Yo lo -So la no Ai r Qua li tyM ana gement D is trict

194 7 Ga li le o C ourt, Su ite10 3 Da v is , CA 95 618 (530 )757 -365 0 w w w .ysa qmd .o rg



## PR OPO SED A M EN D M EN TS TO

RUL E 2
. 3 , RI NGE L MA NN CHA RT RUL E 2
. 1 1 , P A RT I CUL AT E MAT T ER CONCE NT RAT I ON R U LE 2. 12, SPEC I FI C CO N TA M I N A N TS

A ND RE PE A L O F RUL E 2
. 4 , E XE MPT I ONS RU LE 2
. 7, WET PL UM ES

F I NAL S TA F F RE PO RT

De cembe r 29 , 20 09

Pre pare d b y : Ky leR ohl f in g, Asso ci ate Ai r Qua li tyE ngin eer Re v ie wed by : Su san M cLa ughl in , S upe rv is in g Ai r Qua li tyE ngin eerTa b l e o f C o n t e n t s P a ge

I

. E X E C U T I V E S U M M A RY

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 A

. B A C K G R O U N D

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 I I

. D I S C U S S I ON O F P R OP OS E D R U L E 2

. 3 , 2

. 1 1 , A N D 2

. 1 2 A M E N D M E N TS

. . . . . . . . . 4 I I I

. C OM P A R I S ON T O OT H E RA P P L I C A B L E R E GU LATI ON S A N D R E QU I R E M E N TS

. . 6 I V

. I M P A C TS O F T H E P R OP OS E D R U L E A M E N D M E N TS

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 V. ENVIRO NM ENTAL IM PACT S OF M ET HODS O F COMP LIANCE

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 V I

. R E G U LAT O RYF I N D I N G S

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 VII

. PUBLIC COMM ENT S AND STAFF RESPONSES

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

ATTA C H M E N T A P R OP OS E D A M E N D M E N TS T O R U L E 2

. 3 , R I N GE L M A N N C H A RT,

RU LE 2.1 1 PARTICULATE M ATTER CONC EN TRATION, A ND 2.1 2 SPECIFI C CONTAM INANT S; ST RIKE- OUT UNDERLINE VERSIONS AT TACHM ENTB NOT ICE O F EXEMPTI ON FRO M CEQA GUI DELINES ATTACH M EN T C RE SOLU TIO N NO. 1 0-01 AT TACHM ENTD W RIT T EN COM M ENT S RECEIVEDFi nal St affR epor t- R ul e 2. 3, 2. 4, 2. 7, 2. 11, & 2. 12 D ecem ber29, 200 9

Pa ge 3 I. EXECUT IVE SUMM A RY On January 13, 2010 , the Yolo- Solano Air Q uality M anag em ent Distr ict (Dist rict ) Board of Director ’s w il l con si der the prop ose d a mend ments to R ul e 2 .3, 2 .11, and 2.1 2, a nd the reco mmende d re pea l of Rul es 2.4 and 2.7

. The rul es app ly to any sou rce of v is ib le emi ssi onsan d p arti cul ate emi ssi on con cen trati on w ith in theD is trict. The pro pos ed rul e a mend ments a r e t he f irs t i n ase rie s o f parti cul ate matter regul ati on cha nges that w il l be devel ope d in the next few y ears as pa rtof the S ta te ma n d a te d “ a l l fea si b l e me a su re s” re quirem ent fo r a i r d i st ri ct s th a t d o n o t me e t th e S ta te parti cul at e m at t er stand ard, w hi ch in cl ude s Yol o-S ol anoA QM D. These rev is io ns were id enti f ie d by the Board for f utur e adoption dur ing a July 2005 public hear ing as req uired by Senat e Bil l (SB) 6 5 6 t o a d o p t th e l i sto f me a su re s for p a rt i cu l a te ma tt e r re d u ct i o n a s re qui re d b yC a l i forn i a H e a l th and S afetyC ode(C H& SC ) §3 961 4. These parti cul ar ru le s were id enti f ie d a s one of the f irs t to be con si dere d beca useco mpl ia nceca n be ach ie v ed w ith out add it i o n a l e mi s s i o n co n t ro l s
. O rdi nary an d c usto marymai nten anc e p roce dure s al read yuti li z ed by

ou r so urce s s hou ld res ul t i n com pli an ce , asha s b een sh ow n b yne w an d mo d i fie d p e rmi t h o l ders who ha v e a l re a d yb e e n re qui re d t o c o mp l yw i th t h e sel o we r l i mi ts

. I n add iti on, thes e p ropo sed l imi ts a re a lre ady i n p la ce throu ghout much of Cal iforni a. The mai n a mend ments to th e ru le s a re: 1 ) F o r R u l e 2 .3 , R i n gel ma n n C h a rt a. v is ib leemi ssi onsl imi twas lo wer ed f rom tha t w hi ch isequa l to N o. 2 on the Ri ngel mann C hart (40% opa ci ty ), to that whic h i s e qual to No . 1 (20%) on the R i n gel ma n n C h a rt

. b. exempti onsl is ted in ex is tin g D is trict Ru le s 2.4, Exempti onsan d 2 .7, W et P lu mes were in corp orate d i nto Ru le2.3

. c. new exempti onsad ded w hi ch are co ns istent w ith exempti onsco ntai ned i n th e CH&SC. 2) F or R ul e 2 .11, Pa rtic ul ate M atter Co nce ntrati on and Ru le2.1 2, S pec ific Co ntami nan ts, th e p a rt i cu l a te ma tt e r co n ce n tra tion wa s l o we re d fro m 0 .3 gra i n s p e r cu b i c foo t o f gast o 0 .1 gra i n s p e r cu b i c foo t o f gas

