1 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

FINAL STAFF REPORT

Amendments to Rule 4621 (Gasoline Transfer into Stat ionary Storage Containers, Delivery Vessels, and Bulk Plants) and Rule 4622 (Gasoline Transfer into Motor Vehicle Fuel Tanks)

December 19, 2013

Prepared by: Sajjad Ahmad, Air Quality Engineer Jesse A. Garcia, Air Quality Engineer

Reviewed by: Anna Myers, Seni or Air Quality Specialist Rob Vinson, Senior Air Quality Inspector Jim Swaney, Permit Services Manager Morgan Lambert, Director of Compliance

I. SUMMARY

On December 12, 2006, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a memorandum (see Appendix A) to pr ovide guidance to States regarding the removal of Stage II (Phase II) 1 gasoline vapor reco very system in specif ic portions of the

motor vehicle flee t, that included the refueling of Flexib le Fuel Vehicles (FFVs) at E85 fuel (85% ethanol and 15% gasoline) dispensing facilities. EPA’s recommendation was based

on the fact that FFVs that use E85 fuel ar e also equipped with an Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery (ORVR) system. Since ORVR essent ially performs the same function as Phase II vapor recovery system, FFVs refueling at E85 dispensing fa cilities are already having their evaporative emissions captured.

On February 20, 2008, the California Air Re sources Board (ARB) issued a letter (see Appendix A) to all local air districts encour aging them to revise their vapor recovery rules to eliminate the requirement for P hase II vapor recovery systems on the vehicle fleets mentioned by EPA on thei r aforementioned letter that includes refueling of FFVs at E85 fuel dispensing facilities. ARB also issued an Executive Order G-70-212 summarizing these recommendations.

1 The term Phase II, instead of Stage II, applies to the California vapor recovery program; therefore, the

term Phase II will be used whenever applicable to the District.SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Final Staff Report: Rules 4621 & 4622 December 19, 2013

2 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622 Based on this guidance from EPA and ARB, the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (Dis trict) is proposing to amend District Rule 4622 (Gasoline Transfer into Motor Vehicle Fuel Tanks) to incorporate an exem ption from requiring Phase II vapor recovery systems for E85 fuel dispensing facilities.

The District is also proposing to amend District Rule 4621 (Gasoline Transfer into Stationary Storage Contai ners, Delivery Vessels, and Bulk Plants) to not requiring ARB certification for aviation gasoline bulk load ing operations because AR B does not certify these operations.

Additionally, ARB recently adopted severa l cost reduction measures; however, the

District found that all ARB cost reduction measures currently proposed or already adopted will be incorporated into ARB’s Exec utive Orders. Since District Rules 4621 and 4622 already enforce all requirements in accordance with ARB’s Executive Orders, any cost reduction measures adopted by AR B and incorporated into Executive Orders would be sufficiently enforced by our current rules. In addition, no comments were received from the stakeholders in this regar d during or after the stakeholder meetings held on August 28, 2013. Therefore, Distr ict staff concluded that no amendment of District Rules 4621 and 4622 is necessary at this time to accommodate ARB’s cost

reduction measures.

The District is also proposing an amendmen t to District Rule 4622 to reduce the frequency of the Dynamic Back-Pressure Test from once every twelve months to once every five years. Due to t he invasive nature of the test in which vapor space of the system is opened, reducing the test frequen cy will reduce the resulting emissions inherent from opening the vapor space. However, the emi ssion reductions will not be quantified for the purpose of th is rule amendment project.

Rule amendments would also improve underst anding of existing rule requirements by removing expired and redundant language, and adding clarifying language.

II. PROJECT BACKGROUND

A. Source Category

District Rule 4621 applies to gasoline storag e containers located at bulk plants with capacities greater than 250 gallons and less than 19,800 gallons; to other stationary gasoline storage containers wit h capacities greater than 250 gallons; and to those gasoline storage containers that are not subject to the cont rol requirements of District Rule 4623 (Storage of Organic Liquids) Section 5.0. The rule also applies to gasoline delivery vessels.SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Final Staff Report: Rules 4621 & 4622 December 19, 2013

3 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622 District Rule 4622 applies to any gasoline storage and dispensing operation or mobile fueler from which gasoline is transferred into motor vehicl e fuel tanks, except as provided in Section 4.0 of the rule.

