COMMONWEALT H O F MASSACHUSETT S EXECUTIV E OFFIC E O F ENVIRONMENTA L AFFAIR S DEPARTMEN T O F ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N ON E WINTE RSTREET , BOSTON , M A 0210 8 617-292-550 0

MIT T ROMNE

Y Governo r KERR Y HEALE Y Lieutenan t

Governo r ELLE N RO Y HERZFELDE

R Secretar y ROBER T W . GOLLEDGE , Jr . Commissione

r

BACKGROUN D DOCUMEN T AMENDMENT S T O REGULATION S 31 0 CM R7.0 0 FO RTH E CONTRO L O F AI RPOLLUTIO N

ES T TH E

BERKSHIR E AI RPOLLUTIO N CONTRO L DISTRIC T PIONEE RVALLE Y AI RPOLLUTIO N CONTRO L DISTRIC T MERRIMAC K VALLE Y AI RPOLLUTIO N CONTRO L DISTRIC T METROPOLITA N BOSTO N AI RPOLLUTIO N CONTRO L DISTRIC T CENTRA L MASSACHUSETT S AI RPOLLUTIO N CONTRO L DISTRIC T SOUTHEASTER N MASSACHUSETT S AP RPOLLUTIO N CONTRO L DISTRIC T STATUTOR Y AUTHORIT Y M.G.L . c. Ill , Section

s 142 A throug h 142 N FEBRUAR Y 200

4

Thi s informatio n i s availabl e i n alternat e format . Cal l Apre l McCabe , AD A Coordinato rat 1-617-556-1171 . TD D Servic e - 1-800-298-2207 . DE P o n th e Worl d Wid e Web : http://www.mass.gov/de p

Printe d o n Recycle d Pape r

### I . BACKGROUN D Massachusett

s Genera l Laws , Chapte

r 111 , Section s 142A-142N i s th e enablin g legislatio n tha

t give s th e Departmen

t th e authorit y t o adop t regulation s t o prevent , contro l or abat e condition s o f ai r pollution , t

o protect publi c healt

h an d welfare . Th

e Commonwealth' s regulation s fo r th e contro l o f ai r pollutio n ar

e promulgate d a

t 31 0 CM R7.0

0 "Ai r Pollutio n Control " an

d 31 0 CM R 6 0 "Moto r Vehicl e Inspectio n an

d Maintenance" . II . DISCUSSIO N Th e amendments , whic h th

e Departmen

t i s proposin g to adop

t an d submit a s aStat e Implementatio n Pla

n (SIP) revision , ar

e par t o f th e effor t to attai n an

d maintai n th

e healt h an d welfare base

d Nationa l Ambient

Ai r Qualit y Standard

s (NAAQS ) fo r

criteri apollutants . Severa l amendment

s delet e unnecessar

y definitions , expire d regulation s or duplicativ e requirements . Mos t o f th e amendment

s updat e citations , correct

typos , modif

y tex t to clarif y intent , o r reorganize subparagraph

s an d ad d heading s fo r

easie r readability . Fo

r example , th

e Departmen

t i s deletin g th

e outdate d definition s o f

th e Inspectio n an

d Maintenanc e Program , no w located a t 31 0 CM R60.02 ; eliminatin g Table 1 a t 31 0 CM R7.0

2 since i t cause s confusion ; deletin g 31 0 CM R7.03(14 ) Dr

y Cleaning Operations , 31 0 CM R7.0 3 (20 ) Printers , an

d 31 0 CM R7.18(27 ) Coatin g Mixin g Tanks , a

s redundant . Th

e key amendment

s i n th e packag e addres s th

e impacts o f federa l regulation s o n Massachusetts . Specifi c changes include : • Presumptive approva

l o f Limite d Pla

n Application s (LPAs ) • Appendi x A languag

e • Appendi x C modification s • Addressing EP

A concerns wit h recently publishe d 31 0 CM R7.06 ( 1 )(c ) • Requirement

s fo r ne w an d existin g automotiv e refmis h facilitie s • Amen d Departmen

t regulation s to incorporat e curren t Unite d State s Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y (EPA ) NESELA P requirements fo r

testin g material s fo r

Asbesto s • Adop t

31 0 CM R7.5 4 T

T Large Cnmhnstin

n Unit s i n response to EPA' s recen t PSD amendmen

t These amendment

s ar e discusse

d i n greate

r detai l below . A complet e listin g o f

th e amendment

s i s i n th e attache d Propose d Amendment

s document . Presumptiv e approva l o f Limite d Pla n Application s (L P As ) Th e Departmen

