-er n,rrgrrnrly me4ffc’f

y

modiflcadon

Section 60$: Before granting or denying an Authority to Construct for any tationaxy source or

A.. Require subject to the provisions of this Article, the Air Pollution Control Officer shall:

emissions, location,

the applicant to submit infonnation sufficient to describe the nature and axtount of

additional infoxnaciondesign construction and operation of the source, and to submit any

B. Require necessaxy to make the analysis required by this Article..

described in

the applicant to submit any projected expansion plans for th stationary source

to

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

analysts

C. Analyze

shall

the effect of the new stationary source or modification on air quality. Such

new source or

consider

modification expected air contaminant emissions and air quality in the vicinity of the

source or modification

within the Air Basin and within adjoining air basins at the time the

application of existing

is proposed to commence operation. Such arialysit; shall be based on state and local control strategies.
Board,

y

Resources and all adjâining air pollution control officers i other air basins. F. Consdex , the public comments submitted. o’ •4t; (h)1

V 4

(T

V b

o4t

‘
San Francisco 1CA 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- ify 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 on
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 Division
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,

Management

Consistent with the reference federal requirements the Lake County Air Quality District has adopted a program to implement section 112(g). The purpose of this letter is to certify that the program meets the requirements of 40 CFR 63.40- 63.44. Please find attached a set of rule changes, additional definitions, and references Q to federal law that will implement the program. Also, find attached the required publication notice(s) stating an effective date of June 23, 1998, for the program to be 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 our SIP. We will make them a regular part of our permitting reviews. Should this certification not be appropriate for your purposes, or if you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me.

tbL42

Attachments: rule package

CC: Dave Howekamp, Regional Director, Air and Toxics Division Kathy Diehi
TO: 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 me a call at (707) 263-7000, if you have 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. - -
TO: 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. - -
strict, taking into consideration the cost of achieving such emissions reduction, and any non air quality health and environmental impacts and requirements, determines

fachievable by the constructed or

For Chapter IV, Article I, Add as follows:

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 of this 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, 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 any proposed new, or inodfled source with estimated or actual HAP emissions of: ten (10) tons per year of any single HAP; or twenty Five (25) tons per yearfor two or more HAPs.

Maximum

Except for sources already regulated by

a CAA 1990 section 112(d) MACT standard, the Achievable control Technology (MA CT) shall be determined and required (ifmore stringent than required by

a BA CT deterinizzation). 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 unit. Such procedures shall be carried out in accordance with adopted Federal EPA proceduresfor 40 CFR Part 63.40 through 63.44, or procedures subsequently modified by the Federal EPA.

modification

Section 605: Before granting or denying an Authority to Construct for any stationary source or subject to the provisions ofthis 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.
g 

p

officers in other air basins. F. Consider the public comments submitted.

‘A

0
TO: 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

A.M.,

the District office, and the public hearing is scheduled for June 23, 1998 at 9:30 at the Lake County Board of Supervisors Chambers.

Please feel free to give me a call at (707) 263-7000, if you have any questions. 0

CC: MACT Rule file

Attachments: (1)

-3 pages total - 0

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

Sincerely,

John D. Thompson, AQE

Legal Notice

the

The

Lake

Lake

County

County Air Quality Management District Board of Directors will hold a public hearing in Board of Supervisors Chambers, 255 N. Forbes St., Lakeport, CA, on June 23,

District’s

1998 at 9:30 AM to consider adopting changes to the Lake County Air Quality Management

June

Rules and Regulations. A workshop will be held at 883 Lakeport Blvd., Lakeport on

Available

9, 1998 at 2:00 PM. The proposed rule addresses the Federal EPA mandated Maximum

more

Control Technology (MACT) for controlling toxic emissions from major sources. For information regarding the proposed rule, contact the LCAQMD 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):

Definitions, Add:

Federal

Section 228:

Clean

Hazardous

Air

Air Pollutants (HAP): Those pollutants that are listed in the Act’s Section 112(b) List of Hazardous Air Pollutants.

Section 237.5: Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT): An emission

practice

limitation which is not less stringent than the emission limitation achieved in

degree ofby the best controlled similar source, and which reflects the maximum

cost

reduction in emissions that the District, taking into consideration the

environmental

of achieving such emissions reduction, and any non air quality health and impacts and energy requirements, determines if achievable by the constructed or reconstructed major source.
, 

pp

, 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, 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

process

determination). This izzcludes an existing source that proposes to add

a new 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

procedures shall be carried out in accordance with adopted Federal EPA

modified

for 40 CFR Part 63.40 through 63.44, or procedures subsequently by the Federal EPA.

Section 605: Before granting or denying an Authority to Construct for any stationary source

A.

or modification subject to the provisions of this Article, the Air Pollution Control Officer shall: 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.

analysis

C. Analyze the effect of the new stationary source or modification on air quality. Such: shall consider expected air contaminant emissions and air quality in the vicinity ofthe 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 on air quality and the preliminary 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 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

Resources

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

- page

2 of

2 -
U

CES 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 on June 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