B. Current District Rules Requirements

The purpose of District Rules 4621 and 4622 is to limit VOC emissions during storage and transfer of gasoline. Current rule specifics are available online at: http://valleyair.org/rules/1ruleslist.htm

.

1) District Rule 4621

District Rule 4621 requires aboveground and underground gasoline st orage containers to be equipped with an ARB certified Phas e I vapor recovery system, a permanent submerged fill pipe, and a pressure-vacuum relief valve with s pecified operational settings. Bulk plants and loading racks are required to be equipped with an ARB certified vapor recovery system for gasoli ne loading operations, maintained free of leaks, and inspected semi-annually.

2) District Rule 4622

District Rule 4622 requires that the contai ners subject to District Rule 4621 be equipped with an ARB certified Phase II vapo r recovery system subject to periodic maintenance inspections based on gas oline throughput, maintenance of an operations and maintenance ma nual (O&M manual), and pr ompt replacement of damaged Phase II components.

C. Control Technologies

There are two main types of vapor recove ry systems utilized to control vapor losses from the transfer and storage of gasoline. The Phase I systems control vapor losses during the transfer of gasoline from deliver y vessels to storage tanks while Phase II systems control vapor losses from the transfer of gasoline into motor vehicle fuel tanks.

When the storage tank is being filled, the gasoline introduced displaces the vapor in the storage tank. Similarly, when liquid gasoline is dispensed into the vehicle fuel tank, it displaces the gasoline vapor already present in the vehicle fuel tank. If the vapor recovery systems do not adequately collect the displaced vapor, the vapor can be emitted into the atmosphere.

ORVR is a vehicle emission control system a nd is an integral part of the vehicle fuel system to capture at least 95% of the vapors that otherwise would be displaced during refueling. The gas tank and fill pipe are des igned so that when refueling the vehicle, fuel vapors in the gas tank travel to an activated carbon packed canister, which adsorbsSAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Final Staff Report: Rules 4621 & 4622 December 19, 2013

4 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622 the vapor. When the engine is in operation, it draws the gasoline vapors into the engine

intake manifold to be used as fuel.

ORVR essentially performs the same functi on as Phase II Vapor Recovery System (VRS) and both are required to achieve a mini mum vapor control efficiency of 95%.

III. AMENDMENTS

A. District Rule 4621 (Gasoline Transfer into Stationary Storage Containers, Delivery Vessels, and Bulk Plants)

1. Section 4.0 (Exemptions)

Language is amended in Section 4.0 to exempt equipment listed in Sections 4.1 through 4.4 from this rule except for the requirem ents of Sections 6.1.1 and 6.1.4. This amendment is to clarify that equipment listed in Sections 4.1 through 4.4 are exempt from all ARB Phase I and ARB Phase II requirements.

2. Section 5.6 (Bulk Plants and Loading Racks at Bulk Plants)

Section 5.6.1 is split into two subsections 5.6.1.1 and 5.6.1.2. Subsection 5.6.1.1 applies to bulk plants not involved with avia tion gasoline loading and continues to require an ARB certified vapor recovery syst em for loading operations (loading rack).

Subsection 5.6.1.2 applies to bulk plants in volved with aviation gasoline loading. Currently, District Rule 4621 requires ARB’s bulk plant certification for aviation gasoline bulk loading operations. However, ARB does not certify aviation gasoline bulk loading operations. Therefore, District Rule 4621 is amended to remove ARB certification requirements for these operations . Instead of ARB certificat ions, these operations are required to be equipped with a vapor recovery system that meets a minimum volumetric

control of 90% when measured in accordance with the test method specified in Section

6.4.9.

3. Section 5.7 (Delivery Vessels)

Section 5.7.3 is amended to account for a scenario in which one delivery vessel is directly filled with gasoline from another delivery vessel without any intermediate gasoline storage tank. Such scenario c an be encountered when a smaller delivery vessel is directly filled from a larger one. Since any delivery vessel into which gasoline vapors have been transferred can only be filled at a loading rack or another delivery vessel that is equipped with ARB certified vapor recove ry system, this amendment addresses this requirement.SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Final Staff Report: Rules 4621 & 4622 December 19, 2013

5 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622 4. Section 6.0 (Administrative Requirements)

A new Section 6.4.9 is added to include ARB’s Test Procedure TP-202.1, Determination of Emission Factor of V apor Recovery Systems of Bulk Plants. This test procedure is required to demonstr ate the required control efficiency for bulk plant loading operations falling under new Section 5.6.1.2.