. M in or p ropo sed amendmen ts inc lu de cha ngin g the format of these thre e ru le s torefle ct th e c urren t rul e formatti ng, i .e. i ncl udean Ind ex , ad d th e Ge nera l, De f in iti ons , an d S tand ardsse cti ons
. The D is trict i s a ls o prop osi ng t he rep eal of Rul es 2.4, Exempti onsan d 2 .7, W et P lu mes b eca use al l of the li sted exempti onsw il l now ap pea r i n a sso ci ated R ul e 2 .3. TheD i st ri ctd o e s n o t e x p e ctt h e p ro p o se d r u l e c h a n gest o h a v e either a s ign i fic a n t n o r a detr iment al ef

fecton the envi ronm ent. The refore, st af f has pr epared a Not ice of Exem ption (NO E) to s ati sfy the Ca li forni a En v iro nmen tal Qual ity Act (CE QA) requi rements

. The NOE state s that the ado pti on of thes e p ropo sed rul e a mend ments isexempt f rom therequi rementsof CE QA p ursu ant to S ecti on 153 08, Acti onsby R egul atory

Agenci es for P rotectio n o f theE nv iro nmen tFi nal St affR epor t- R ul e 2. 3, 2. 4, 2. 7, 2. 11, & 2. 12 D ecem ber29, 200 9

Pa ge 4 A
. BACKGRO UND R u l e 2 .3 , R i n gel ma n n C h a rt The p ropo sed amen dmen t lowers the al lowabl e v is ib leemi ssi on le v el s o f most pol lu tio n e mitti ng dev ic es to R in gelman n N o.1 (20% opa ci ty ) from our curre nt l imi t of Ri ngel mann N o. 2 (4 0% o p a ci ty ) w h i c h wa s a d o p t e d i n 1 9 7 2

. T h e o p a c i ty p e rc e n t a g e a n d R i n g e l m a n n n u m b e r a re measu res of the amou nt o f l ight prevente d from pas si ng throu gh a pl ume. Li ght col ored pl umes s u c h a s d u s tfro m a c e me n ts i l o a re ty p i c a l l ye x p re s s e d i n opa c i tyw h i l e d a r k c o l o re d s mo ke p l u me s a re e x p re ss e d a s R i n gel ma n n n u mb e rs
. Theva stma

jo ri ty o f C a l i forn i a b u si n e ss e s h a v e b e e n l i mi te d to 2 0 % op a ci ty for we l l o v e r 1 0 ye a rs and the proposed li mit is already in place in many of the othe r air distr icts. Visi ble emissions of air pol lu tio n o ccu r aspo in t so urce emiss io ns and f ugiti v e e miss io ns f rom a w id e vari ety of acti v iti es, su ch a s co n v e y i n g, c ru sh i n g, c u tt i n g, gr i n d i n g, s cre e n i n g, e tc

. R u l e s 2 .1 1 , P a rt i cu l a te M a tt e r C o n ce n tra ti o n a n d 2 .1 2 , S p e ci ficC o n ta mi n a n ts T hese ru les li mitthe part iculate ma tt er conc entr ations thatany given proces s may emit. Lik e Rule 2.3, the limits would be l owered to mat ch thos e thathav e been in place in many other California di stri cts for ma ny

years
. The c urren t rul es li mit the parti cul ate matter e miss io ns to 0 .3 grain per cub icfoot o f gas cal cul ated
2 to 12 perc ent of carb on di ox id e (CO ) at stan dard co ndi tio ns. E PA emi ssi on facto rs i ndi cate tha t l i qui d a n d gas -fue l e d bo i l e rsan d gas tur b i n e s a l re a d yco mp l yw i th t h e p ro p o se d l o we r l i mi t o f 0. 1 gra i n p e r cu b i c foo t e mi ss i o n l i mi t co n ta i n e d i n t h e “ a l l fea si b l e me a su re ” l i st

. I I
. DI SC US SI O N O F PR O PO SE D RU LE A M EN DM EN TS Liste d beloware d esc ription s o f thep rop ose d amen dmen ts to : R u le2 .3 , R in g e lma n n C h a rt
. Se cti on 100 Genera l S e ct i o n 1 0 1 - P u rp o se : The p u rp o se o f th i s ru l e i s to l i mi t th e e mi ss i o n o f v i sible air co n ta mi n a n ts t o t h e a tmo sp h e re
. Se cti on 102 - A ppl ic abi li ty : Thi s ru leap pl ie s toan yso urce op erati on w hi ch emi ts o r may e mi t a i r co n ta mi n a n ts

. Sect ion 110 - Exem ptions - Gene ral: This sec tion was added to the rule to incor pora te all of the exem ptions listed in the CH&SC , w hich includes the exempt ions previously li ste d in R u l e s 2 .4 a n d 2 .7

. Se cti on 111 - Exempti ons- Li mite d: Thi s secti on was add ed to th e ru leto li st s ourc es ofFi nal St affR epor t- R ul e 2. 3, 2. 4, 2. 7, 2. 11, & 2. 12 D ecem ber29, 200 9