t propose s to revis e th

e pla n approva

l proces s i n 31 0 CM R7.02(1 ) b y addin g a ne w section , 31 0 CM R7.02(l)(b) 2 Presumptive Pla n Approvals . A limite d plan applicatio n (LPA ) wil l receive presumptiv e approva l i f th e Departmen

t doe s no t notif y th e applican

t otherwis e withi n 6

0 days . Approval ma

y be denied du

e to administrativ e o

r technica l deficiencies . Th

e Departmen

t ma y als o requir

e awritte n approval . Th

e purpos e o f

thi s chang

e i s t o streamlin

e th e approva l proces s fo r

L P As , whic h typicall y ar

e simple r an d les s complicate d tha n comprehensiv

e pla n application s (CPAs ) t

o review/approve . Presumptiv e approval s wil l reduce paperwor

k and , i n man

y cases , th

e tim e neede

d fo r a n applican

t to receiv e a

n approval . Unde r thi s proposa

l th e L P A must hav e aprofessiona

l engineer' s (PE) stam

p t o demonstrat

e tha t atraine d enginee

r prepare d th e L P A .

lTh

e Departmen

t als o propose s t

o eliminat

e th e exemptio n fo r

operating permi t

facilitie s fro mth

e requiremen

t t o submit L P As . Thi s amendmen

t wil l ensur

e tha t ne w o r modifie d emission unit s i n operatin g permi t

facilitie s mee

t BAC T requirements . 31 0 CM R7.00 : Appendi x A : Th e proposed revisio n to Appendi x A(6) , Emissio n Offsets , an d Non-attainmen

t Review i s intended t o mak e th e section mor

e consisten

t wit h federa

l requirements . 31 0 CM R7.00 : Appendi x C Modifications : Th e purpos e o f

th e propose d amendment

s t o 31 0 CM R7.00 : Appendi x C , Operatin g Permit an d Complianc e Program , i s t o updat e an d clarif y th e requirements , a

s wel l a s improv e consistenc

y wit h th e federa l requirements . Amen d 31 0 CM R7.0

0 Appendi x C(l) , Definitions , b y updating th e definition s o f

Affecte d Stat

e an d Majo r Sourc e i n 31 0 CM R7.0

0 Appendi x C (1) . Thes

e change s ar e necessar

y du e t o changes i n th

e federa l regulations . Simplif y th e requirements i n Appendi x C(8)t o be consisten

t wit h federa

l requirements b y clarifyin g th

e languag e i n Appendi x C(8)(c ) describing whe n amodificatio n o

r othe r chang e i n a facility , whic h require s asignifican t modificatio n to th

e operating permit , ma

y be operate

d prio r t o fina l EP

A action . Updat e th e requirements i n Appendi x C(9)(c) 2 t o operat e continuou s emissio n monitor s (CEM) . Addres s EP A concern

s wit h recentl y published 31 0 CM R7.0 6 (l)(c) : Th e followin g i s asummar

y o f th e significan t

change s proposed fo r

31 0 CM R7.06(l)(c) . Th e requirements fo r

aPla n o f Good Operating Practice s ar e mor e clearl y delineated . Th

e pla n mus t provid e for : • Thir d part

y combustio n exper

t t o develo p th e pla n wit h recommendation s to minimiz e opacity ; • Documentatio n o f

th e nee d fo r differen t opacit y limit s an

d aproposa

l fo r specifi c opacit

y limits ; • Ho w improve d technology , operating an d maintenance procedure s wil l minimiz e emissions ; • Requirements fo r

correctiv e actio n procedure s an d retur n t o compliance ; an

d • Recor d keepin g an

d monitorin g requirements A maximum average opacity limit of 27% is set

for startup, shutdown, soot

blowing and

other specified operating conditions. The Department

must approve Plans of

Good Operating Practice. A forma l approva

l proces s wil l mak

e th e limit s an

d an y terms an

d condition s o f

th e pla n enforceable . The terms and

conditions of

an approved

Plan are required

to be put in the Operating Permit.