B. District Rule 4622 (Gasoline Transf er into Motor Vehicle Fuel Tanks)

1. Section 3.0 (Definitions)

Four new definitions are added to Section 3.0 for clarification of terms used within the requirements of District Rule 4622. These definitions include E85 Fuel, IOM Manual, InStation Diagnostics (ISD) system, and Liqui d Condensate Trap. ISD and liquid condensate trap definitions ar e consistent with ARB’s Definitions for Vapor Recovery Procedures (D-200).

2. Section 4.0 (Exemptions)

A new exemption is added to the rule as Sect ion 4.5. This exemption allows mobile fuelers registered under Distric t Permit Exempt Equipment R egistration program to not be subject to the testing require ments of Section 6.4.1. Such mobile fuelers are subject to the certification requirements of ARB’s Executive Order G-70-193, Certification of the Hill-Vac Vapor Recovery System for Car go Tank Motor Vehicle Fueling Systems . G-70- 193 already lists all of the te sting requirements for these m obile fuelers making testing requirements under District Rule 4622 redundant and unnecessary.

A second exemption is added under a new Sect ion 4.6 to exempt E85 fuel dispensing operations from rule require ments. As mentioned under Se ction I of this document,

FFVs that use E85 fuel ar e also equipped with ORVR. Since ORVR essentially performs the same function as Phase II v apor recovery system and each of them is required to achieve a minimum vapor control efficiency of 95%, the removal of Phase II vapor recovery system for E85 fuel dispens ing operation will not result in relaxing current rule requirements and will not re sult in an increase in emissions.

3. Section 5.0 (Requirements)

Section 5.4.1 is amended to eliminate r edundant language that is already included in the definition of Major Defect (Section 3.22).

ARB’s Executive Order requirements for IS D systems and liquid co ndensate traps are

added to District Rule 4622 as Sections 5.12 and 5.13 to reflect ARB’s Executive Order and Certification Procedure requi rements, and to add clarity for regulated sources. New Section 5.12 is added to the rule to add pr ovisions regarding requirements for liquid condensate trap installation, operation, and main tenance. Similarly, new Section 5.13 isSAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Final Staff Report: Rules 4621 & 4622 December 19, 2013

6 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622 added to the rule to add provisions for requi rements of ISD system regarding operator
response, contractor response, and alarm history records.

4. Section 6.0 (Administrative Requirements)

Amendment to Section 6.3.3.3 e liminates the reference to ARB Certification Procedure CP 201, and makes rule language more incl usive of ARB certification procedures by including the language “applicab le ARB Certification Procedures ,” this includes CP 201, CP 206 and any future ARB Certification Procedures.

5. Section 6.4 (Testing Requirements)

Section 6.4.1.2 is amended to reduce the fr equency of the Dynamic Back-Pressure Test from once every twelve months to once ev ery five years, unless the applicable ARB’s Executive Order requires more frequent test ing. This amendment is based on the

invasive nature of the test – the vapor space of the system is opened – and to reduce the resulting emissions inherent from opening the vapor space.

This test is to determine if the vapor reco very piping contains any blockages that would impair the system’s effectiveness. ARB’s Ex ecutive Orders require this test to be performed initially whenever a vapor recovery system is installed or modified. Together with the pre-backfill inspection r equired by Rule 4622 Section 5.2. 2, this test shows if a system was constructed correctly and therefor e less likely to have blockage issues in

the future. ARB’s Executive Orders leave it to the District’s discretion if ongoing testing would be required, and at what frequency.

Vapor recovery systems that have been constructed correctly are less likely to have blockage issues in the future. Addi tionally, the systems equipped with In-Station Diagnostics (ISD) systems will be continuous ly monitored by ISD for blockages.

The annual testing requirement was added to District Rule 4622 on September 19, 2002. A review of the past eight years of District’s testing records for the Dynamic

Back-Pressure Test indicates that there were only seven test failures in eight years of the approximately 1,500 sites tested annually. Out of these tests, only four were failures during the ongoing testing (the other thr ee were the initial tests). On average,

this constitutes a test failure rate of less than one test per year.