Pa ge 5 emi ssi onsw hi ch are not exempt f rom o pac ity sta nda rds al together, but are sub ject toa le ss res tr ictive opacity sta ndard as li ste d in the CH&SC. Se cti on 200 De f in iti ons Se ct ion 201
- De f ini t ion s o f abr as ive bl as t ing , ca r bo na ce ou s m at er ial , obs cu ran t , opa ci ty, t ee pe e bu r ne r , and visib le a ir co nt am ina nt s h ave bee n ad de d for ru le c lar ity. S e ct i o n 3 0 0 S ta n d a rd Se cti on 301 .1: The pre v io us v is ib leemiss io n li mit to R in gelman n 2 (40 % op aci ty ) ha s b een retai ned for sou rcessu bject to th e l imi ted exempti on. S e ct i o n 3 0 1 .2 : Ther u l e a me n d me n t l o we rst h e a l l o wa b l e v i si ble em issi o n l i mi t to Ri ngel mann 1 (20% opa ci ty ) for al l sou rcesno r l is ted und er th e gen eral or li mite d exempti ons
. Se cti on 400 M oni tori ng Se cti on 401 - Test M etho d: E PA Test M etho d 9 h as bee n l is ted as the prop er te st meth od to veri f yco mpl ia ncew ith the rule

. The ruleitsel f does no t speci f ic al ly

req ui re te sti ng of any so u rc e
. Ru le 2 .11, Pa rticula te Ma tter Co nce ntra tion Se cti on 100 Genera l Se cti on 101 - Pu rpos e: The purp ose of th is rul e is to esta bl is h a parti cul ate matter e miss io n st a n d a rd

. Se cti on 102 - Ap pl ic abi li ty : Thi s ru leap plies to a ny so urce op erati on w hi ch emi ts o r may e mi t d u st , fume s, o r to ta l s u sp e n d e d p a rt i cu l a te ma tt e r. Se cti on 200 De f in iti ons Se ct ion 201 - A de f ini t ion for part ic ula t e m at t er

has bee n ad de d for

ru le c lar ity. S e ct i o n 3 0 0 S ta n d a rd Se cti on 301 - Re q ui rement: The ru leame ndme nt l owers the al lowabl e p arti cul ate matter e mi ss i o n l i mi t to0 .1 gra i n s p e r cu b i c foo t o f gasa t d ry s ta n d a rd c o n d i ti o n s. Se cti on 400 M oni tori ng Se cti on 401 - Test M etho ds: Ap pl ic abl e EP A and CAR B test method s h av e b een l is ted for d e te rmi n a ti o n o f ex h a u sts ta ck gasv e l o ci ty , e x haustst ack gasmo i st u re , a n d p a rt i cu l a te matter e miss io ns, w hi ch may bene ede d to d etermi ne compl ia ncew ith therul e s tand ard.Fi nal St affR epor t- R ul e 2. 3, 2. 4, 2. 7, 2. 11, & 2. 12 D ecem ber29, 200 9

Pa ge 6 Ther u l e d o e s n o t sp e ci fic a l l yre qui re t e st i n g o f an ys o u rc e
. R u le2 .1 2 , S p e c if icC o n ta min a n ts Se cti on 100 Genera l Se cti on 101 - Pu rpos e: T he pu rpos e of this rul e isto esta bl is h p arti cul ate matter a nd sul f ur co mp o u n d e mi ss i o n s ta n d a rd s. Se cti on 102 - Ap pl ic abi li ty : Thi s ru leappli es to a ny so urce op erati on w hi ch emi ts o r may emi t gaseo us sul f ur c ompo und s a nd combu sti on con tami nan ts. Se cti on 110 - Exempti ons : The prov is io ns of t his rul e d o n ot a ppl yto the start of an ope rati on or cha nge in ene rgy sou rce, or d uri ng the ti me n ece ssa ryto bri ng the co mbusti on p ro ce ssu p t o t h e o p e ra ti n g l e v e l

.. Se cti on 200 De f in iti ons Se ct ion 201 - A de f ini t ion for co m bu st ion co nt am ina nt s h as bee n ad de d for ru le c lar ity. S e ct i o n 3 0 0 S ta n d a rd Se cti on 301 - Re quire ment: The rul e a mend ment lowers t he al lowabl e c ombu sti on con tami na n te mi s s i o n l i mi tt o 0

. 1 gra i n s p e r c u b i cfo o to f ga s a td rys t a n d a rd c o n d i t i o ns. Se cti on 400 M oni tori ng

2 Se cti on 401 - Co mpl ia nceD etermi nati on: A state ment dec la rin g that the CO pro duc ed f rom co mbusti on of any l iqui d o r gaseo us f uel s sha ll beexcl ude d from the ca lc ul ati on to 1 2
2 p e rc e n t o f C O w h e n me a su ri n g c o mb u st i o n c o n ta mi nant s from i n ci n e ra to rsu se d t o di spo se of combu sti bl e re f use by burn in g h as bee n mov ed f rom thesta nda rd s ecti on of the rul e tothemon ito rin g secti on. Se cti on 402 - Test M etho ds: Ap pl ic abl e EP A and CAR B test method s h av e b een l is ted for d e te rmi n a ti o n o f ex h a u sts ta ck g as vel oci ty , e x h a u sts ta ck gasmo i st u re , a n d p a rt i cu l a te matter e miss io ns, w hi ch may bene ede d tode termin e compl ia ncew ith therul e s tand ard. Ther u l e d o e s n o t sp e ci fic a l l yre qui re t e st i n g o f an ys o u rc e
. I I I
. CO M PA RI SO N TO O THERA PP LI CA BL E RE G UL A TIO NS A ND REQ UI RE M EN TS CH &S C Se cti on 407 27.2 requi res di stri cts to p erform aco mparati v e a lte rnati v e a nal ysi s o f any new cont rol sta ndard. Specif ically , the Districtis req uired to prep are a w ritt en analysis that id enti f ie s a ll ex is tin g fede ral air pol lu tio n contro l requi rementsinc lu di ng, bu t no t l imi ted to, e miss io n c ontro l stan dard s c ons tit ut in g best avai la bl e c ontro l tech nol ogy(B AC T) that app li es to th e s ame equi pmen t or sou rce ty pe as the rul e o r regul ati on pr opo sed for ado pti on or mo di f ic ati on by theD is trict. In ad di tio n, the an alysi s s hal l id enti f yan yoth erFi nal St affR epor t- R ul e 2. 3, 2. 4, 2. 7, 2. 11, & 2. 12 D ecem ber29, 200 9