2Thi s wil l include th e visibl e emissio n limit s fo r eac h operating even

t fo r whic h th e facilit y seek

s to establish alimi t

greate r tha n 1 5 percent , but

not to excee d 2 7 percent . Sufficien t

condition s to mak e th e limit s enforceabl e suc

h a s monitoring , recor

d keeping , reportin g an

d an y othe r condition s a

s appropriat

e wil l als o be incorporate d int o Operating Permits . Requirement

s fo r ne w an d existin g surface coatin

g facilities : Amendment

s to th e requirement s fo r

automotiv e refmishin g operation s ar e proposed i n 31 0 CMR7.03(16 ) an

d 31 0 CM R7.18(28) . Th e propose d amendment

s simplif y recordkeeping requirements , ad

d language t o 31 0 CM R7.03(16 ) t o allo w th e approva l o f new , innovativ e technology , an

d establis h ane

w limi t fo r surfac e preparation product s formulate d t o clea n ne w plasti c parts . I n additio n t

o th e changes described above , th e followin g amendments , whic h ma y affec t a n automotive refinishin g operation , ar e proposed . I t

i s propose

d t o revis e 31 0 CM R7.03(1 ) to ad d facility-wid e limit s o n emission s o f hazardou s ai

r pollutant (HAP ) o f

1 0 ton s pe

r yea r o f an y on e HAP an d 2 5 ton s pe r yea r o f combine d HAPs . Thi s revisio n wil l provid e facilitie s operatin g unde r 31 0 CM R7.0

3 wit h a n enforceable limi t

on their potentia l to emit HAPs . I t i s als o propose

d t o revis e 31 0 CM R7.2 4 to modif

y th e inspectio n requirement s fo r organi c materia l storag e tanks . Currently , a

n interna l floatin g roo f

wit h asingle sea

l mus t be inspected ever y te n years , whil e a

n internal floatin g roo f

equippe d wit h adouble sea

l mus t be inspected ever y fiv e years . Th

e differenc e i n inspectio n cycle s wa s adopte d du e to amisinterpretatio n o f federa l requirements . Since ther e i s n o technica

l reaso n to inspect

double sea

l version s twic e a

s ofte n a s single sea

l version s o f

floatin g roofs , i t

i s propose

d tha t interna l floatin g roof

s o f eithe r typ e b e inspecte d a t least ever y te n years . Amen d Departmen

tregulation

s t o incorporat

e curren tUnited State

s Environmental Protectio n Agenc y (EPA ) NESHA P requirement s fo r testin

g material s fo r Asbesto

s Th e Massachusett

s Departmen

t o f Environmenta

l Protectio n (DEP) propose s to amen d 31 0 CM R 7.0 0 definition s pertainin g t o th e handlin g o f

Asbesto s an

d correct typo s a t 31 0 CM R7.15 . Thes e amendment

s incorporat

e curren t Unite d States Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y (EPA ) requirements i n th

e Nationa l Emissio n Standard s fo r Hazardou s Ai r

Pollutant s (NESHAP ) applicable to testin g amaterial to determin e i f i t contain s Asbestos . These testin g protocol s reflec t curren t laborator y practice s i n th

e industry . Th

e propose d amendment

s als o includ e change s t o certain regulator

y definition s t

o increas e clarity an

d t o correct typographica

l errors . I n 1990 , EP

A adde d severa l ne w aspect s t o th e Asbesto s NESHAP , includin g amendment s to ke y provision s an

d regulator

y terminology . Mos t

importantly , EP

A revise d it s definition s fo r friabl e asbestos materia

l an d non-friabl e asbestos-containin g materia l to encompas s asbestos-containin g materia l tha t i s greate r tha n on e percen t asbesto s b y are arathe

r tha n greate r tha n on e percen t asbesto s b y weight . To date , DE P ha s no t amende d it s regulation s to reflec t thos e changes . DEP' s curren

t regulation s continu e to reflec t EPA' s forme

r "on e percen t asbesto s b y weight " test , althoug

h DEP' s operationa

l practic e ha

s bee n to us e EPA' s on

e percen t asbesto s b y are

afo r bul k samples , whic h i s th

e curren t laborator y practic e i n th

e industry . DE P recently reviewe d asbesto s remova l practice s i n th

e industry , asbesto s testin g methodologie s

3an

d laborator

y practices . DEP' s revie w include d a n analysi s o f

th e variou s methodologie s available fo r

testin g materia

l t o determin

e i f i t contain s asbestos . DE

P concluded tha

t EPA' s Polarize d Ligh t

Microscop y (PLM ) are

atest method , publishe d after

EPA' s 199

0 Asbesto s NESHA P amendment

, i s th e metho d mos t

widel y use

d b y environmenta

l laboratorie s i n measurin g asbestos conten

t i n bul k samples . Therefore , DE P i s proposin g to amen

d 31 0 CM R 7.0 0 t o requir e th e regulated communit

y to us e EPA' s approve

d testin g methodologies . Thes e amendment

s woul d rende

r Massachusetts ' Asbesto s regulation s consisten t wit h EPA' s testin g methodologies , a