The amendment to change the frequency for Dynamic Back-Pressure Test will not result in an increase in emissions, but will instead reduce VOC emissions that are inherent to the test procedure itself. T he test frequency is being reduced from once every twelve months to once every five years, consistent with EPA guidance on minimum test frequencies.SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Final Staff Report: Rules 4621 & 4622 December 19, 2013

7 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622 District staff has discussed this amendm ent with EPA and EPA has submitted a “No

Comment” letter to the District. Please re fer to Appendix B for more information.

6. Section 7.0 (Compliance Schedule)

Section 7.1.2 is modified to clarify the six month period to complete construction from

the issuance date of authorit y to construct (ATC) and 60 day testing requirements.

Additionally, new section 7.3 is added allowing ti me to comply, if necessary, for facilities becoming subject to the requirements of the installation and operation of an ISD
system.

IV. RULE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

A. Stakeholder Meetings

As part of the rule development process, th e District held two stakeholder meetings on August 28, 2013 to present, discuss, and hear comments on the draft rule amendments under consideration, which were presented in the meetings in the form of a power point presentation. Draft versions of the rules were not available and we re not presented at the stakeholder meetings. The stak eholder meetings were held via video teleconferencing in all three District’s offi ces and were also live streamed using the

webcast. No comments were received duri ng or after the stak eholder meetings.

B. Public Workshop

The District held a public workshop on Octo ber 10, 2013 and the draft versions of the rules were presented at the public workshop. The focus of the public workshop was to present the goals for the project and to solicit public feedback. At the public workshop, District staff presented the objectives of the rule-amending project, explained the District’s rule development process for th is project, solicited feedback from affected stakeholders, and informed all interested parti es of the comment period and project

milestones.

The Draft Staff Report and Draft Rules were made available on the District’s website prior to the public workshop, and a two week comment period followed the public workshop. No comments were received duri ng the public workshop or during the two week comment period that fo llowed the public workshop. As such, it was also

determined that there is no need to hold a future workshop.SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Final Staff Report: Rules 4621 & 4622 December 19, 2013

8 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622 C. Public Hearing

In accordance with California Health and Sa fety Code (CH&SC) Section 40725, the proposed amendments to District Rules 4621 and 4622 and final draft staff report were publicly noticed and made available on the Dist rict’s website prior to the Governing Board public hearing to consider adoption of the proposed rule amendments. The proposed amendments and final draft staff r eport were made available for public comment on November 19, 2013. No co mments were received during the subsequent two-week comment period. The public was al so invited to provide comments during the public hearing for the adoption of the proposed rule amendments.

V. ANALYSES

This rule amending project incorporates already enforced stat e and federal standards, clarifies existing requirements and updates the frequency of dynamic backpressure testing. Amendments do not result in new or more stringent regulatory controls beyond those already enforced and do not negatively affe ct air quality or emi ssion limitations.

A. Emission Reduction & Cost Effectiveness Analysis

Emissions will be reduced as a result of the amendment of reducing the frequency of the Dynamic Back-Pressure Test. Howe ver, the emission reductions will not be quantified for the purpose of this rule amendment project an d will therefore not be quantified or claimed in the St ate Implementation Plan (SIP). Additionally, there are no

costs associated with the amendments to District Rules 4621 and 4622.

B. Socioeconomic Analysis

Pursuant to CH&SC § 40728.5 (a), “Whenever a district intends to propose the adoption, amendment, or repeal of a rule or r egulation that will significantly affect air quality or emissions limitations, that agency s hall, to the extend data are available, perform an assessment of the socioeconomic impacts of the adoption, amendment, or repeal of that rule or r egulation. This section does not apply to the adoption, amendment, or repeal of any ru le or regulation that resu lts in any less restrictive

emissions limits if the action does not interfer e with the district’s adopted plan to attain ambient air quality standards, or does not re sult in any significant increase in

emissions.” Amendments do not si gnificantly affect air qualit y or strengthen emission limitations beyond those already enforced, nor does it result in a significant increase in emissions; therefore, no socioec onomic analysis is required.SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Final Staff Report: Rules 4621 & 4622 December 19, 2013

9 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622 C. Rule Consistency Analysis

Pursuant to CH&SC § 40727.2, District staf f has prepared a rule consistency analysis that compares the element s of the amendments with the corresponding elements of other District rules, federal regulations and guidelines that apply to the same source category or type of equipment. Distric t staff found that the amendments and requirements of these rules would not conflict with federal rules, r egulations, or policies covering similar stationary sources. The ru le consistency analysis is presented as an appendix to the final draft staff report. T he amendments would not conflict with federal rules, regulations, or policies co vering similar stationary sources.