Pa ge 7 Distr ict rule or reg ulation thatapplies to the sam e eq uipme nt or sourc e type. The analysis sha ll co mpare the fol low in g spec ific el emen ts: E x i st i n g B A C T R e qui re me n ts T he stan dard s of

all thre e of

these r ules are m eantt o ap ply gen erally to sour ces of v isible emi ssi onsan d gase oussu lfur co mpou nds/ p a r t i c u l a t e ma tter c ombu sti on con tami nan ts a nd are not li mite d toan ysp eci f icequi pmen t or sou rce ty pe. A lth ou g h t he r e are many stan dard s for sp eci f ic so urce ty pesi n fede ral regul ati ons , theD is trict i s u naware of any ex is tin g fede ral emi ssi on con t rol standard s c ons titu tin g BA CT w hi ch can beap pl ie d g en erall y. C o mp a ri so n w i th S ta te R e qui re me n ts CH &S C § 417 01 sets a gen eral standa rd that v is ib leemiss io ns f rom a ny so urce sh al l not b e a s d a rk o r d a rke r i n sh a d e a s th a t d e si gna te d a s N o
. 2 o n th e R i n gel ma n n C h a rtfor a p e ri o d o r p e ri o d s a ggre gat i n g mo re t h a n th re e mi n u te s i n a n y o n e h o u r. Thi s i s th e s a me stan dard astha t of the ex is tin g Rul e 2 .3 w hi ch the Di stri ct is pro pos in g to re v is e toa lower accep table st andard. T he Districtbelieves thatestablishing a l ower st andard may aid in re a ch i n g a n d /o r ma i n ta i n i n g a tt a i n me n t st a tu s for cri te ri a po l l u ta n ts an d may a l sol e a d t o redu ctions in the em issions of t oxi c a ir c onta minan ts. T he CH&SC sect ion does not pro hibit the Di stri ct from esta bl is hi ng a more stri ngent stan dard for v is ib leemi ssi onsopaci tyexcep t for s pec ific sou rcesof emi ssi ons , for w hi ch excep tio ns have b een inclu ded i n th e a me n d me n ts

. IV. IMPACT S OF T HE P ROPOS ED R UL E E mi ss i o n s Imp a ct s Vi si bl e e miss io ns and co mbusti on ai r co ntami nan ts a re e mitted i n the form o f smoke or d ust as poi nt sou rce emi ssi onsor f ugiti v e e miss io ns f rom a w id e vari ety of acti v iti es. F or ma ny of these sour ces, reduct ions in crit eria pollutantand toxic air cont am inant em issions should resu lt f rom o rdi nary

an d c usto marymai nten anc e p roce dure s. Un der the auth ori tyof Di stri ct Ru le3.4 (N ew

S ourc e R ev ie w ) the Di stri ct has al read y bee n app ly in g the prop ose d l ower stan dard s toan yne w or modi f ied p er m itted sou rce for s ome time soan yemi ssi ons re d u ct i o n s wo u l d c o me fro m s o u rc e s w h i ch h a v e n o t mo d i fie d a P e rmi t toOp e ra te ( P TO) for a l o n g p e ri o d o r so u rc e s w h i ch h a v e n o t o b ta i n e d a va l i d P TO. Co st E f fecti v ene ss CH &S C Se cti on 407 03 requi res the Di stri ct, i n t he p roc ess of the ado pti on of any re g u l a t i o n , t o c o n s i d e r

a n d m a kep u b l i ci t s f i n d i n g s re l a t e d t o t h e c o s te ffe ct i v e n e s s o f a con trol mea sure . C ost effecti v ene ss for ru le making pu rpos es isca lc ul ated by di v id in g the cos t of ai r po ll uti on con trol s re quire d b ytherul e b ytheamo unt of ai r po ll uti on redu ced

. As d i sc u ss e d a b ove , th e p ro p o se d s ta n d a rd s sh o u l d b e a ch i e v a b l e t h ro u gh o rd i n a ry ope rati on and mai nten anc e p roce dure s, th erefore th ere are no cos ts o f co mpl ia nceFi nal St affR epor t- R ul e 2. 3, 2. 4, 2. 7, 2. 11, & 2. 12 D ecem ber29, 200 9

Pa ge 8 ex pected and co st e f

fecti v ene ss eval uati onsareno t requi red. S o ci o e co n o mi c Imp a ct s CH&SC Sect ion 40728. 5 (a) req uires the Distr ict, in the process of the adop tion of any rule or re gula tio n, to con si der the soc io eco nomi c imp act if ai r qual ity or emi ssi on li mits may be si gni fic a n tl ya ffe ct e d

. H o we v e r, d i st ri ct s w i th a p o p u l a ti o n o f l e sst h a n 50 0 ,0 0 0 pe rs o n s a re exempt f rom the prov is io ns of Sectio n 4 072 8.5 (a). The D is trict’spo pul ati on ises tima ted to b e a ppro x ima tel y32 5,000 and wel l bel ow the50 0,00 0 p erso n th resh ol d. Therefore, so ci o e co n o mi c a n a l yse s for th i s ru l e ma ki n g a re n o t re qui re d