s reflecte d i n th

e Asbesto s NESHAP . Adopt310 CM R7.5

4 T T T arg e Combustio

n Emission Uni ti n respons e t o EPA' s recen

t PS D amendment

s EP A adopte d amendment

s to th e Preventio n o f

Significant

Deterioratio n (PS D - 40 CF R 52.21 ) regulatio n tha

t ha d th e effec t o f relaxin g th

e applicabilit

y t o 31 0 CM R7.02(5 ) an

d complicatin g applicabilit

y determination s fo r

certai n categorie s o f

majo r source s to PS D review . I n orde r t o assur e tha t a t leas t th e largest o f thes e facilitie s wil l stil l b e require d to receive Departmen t approval , i t

i s propose d t o adop t

31 0 CM R 7.5 4 T

T Larg e Combustio n Emissio n Units . Th e propose d regulatio n reinstate s th

e requiremen

t tha t certain modification s a

t Larg e Combustio n Emissio n Unit s b

e approve d unde r 31 0 CM R7.02(5) . Thes e ar e th e emission unit s tha

t generall y hav e th e highes t emissions . Th

e amendment

s wil l appl

y t o large municipal wast

e combustor

s an d large boilers , includin g electri c utilit y generatin g units . Effectiv e July 1 , 1982 , th e Departmen

t becam e th e implementin g agenc

y fo r th e PS D progra

mi n Massachusett

s throug h aMemorandumo f Agreemen

t (MOA) . Th

e recen t amendment

s t o th e PSD progra

mwer e effectiv e Marc h 3 , 2003 fo r states lik e Massachusett

s wit h delegate

d PS D programs . Th

e Departmen

t returne d implementatio n o f th e PS D progra

mt o EP A o n Februar

y 27 , 2003 . State s tha t implemen

t PS D throug h regulation s tha t ar e par t o f their Stat e Implementatio n Plan s (SJJPs ) hav e thre e year s to adop t thes e same , o

r equivalent , amendments . Simila r changes ar

e require d t o non-attainmen

t ne w sourc e revie w (NSR

) regulation s withi n three years . Th e Departmen

t recommends atwo-phas e approac h t o addres s th

e neede d regulatio n changes . Durin g phas

e I th e propose d regulation s (31 0 CM R7.54 ) wil l be adopted . Thi s wil l assur e th e largest facilitie s tha

t wer e exempte

d fro mth e ne w federa l PS D progra

mwil l stil l be subject

t o revie w unde

r stat e NS R regulations . Durin g phas

e I I th e Departmen

t wil l propos e t

o adop t it s own PS D regulation s an d amen d it s non-attainmen

t NS R regulatio n (31 0 CM R7.00 : Appendi x A) . Durin g thi s phase , th e Departmen

t wil l wor k throug h STAPPA , an

d wit h othe

r states , to ensur

e th e regulation s ar

e equivalen t t o EP A requirements . Thi s phas e wil l b e completed withi n th

e three-yea

r timeframe .

4III . ECONOMI C IMPACT S

Mos t o f th e propose d amendment

s wil l hav e littl e i f an y economi

c impact becaus e the y simpl y streamline , correct , o

r clarif y existin g regulations , an d brin g th e Department' s regulation s int o lin e wit h th

e federa l requirements an

d curren t industr y practic e i n th

e cas e o f th e propose d change s t o th e asbestos relate d definitions . Changin g th e Limite d Pla

n Applicatio n to apresumptiv e approva l wil l hav e ahav e afavorabl e impact fo r facilitie s since the

y wil l generall

y be abl e to procee

d wit h propose

d change s a t th e facilit y mor

e quickly . I t

wil l als o sav

e th e Departmen

t time preparing individua l approva l letter s fo r eac h application . Changin g th e inspectio n frequenc y fo r larg e tanks fro m5 year

s t o 1 0 year s wil l sav e th e gasolin e marketing industr

y time an d th e cos t o f drainin g an

d purgin g th

e tanks . IV . ENVIRONMENTA L IMPACT S Th e primar y impac t o f these amendment

s wil l be to clarify , reduc e inconsistency/duplication , o r streamlin e th e requirements contained i n th e existin g regulations . Therefore , th e propose d change s wil l no t hav e asignifican t