D. Environmental Impact Analysis

Pursuant to §15061 of the Guidelines for Impl ementation of the Calif ornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), District staff investigated the possible environm ental impacts of the

amendments to District Rules 4621 and 4622. Based on the lack of evidence to the contrary, District staff has concluded that the amendments to these rules will not have any significant adverse effects on the environm ent. Staff recommends filing a Notice of Exemption under the provisions of Public Resource Code 15061(b)(3).

VI. REFERENCES

Appendix A: Guidance from EPA and ARB Appendix B: Comments and Responses Appendix C: Rule C onsistency AnalysisSAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Final Staff Report: Rules 4621 & 4622 December 19, 2013

10 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622 This page intentionally blank.SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix A: Guidance from EPA and ARB December 19, 2013

A - 1 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622 

### APPENDIX A

Guidance from EPA and ARB

Amendments to District Rules 4621 & 4622

December 19, 2013SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix A: Guidance from EPA and ARB December 19, 2013

A - 2 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622 This page intentionally blank.SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix A: Guidance from EPA and ARB December 19, 2013

A - 3 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix A: Guidance from EPA and ARB December 19, 2013

A - 4 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix A: Guidance from EPA and ARB December 19, 2013

A - 5 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix A: Guidance from EPA and ARB December 19, 2013

A - 6 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix A: Guidance from EPA and ARB December 19, 2013

A - 7 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix A: Guidance from EPA and ARB December 19, 2013

A - 8 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix A: Guidance from EPA and ARB December 19, 2013

A - 9 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix A: Guidance from EPA and ARB December 19, 2013

A - 10 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix A: Guidance from EPA and ARB December 19, 2013

A - 11 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix A: Guidance from EPA and ARB December 19, 2013

A - 12 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix A: Guidance from EPA and ARB December 19, 2013

A - 13 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix A: Guidance from EPA and ARB December 19, 2013

A - 14 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622 This page intentionally blank.SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix B: Comments and Res ponses December 19, 2013

B - 1 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622 

### APPENDIX B

Summary of Significant Comments and Responses

For Amendments to Di strict Rules 4621 & 4622

December 19, 2013SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix B: Comments and Res ponses December 19, 2013

B - 2 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622 This page intentionally blank.SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix B: Comments and Res ponses December 19, 2013

B - 3 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622 SUMMARY OF SIGNIFI CANT COMMENTS FOR

DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO DISTRICT RULES 4621 AND 4622

EPA REGION IX COMMENTS

EPA submitted the following comm ent on November 14, 2013: Based on the preliminary review of the revi sed draft rule identified above, we have no comments at this time. We support the Distr ict’s efforts to update the rules to meet EPA guidelines and to remove outdated rule language.

ARB COMMENTS

No comments were received from ARB.

STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS

No stakeholder comments were received.SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix B: Comments and Res ponses December 19, 2013

B - 4 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622 SUMMARY OF SIGNIFI CANT COMMENTS FOR

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO DISTRICT RULES 4621 AND 4622 FOR THE COMMENT PERIOD ENDING DECEMBER 3, 2013

EPA REGION IX COMMENTS

No comments were received from EPA.

ARB COMMENTS

ARB submitted an electronic version of no comment letter on December 18, 2013, stating as follows:

The following proposed rules, scheduled for hear ing to be held by your District Board on December 19, 2013, were received by us on November 20, 2013, for our review:

Rule 4621 Gasoline Transfer into Stationary Stor age Containers, Delivery Vessels, and Bulk Plants

Rule 4622 Gasoline Transfer in to Motor Vehicle Fuel Tanks

The Air Resources Board staff has revi ewed the rules and, based on the information

available to us at this time, we have no comments.

The rules were examined by the Enforcem ent Division, the M onitoring and Laboratory Division but not by the St ationary Source Division.

STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS

No stakeholder comments were received.SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix C: Rule Consisten cy Analysis December 19, 2013

C - 1 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622 

### APPENDIX C

Rule Consistency Analysis

for Amendments to District Rules 4621 & 4622

December 19, 2013SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix C: Rule Consisten cy Analysis December 19, 2013

C - 2 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622 This page intentionally blank.SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix C: Rule Consisten cy Analysis December 19, 2013

C - 3 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622 RULE CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS FOR AMENDMENTS TO

DISTRICT RULES 4621 & 4622

I. REQUIREMENTS FOR RULE CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS

Pursuant to Section 40727.2 of the California Health and Safe ty Code, prior to adopting, amending, or repealing a rule or regulation, the District perf orms a written analysis that identifies and compares the air pollution cont rol elements of the rule or regulation with corresponding elements of existing or proposed District and United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule s, regulations, and guidelines that apply to the same source category. The rule elemen ts analyzed are emission limits; monitoring and testing requirements; recordkeeping and reporting requirements; and operating parameters and work prac tice requirements.

II. ANALYSIS

A. District Rules

There is no other District prohibitory rule or regulation tailored spec ifically for gasoline transfer into stationary storage containers, delivery vessels, bulk plants, and gasoline

transfer into motor vehicle fuel tanks.

B. Federal Rules, Regulations, and Policies

1. EPA Control Techniques Guideline (CTG) Documents 2

i. EPA 450/R-75-102 “ Design Criteria for Stage I Vapor Control Systems –

Gasoline Service Stations ,” dated November 1975 (applicable to Rule 4621)

This document discusses the different c ontrol techniques and establishes the design criteria for controlling VOC emi ssions from gasoline tank filling (federal Stage I sources). The control techniques discussed in this CTG include twopoint systems, concentric or coaxial syst ems, and manifolding the vent lines.

The ACT also states that EPA requires vapor control systems control 90% of the vapors from the St age I side of a gasoline dispensing operation. Currently District Rule 4621 requires ARB’ s certified Phase I vapor recovery systems with more stringent control r equirements (a minimum of 95% of vapor control) than the federal Stage I syst ems. Since all control techniques established by this CTG document are already being implemented and the

amendments to District Rule 4621 do not establish any new design criteria, the District rule is already as stringent as the CTG.

2 Environmental Protection Agency [EPA]: SIP Planning Info rmation Toolkit: Control Techniques Guidelines and Alternative Control Techniques Documents. (2012). Retrieved November 19, 2013 from http://www.epa.gov/glo /SIPToolkit/ctgs.htmlSAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix C: Rule Consisten cy Analysis December 19, 2013

C - 4 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622 iii. EPA 450/2-77-026 “ Guideline for Control of Hydrocarbons from Tank Truck Gasoline Loading Terminals ” dated October 1977 (applicable to Rule 4621)

This CTG is related to the control of VOC emissions from tank truck terminals with daily throughputs of great er than 76,000 liters of gasoline. Since this CTG only applies to the loading of tank trucks, only the sections of District Rule 4621 that apply to tank truck loading will be evaluated.

This CTG identifies the control of VO Cs from tank truck gasoline loading terminals as having an emission limi t of 80 mg-hydrocarbon/L-gasoline loaded. District Rule 4621 requires that the VOC emissions from the transfer of gasoline from a stati onary storage tank to a gas oline tank truck shall be controlled by 95%. The CTG lists the emission factor for hydrocarbon emissions generated during submerged f ill (top or bottom) gasoline loading operations is 600 mg/liter tr ansferred. Therefore, District Rule 4621 emission

limit can be calculated as 30 mg/liter (600 mg/liter x (1 – 0.95)). Since this

emission limit is lower than the one list ed in the CTG, District Rule 4621 is more stringent than this CTG.

iv. EPA 450/2-77-035 “ Guideline for Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from

Bulk Gasoline Plants ” dated December 1977 (applic able to Rule 4621)

This CTG outlines the design of contro l devices to control vapors from the loading and unloading activities at a gasoline bulk plant. The CTG discusses

the effective control of VOC emissions with the installation of submerged fill pipes and vapor control systems. Distr ict Rule 4621 requires that all bulk plants shall be equipped with an ARB certif ied vapor recovery system for the loading racks. In addition, District Rule 4621 also describes inspection procedures to verify that the operat ion is operating leak free. The requirements in District Rule 4621 are equivalent to the control technology discussed in this CTG. Therefore, Distr ict Rule 4621 is at least as stringent

as this CTG.