. Incre mental C ost Effecti v ene ss CH &S C Se cti on 40 920 .6 require s an asse ssmen t of the inc rementa l co st-effecti v ene ss for p ro p o se d re gul a ti o n s re l a ti v e t o o z o n e , C a rb o n M o n o x i d e ( C O), S u l fur O xi des( S Ox ), Ni trogen Ox id es (NOx ), an d th ei r pre curs ors. Inc rementa l cos t-effecti v ene ss isde f in ed as t h e d if fe re n c e i n c o n t ro l c o s t s d iv id e d b y t h e di f fe re n c e in em is s io n re d u ct io n s be twe e n two pote nti al co ntrol op tio ns that can achi ev e the same emi ssi on redu cti on goal of a regul ati on. There are no cos ts o f

co mpl ia nceex pected for c ompl ian ce wit h th esepro pos ed rul es stan dard s th erefore i ncre mental co st e f fecti v ene ss eval uati onsareno t requi red. Impactsto the Di stri ct The D is trict ha s a lre ady be en requi rin g th e lower stan dard s f rom many pe rmitted so urce s und er th e a utho rity

of Ru le3.4 , the refore thepro pos ed amen dmen ts w il l h ave li ttleto no imp act on staf

f wor k load. It isex pected that any ad di tio nal work l oad ca n b e a bso rbed w ith in theD is trict’sE ngin eeri ng Di v is io n.
V. ENVIRO NMENTA L IM PACT S OF METHODS O F COM PLIA NCE Ca li forni a P ubl icR eso urce Co de Se cti on 211 59 requi res the Di stri ct (a t theti me o f ad opti ng a ru lerequi rin g the in stal la tio n of p ol lu tio n c ontro l equi pmen t, or a p erformance stan dard ) to p erform an env iro nmen tal an al ysi s o f therea son abl yforesee abl e me thod s o f compl ia nce
. The ana lysi s must in cl ude the fol low in g i nformatio n for th e pr op ose d amen dmen ts toR ul e 2 .3, 2 .11, and 2.1 2:
a. An an al ysi s o f

therea son abl yforesee abl e e nv iro nmen tal i mpactsof the meth ods of compl ia nce
. b. An an al ysi s o f

therea son abl yforesee abl e mi tigati on measu res.
c. An an al ysi s o f

therea son abl y fores eea bl e al terna tive mean s of c ompl ia nce w ith the rul e o r regul ati on. Tab l e 1 l i s t s a l l re a s o n a b l yfo re s e e a b l e c o m p l i a n c e m e t h o d s , t h e e n v i ro n m e n t a l i m p a ct sFi nal St affR epor t- R ul e 2. 3, 2. 4, 2. 7, 2. 11, & 2. 12 D ecem ber29, 200 9

Pa ge 9 of th ose method s, and measu res that cou ld be use d tomi tigate the env iro nmen tal i mpacts

.
TA BL E 1. En v iron menta l Impa cts, Mitigation Mea sures, and A lterna tives Co mplian ce Metho ds R e a s o n a b ly F o re s e e a b le E n v iro n me n ta l Imp a c ts R e a s o n a b ly F o re s e e a b le Mitigation Mea sures 1

. S w i tc h t o alter nate f uel. 2. In stal la tio n o f con trol equi pmen t (cy cl one , bagho use , wet sc ru b b e r, e tc .) 3. U se of water or che mica l sup pres san t sp rays 4

. A l te rn a te ope rati ona l practic es (adju sti ng ai r/f uel mixture, al teri ng a i rfl o w ra te , e tc .) Air Quality Im pact s: Pot entially

dec reas ed ai r po ll uti on emi ssi ons
.

Ad opti on of water con servati on pol ic ie s tomi tigate in crea sed us e of water for water spra y sup pres si on, if di f

feren t from ex is tin g practi ces
.
Ha z ardo us waste di spo sal program n ece ssa ryfor di spo sal of to x i c so l i d wa st e ge n e ra te d w i th u seo f co n tro l e qui p me n t. W ater Impacts : Inc reas ed useof water for water spra ysu ppre ssi on.

Hu man He al th Impa cts: P oten tia l decrease in emissions of toxic air con tami nan ts re sul tin g in i mprov ed h u ma n h e a l th i n t h e D i st ri ct

. So li d W aste D is pos al Impa cts: In cre a se d ge n e ra ti o n o f so l i d wa st e w i th u seo f co n tro l e qui p me n t.

T his analysis demo nst rat es the adopt ion of amend me nts to Ru le 2. 3, 2.11 , and 2.1 2 w ill not have a si gnifica nt effect on the env iro nmen t or huma ns due to u nus ual ci rcumsta nce s. In a ddi tio n, th eseame ndme nts to th e p ropo sed rul es ar e an acti on taken topro tect the env iro nmen t. The refore, sta f f ha v e d etermi ned tha t the project i s categori cal ly ex empt f rom the requi rementsof the Ca li forni a E nv iro nmen tal Qua li tyAct (C EQA) purs uan t to Se cti on 153 08, Acti onsbyRegul atory Agenci es for Prote cti on of the En v iro nmen t. S taff pre pare d a N o ti ceo f E x e mp ti o n ( N OE ) tome e t th e C E QA Gu i d e l i n e s (Att a ch me n t B ). V I. R E GU LA

T ORY F IN D IN GS Se cti on 407 27(a ) of the C H& SCrequir es t ha t pri or toad opti ng or amen di ng a rul e o r reg ula t ion , an air dis t r ict ’s bo ard ma k e f ind ing s of ne ce ss ity, aut ho r ity, cla r ity, c on si st en cy, n o n d u p l i c a t i o n , a n d re fe re n c e
. Th e fi n d i n gs m u s tb e b a s e d o n t h e fo l l o w i n g: 1. Inform ation present ed in the District ’s w ritt en analysi s, p re p a re d p u rs uantto CH&SC Se cti on 407 27.2 ; 2. Infor m at ion co nt ain ed in t he ru lem ak ing re co rds pursu an tto CH& SC Sec t ion 40 728 ;Fi nal St affR epor t- R ul e 2. 3, 2. 4, 2. 7, 2. 11, & 2. 12 D ecem ber29, 200 9