environmenta

l impact . V . IMPACT S O N OTHE RPROGRAM S Toxics Us

e Reduction Implementatio n o f

toxic s us e reductio n i s aDepartment-wid e priority . Toxic s us

e reductio n i s define d a s in-plan t practice s tha

t reduce or

eliminat e th e tota l mas s o f

contaminants discharge

d t o th e environment . These amendment s ar e no t expecte d to impac t

o n tha t effort . Ai r Toxic s I n th e past, ai r pollutio n contro l programs hav e focuse d o n th

e six criteri apollutants : particulat e matter , nitrogen oxides , sulfu r dioxide , ozone , carbon monoxide , an d lead . Recentl

y concer n ha s bee n raised ove

r th e component

s o f air pollutio n tha

t ar e no t specificall y regulated b y programs develope d t o contro l criteri apollutants . These compounds ar e collectivel y know n a

s ai r toxics . Th e healt h effect s o f

ai r toxic s ar e wid e rangin g an

d ca n var y fro mlong-ter

mcarcinogenic effect s t o short-ter

madvers e healt h effects . Th e CA A require s th

e EP A to promulgat

e contro l strategie s fo r

source s o f toxi c ai r emissions . Th e Departmen

t intend s to implemen

t thos e standards a

s promulgate d b y th

e EPA . Unti l tha

t time , th e Departmen

t wil l generall

y contro l ai

r toxic s throug h programs aimed a t controllin g th

e traditional criteri apollutants . I n s o far a s thes e proposed amendment s furthe r limi t emission s o f CO , VO C an

d NO x , the

y als o limi t

emission s o f

ai r toxics .

5Impact s o n Citie s an

d Town s (Proposition 2 1/2

) Pursuan t t o Executiv e Orde

r 145 , th e Departmen

t must assess th e fisca l impact

o f ne w regulation s o

n th e commonwealth' s municipalities . Th e Executiv e Orde

r wa s issue d i n respons

e to Propositio n 2 1/2 . MG L c . 2 9 § 27C(a ) tha t require s th

e stat e t o reimburs e municipalitie s fo r cost s incurre d a

s aconsequenc

e o f ne w stat e law s an d regulations . Propositio n 2 1/

2 require s th

e stat e to reimburs e th

e citie s an

d town s fo r

th e additiona

l cos t incurre d b y stat

e regulations . Sinc

e these regulation s wil l no t burde n municipalitie s wit h additiona l costs , reimbursemen

t pursuan t t o Propositio n 2 1/

2 i s no t necessary . MEP A Thi s propose

d actio n i s "categorically exempt " fro mth e "Regulation s Governing th e Preparation o f Environmenta

l Impact Reports" , 30 1 CM R 11.00 , becaus e th e propose d amendment

s wil l resul t i n a n overall increas e i n emission controls . Al l reasonabl e measure

s hav e bee n take n t o minimiz e advers

e impacts . Agricultural Impact

s Massachusett

s Genera l Laws , Chapte

r 30A , Sectio n 1 8 require s stat e agencies t

o evaluat e th e impact o f propose d programs on agricultur e withi n th

e Commonwealth . A s th

e propose d amendment

s affec t onl y industrial facilities , th e Departmen

t ha s determined tha

t th e propose d regulation s wil l hav

e n o advers e impac t o n agricultur

e i n Massachusetts . Th

e onl y impact

on agricultur e wil l b e beneficial , a

s th e progra mwil l hel

p Massachusett

s to attain th

e NAAQ S fo r ozone , thu s lowerin g cro

p damag e attributabl e to hig h ozon e concentration s i n th

e summer. V I IMPLEMENTATIO N Thes e amendment

s ar e not expecte d to ad d significantl y t

o th e Department' s workloa d since th e majority o f

th e change s clarif y o r correct th e existin g regulations . I n genera l the y clarif y existin g requirements . Wher

e the y ad d additiona

l requirements , th

e amendment

s generall y upgrad e th e enforceabilit

y o f th e regulations .

V I PUBLI C PARTICIPATIO N A s require d b y M.G.L . c 30A , th e Departmen

t give s notic e an

d provide s th

e opportunit

y t o revie w backgroun

d an d technica

l informatio n a

t least 2 1 days prio r

t o proposing th

e regulatio n amendment

s a t apubli c hearing . T o assur e mor e adequat e notic e fo r

processin

g arul e a s a n amendmen

t t o th e SEP , forma l notic e wil l b e issue d 3 0 days befor

e th e publi c hearing s whic h wil l b e held : Februar

y 11 , 200 4 i n Springfiel d an

d Februar y 12 , 200 4 i n Boston . Th

e hearing recor

d wil l b e kep t ope n unti l th e clos e o f busines s o n Februar

y 20 , 2004 .

6