v. EPA 450/2-78-051 “ Control of Volatile Organic Compounds Leaks from Gasoline Tank, Trucks and Vapor Collection Systems ,” dated December 1978 (applicable to Rule 4621)

This document establishes regulati ons for VOC emissions from vapor recovery systems (federal Stage I sour ces) associated with gasoline delivery trucks, bulk terminals, bulk plants, and gasoline service stations. The approach described in this document is based on good maintenance practices through periodic monitoring and testing of the suspected leak points. Since all control techniques established by this CTG document are already being implemented and the amendments to District Rule 4621 do notSAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix C: Rule Consisten cy Analysis December 19, 2013

C - 5 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622 establish any new design criteria, the Dis trict rule is already as stringent as

the CTG.

2. EPA Alternative Control Techniques (ACT) Document

Based on the EPA ACT list 3 , there is no ACT for this source category.

3. EPA New Source Performance Standard (NSPS)

Based on the NSPS list in 40 CFR 60 4 , there is no NSPS requirements for this
source category.

4. National Emission Standard for Ha zardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) and Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT)

Based on the NESHAP and MACT lists in 40 CFR Part 63 5 , Subparts BBBBBB and CCCCCC are applicable to th is source category.

40 CFR Part 63, Subpart BBBBBB ( National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Category: Gaso line Distribution Bulk Terminals, Bulk Plants, and Pipeline Facilities) establishes national emission limitations and management practices for hazardous air pollutants (HAP) emitted from area source gasoline distribution bulk terminals, bulk plants, and pipeline facilities.

40 CFR Part 63, Subpart CCCCCC ( National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Category: National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categor y: Gasoline Dispensing Facilities) establishes

national emission limitations and management practices for HAPs emitted from the loading of gasoline storage tanks at gasoline dispensing facilities.

EPA finalized approval of the 2007 amendm ents to District Rules 4621 and 4622 on October 30, 2009 and deemed these rules as being at least as stringent as established RACT requ irements: 74 FR 56120, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR -2009-10-30/pdf/E9-26178.pdf.

3 Environmental Protection Agency [EPA]: SIP Planning Info rmation Toolkit: Control Techniques Guidelines and Alternative Control Techniques Documents. (2012). Retrieved November 19, 2013 from http://www.epa.gov/glo /SIPToolkit/ctgs.html

4 Environmental Protection Agency [ EPA]: 40 CFR 60-Standards of Perfor mance for New Stationary Sources (NSPS). (2013). Retrieved November 19, 2013 from http://www.tceq.state.tx .us/permitting/air/rules /federal/60/60hmpg.html

5 Environmental Protection Agency [EPA]: 40 CFR 61-Nati onal Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS). (2012). Retrieved November 19, 2013 from http://www.tceq.texas.gov/permitting/ air/rules/federal/63/63hmpg.htmlSAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix C: Rule Consisten cy Analysis December 19, 2013

C - 6 Final Staff Report with Appendices for

Amendments to Rules 4621 & 4622 Since the requirements of Subpar ts BBBBBB and CCCCCC have not been strengthened since the RACT approval, curr ent District Rules 4621 and 4622 are at least as stringent as NESHAP and MACT standards. In addition, neither subpart has any requi rements for back pressure testing. Therefore, the amendment to District Rule 4621 to reduce the frequency of the dynamic back pressure test from once every twelve m onths to once every five years, does not relax any federal require ments. The amendm ent would actually

reduce VOC emissions inherent to the test procedure.

5. EPA Best Available Control Technology (BACT) Requirements

There are no EPA BACT requirements listed fo r this source category listed in

EPA’s RACT/BACT/LAER Clearinghouse (RBLC): h ttp://cfpub.epa.gov/RBLC/.

6. EPA Policy on Recordkeeping

EPA has a policy that mandat es stationary sources keep and maintain records for at least five years. District Ru les 4621 and 4622 already requires the subject sources to keep and maintain records for five years and the current rule amendments are not relaxing this requirem ent. Therefore, District Rules 4621 and 4622 are as stringent as EPA policy on recordkeeping.

III. CONCLUSION

Based on the above analysis, District staff found that the amendments to District Rules 4621 and 4622 would not conflict with any Distri ct or federal rules, regulations, or policies covering similar stationary sources.