P a ge 10 and 3. Re le v ant in formati on pres ente d a t theB oard ’she ari ng for a dop tio n o f therul e. The re quire d fin di ngs are : Necess ity: Th e rule amen dm ent is req uired in order to mee tt he stat e’s Best Avai lable Retrof it Control Tec hnolog y req uirem ents (sect ion 40919(a) (3) of the CH&SC) and to f ulf ill th e D i st ri ct ’ s S e n a te B i l l ( S B ) 6 5 6 c o mmi tme n t. ( C H & S C S e ct i o n 4 0 7 2 7 ( b )( 1 ))

. Au thori ty : The Di stri ct i s a utho riz ed to a dop t rul es and regul ati onsby C H& SC , S ecti ons 400 01, 407 02, 407 16, 410 10 and 41 013

. Clari ty : D is trict sta f

f ha v e re v ie wed the prop ose d ru leame ndme nts and de termin ed that they ca n b e e asi ly

un ders tood by

theaffecte d s ourc es. In add iti on, the reco rd con tai ns no evi dence t hat persons direct ly af fect ed by the rules cannotunders tand the rules. (CH&SC S e ct i o n 4 0 7 2 7 (b )( 3 ))

. C o n si st e n cy : Thep ro p o se d r u l e a me n d me n ts d o n o t co n fli ctw i th a n d a re n o t co n tra d i ct o ry to, e x is tin g statute s, c ourt dec is ions , or stateor fede ral regul ati ons . (C H& SCS ecti on 4 0 7 2 7 (b )( 4 ))

. No n-D upl ic ati on: The p ropo sed rule ame ndme nts do not dup li cate an ysta te l aws o r regul ati ons , regardi ng the atta in ment and mai nten anc e o f sta te and fede ral ai r qual ity l imi ts. (C H & S C S e ct i o n 4 0 7 2 7 (b )( 5 ))

. Re feren ce: The Di stri ct must refer to any statu te, cou rt dec is io n, or othe r prov is io n of la w tha ttheD is trict i mpl emen ts, i nterp rets, or ma kes sp eci f icby ad opti ng, amen di ng or repe al in g rul es. VII
. PUBLIC COM MENTS A ND STA FF RESPONSES S ta ff h e l d a p u b l i c wo rks h o p o n Octo b e r 9 , 20 0 9 , todi sc u ssthep ro p o se d a me n d me n ts t o R u l e 2 .3 , 2 .1 1 , a n d 2 .1 2

. N o ti fic a ti o n wa s se n t tosu rro u n d i n g Ai r D i st ri ct s, C i ty M a n a gers w i th i n t h eD i st ri ct , b u i l d i n g/p l a n n i n g/com mu nity developm ent depa rt me nts w ith i n t h eD i st ri ct , al l ci tyan d c oun tyl ib rari es w ith in theD is trict, al l Bo ard members, and al l permi tted sou rces
. The workshopno tic e was pub li she d i n th e Vaca v il leR epo rt er (10/2), the Di xon Tribu ne (10/2 ), theD ai ly

D emocra t (10/2), the Dav isEnterp ris e (10/2 ), the W est Sa cramen to P ress (1 0 /7 ), a n d t h e W i n te rsE x p re ss( 1 0 /8 ). A copy of

the p u b li cwo rk shop not ice, th e draft st af f report, and the propo sed dra ft rule la nguage for ea ch affecte d rul e, w ere po sted on the Di stri ct’ s web page. In resp ons e tothe noti ce and workshop , theD is trict rec ei v ed the fol low in g comments: A . P ublicWorksho p: Joh n K il le y , the env iro nmen tal sp eci al is t of Agriu m U.S . Inc ., was the onl yatte nda nt a t the pub li c workshop . D is trict sta f f w il l attempt to p arap hras e th e comments that were rece ivedFi nal St affR epor t- R ul e 2. 3, 2. 4, 2. 7, 2. 11, & 2. 12 D ecem ber29, 200 9

P a ge 11 duri ng the workshop

. Co mment 1

. M r. K il le ysta ted that many Agriu m permi ts al read y requi re p arti cul ate matter

emi ssi onsbemuch l esstha n th e p ropo sed emi ssi on li mit of Ru le s 2.11 and 2.12

. Re spo nse 1. Noch an g es t o t he p ropo sed rul e a mend ments w il l be made du e to the

co mme n t. C o mm e n t 2

. M r. Ki ll e y a s ke d fo r c o n fi r ma t i o n o f t h e n e w o p a c i ty s t a n d a rd , b u t di d n ot

v o i cea n yc o n ce rn t h a t Agri u m c o u l d n o t co mp l yw i th thel o we r o p a ci ty l i mi t. Re spo nse2. M any

Agrium p ermi ts a re curre ntl y sub ject to the 40% opa ci tysta nda rd, but som e perm its (an d port ions or certain p e r mit ted oper ations ) are currently li mite d to o pac iti es of lower th an 20% by federa l regul ati ons . The pro pos ed ru l e re v i si o n s wo u l d l o we r th e 4 0 % s ta n d a rd t o 2 0 %, b u t th e cu rre n t l i mi ts w hi ch are lower th an 20% w il l not cha nge. Co mment 3. M r. K il le yas ked ab out exempti onsfrom the opa ci tystanda rd prop ose d for

the amen dmen t to Ru le2.3. He asked if the exempti on for smoke f rom fires set or a utho riz ed by

pu bl icoff ic ers for i nstru cti on in themeth odsof f ighti ng f ire s would a pp ly

to Agriu m. Thi s e x empti on was oneof several incorp orat ed f rom the CH&SC. Re spo nse 3. A ty pograp hi cal erro r res ult ed in s uc h f ir es s eton pro perty us ed for in dus tria l pu rpos es bei ng exe mpted for tra in in g of pu bl icemp lo y eesw hen the exempti on sho ul d h ave b e w ritte n for e mpl oye es in g ene ral . The p ro p o se d r u l e a me n d me n t l a n gua ge h a s b e e n e d i te d t o ma ke this corre cti on. C o mme n t 4

. M r. Killeystat e d n o o b je ct i o n t o t h e for ma t ch a n geso f al l t h re e r u l e s to make the ir formats con si sten t w ith more mod ern Di stri ct ru le s. Re spo nse 4. Noch anges to th e p ropo sed rule a m en dm en t s w il l be made du e to the

co mme n t. B. Written Co mments: Andrew St ec ke l of the Uni ted St ate s Envir onmental Pr otec tion Age ncy (EP A) iss ued wri tte n comments via ema il on Octobe r 23, 2009. The c omments a nd Dis tr ic t r e sp ons e s a r e l i st e d b e l ow: C o mme n t 5

. M r. S te cke l su gges te d th a t th e e x e mp ti o n to the newopacity stan d a rd

a p p l i e d t o s mo ke from fi re s se t o r p e rmi tt e d b ya n y p u b l i c o ff i ce r o n p ro p e rty use d for i ndu stri al purpo sesfor trai ni ng in th e me thod of f ighti ng f ire s was mean t to read for the purp ose of tra in in g empl oyeesi n gen eral rath er th an trai ni ng pu bl icemp lo y ees
.Fi nal St affR epor t- R ul e 2. 3, 2. 4, 2. 7, 2. 11, & 2. 12 D ecem ber29, 200 9

P a ge 12 R e s p o n s e 5

. Th e e x e mp t i o n h a s b e e n e d i t e d i n t h e p ro p o s e d r u l e a me n d me n tl a n gu a ge

to me nti on empl oyeesrath er th an pub li c e mpl oyees
. Co mment 6. M r. S teckel co mmented tha t exempti onsof sectio ns 110 .1d an d 110 .1e of

the Dra ft R ul e 2 .3 a mend ment conce r nin g setti ng of f ire s for firefightin g reas onsap pea red redu nda nt totheexempti on of secti on 110 .1a of the rul e. R e sp o n se 6

. T h e Di st ri ctagre e s a n d ha s d e l e te d themen ti o n e d se ct i o n s fro m the r ule

la nguage. C o m m e n t 7

. M r
. S t e c ke l c o m m e n t e d t h a t t h e e x e m p t i o n o f s e ct i o n 1 1 0

. 1 f o f th e D ra ft

Ru le2.3 ame ndme nt c onc erni ng smoke from f ire s setfor di sea se or p est preventi on was not in si mil ar rul es f rom othe r ai r di stri cts and se emed to be in stea d a n a gricul tural bu rni ng requi rement con si dera tio n. Respons e 7. T he Distr ict cont ends this exempt ion already exi ste d in Di str ict Rule 2.4. No

ch a n ge h a s b e e n ma d e t o t h i s p o rt i o n o f th e p ro p o se d a me n d me n t. Com me nt 8. M r. Steck el req uest ed thatthe exempt ion of section 110. 1g of

the Draft Rule 2.3 am endm ent con cer ning smok e f rom f ires setfor re me diation of an oil spi ll beremo v ed or th e D is trict ex pl ai n w hy i t woul d n ot b e c ons id ered a rel axati on of a re stri cti on. R e sp o n se 8

. T he Distr i ct co n te n d s th i s e x e mp ti o n , i n co rp o ra te d from the CH&SC, is

al read ya part of state la w . N o chan ge has been m adeto t hi s p orti on of the p ro p o se d a me n d me n t. Com me nt 9. M r. Stec k el req uest ed that the exempt ion of sect ion 110. 2 of the Draft Rule

2 .3 a me n d me n t co n ce rn i n g o rc h a rd a n d c i tr u s gro v e he a te rsbe rew ri tt e n t o st a te t h e re l e v a n t co n d i ti o n s o f th e C H & S C ra th e r th a n re fere n cet h e m. Re spo nse 9. The e x em pt ion h as b ee n ed it ed t o di rectl ysta te th e re quire ments for

orch ard and ci trus grov e h eate rs. Com me nt 10. M r. Steck el req uest ed thatthe exempt ion of section 110. 10 o f

the Draft Rule 2.3 amen dmen t co nce r nin g a brasive b la sti ng be remo v ed or th e D is trict ex pl ai n w hy

i t woul d n ot b e c ons id ered a rel axati on of a re stri cti on. R e sp o n se 1 0

. The se ct i o n o f th e C H & S C re l a ti n g to a b ra si v e b l a st i n g l i st s a 4 0 % o p a ci ty

con di tio n for a bras ive b la sti ng con ducted outs id e ape rma nen t bu il di ng. The Di stri ct a dde d th e 4 0% o pac ity requi rement to th e s t andard se cti on of the prop os ed ru le a m en dm en tlan g ua g e an d s pe ci f ic all y tie d s uc h ab ra s i ve bl asti ng to thi s o pac ity

sta nda rd. C o mme n t 11

. M r. S te cke l c o mme n te d t h a t th e Di st ri cti s p ro h i b i te d fro m e st a b l i sh i n g mo re

stri ngent restri cti onson v is ib leemiss io ns f rom d ie sel au x il ia ryen gine s u sed excl usi v el yw ith dri nking water systems.Fi nal St affR epor t- R ul e 2. 3, 2. 4, 2. 7, 2. 11, & 2. 12 D ecem ber29, 200 9

P a ge 13 Re spo nse11. The ex empti on of sectio n 1 10.1 2 o f theD raft Rul e 2 .3 a mend ment has bee n strick en and sectio n 1 11.3 of the P ropo sed R ul e 2 .3 a mend ment tie s th e o p e ra ti o n o f su ch e n gi n e s tot h e 4 0 % o p a ci ty re qui re me n t. Co mment 1 2. M r. Steckel q ues tio ned t he exe mpti onsf rom the opac ity standa rd gran ted tot e e p e e b u rn e rsa n d b u rn e rsu se d top ro d u cee n e rgy a n d fi re d b yfore st ry a n d a gri cu l tu ra l re si d u e s. R e sp o n se 1 2

. TheD i st ri cth a s st ri cke n s e ct i o n s 1 1 0 .1 4 a n d 1 1 0 .1 5 o f th e D ra ft R u l e 2 .3

a me n d me n t a n d h a s re w r i tt e n t h e e x e mp t i o n s i n t o s e ct i o n 1 1 0

. 11 of the Pro pos ed Ru le2.3 amendmen t to be more con si sten t w ith rul es f rom o ther ai r di stri cts. Co mment 13. M r. S teckel reque sted that the Rul e 2 .3 a mend ment con tai n d efini tio ns for

v i s i b l e a i r

c o n t a mi n a n t s , o b s c u ra n t , t e e p e e b u r n e r , a n d a b ra s i v e b l a s t i n g. R e s p o n s e 1 3

. These defin iti ons an d a de fi n i t i o n o f c a r b o n a c e o u s re la tin g to the

exemption s o f

orc hard an d c itru s grov e h eate rs h as bee n a dde d tothe Pro pos ed Ru le2.3 ame ndme nt l angua ge. Co mment 14. M r. Ste ckel requeste d that EP A M etho d 9 be li sted for the dete rmin ati on of

opa ci tyof emi ssi ons
. R e sp o n se 1 4

. A

M e thod 9 ref eren ce has been added to the P ro p o se d R u l e 2 .3 amen dmen t l angua ge. Co mment 15. M r. Ste ckel requeste d the Di stri ct make cl ear in Sta te Impl emen tati on Pl an

sub m itta l doc umen ts th at th e R ul es 2.4 and 2.7 arebe in g resci nde d bec aus e th ei r co ndi tio ns have b een i nco rpora ted in to R ul e 2 .3. R e sp o n se 1 5

. TheD i st ri ctw i l l ma ke the reas ons for th e re sc i n d i n g o f R u l e 2 .4 a n d 2 .7

cl e a r. C o mm e n t 1 6

. M r. S te c ke l n o t e d a mi s s p e l l i n g o f p a rt i c u l a t e i n th e D raft Rul e 2.11

amen dmen t l angua ge. Re spo nse16

. The mi ssp el li ng ha s b een co rrecte d i n th e P ropo sed R ul e 2 .11 la nguage. Co mment 17. M r. S teckel reque sted tha t EPA test metho ds for d etermi nati on of ex hau st stack gas v el oci ty , sta ck gas moi sture co nt en t , an d p arti cul ate matter emi ssi onsbereferenc ed in therul e l angua ge. Re spo nse17

. The P ropo sed R ul e 2

. 1 1 ame ndme nt l angua ge ha s b een ed ite d to reference

the rel evant EP A and CAR B test method s. Co mment 1 8. M r. S teckel reque sted co nsi sten cy i n s pel li ng of sul f ur i n R ul e 2 .12.Fi nal St affR epor t- R ul e 2. 3, 2. 4, 2. 7, 2. 11, & 2. 12 D ecem ber29, 200 9

P a ge 14 Respons e 18. Prop o s e d R u le 2

. 12 ame ndm ent lang uag e has been edited to m ak e this

cha nge. Com me nt 19. M r. Steck el comm ente d thatthe exempt ions of section 110 of

the Draft Rule 2.12 ame ndme nt d o n ot a ppe ar in si mil ar rul es f rom o ther ai r di stri cts and req ue st ed a ch an g e c on si st en tw it h EP A po licy. Re spo nse 19. The e x empti onsfrom the rul e a lre adye xist ed in o r igi nal text of the rul e.

Thisrul e rev is io n si mpl ypla cesthe l angua ge i n s epa rate exempti on sectio n i n t h e r u l e for ma t. N o c h a n gesw i l l b e ma d e d u e t o t h i s co mme n t. Co mment 2 0. M r. S teckel reque sted tha t the requi rement rel ati ng or sul f ur d io x id e i n th e

Dra ft R ul e 2 .12 amen dmen t l angua ge be ch anged to sul f ur compo und s cal cul ated assu lfur d io x id e. R e s p o n s e 2 0

. Th e P ro p o s e d R u l e 2

. 1 2 a me n d me n t l a n gu a ge h a s b e e n e d i t e d to ma ke

thi s c han ge. Co mment 2 1. M r. S teckel reque sted tha t theti tlepa rtic ul ate matter c ombu sti on

con tami nan ts b e e di ted to s imp ly co mbusti on con tami nan ts. Re spo nse 21. The edi t has bee n made to the Pro pos ed Ru le 2.12 amen dmen t l angua ge. Co mment 22. M r. S teckel reque sted tha t EPA test metho ds for d etermi nati on of ex hau st stack gas v el oci ty , stack gas moi sture co nten t, pa rtic ul ate matter e miss io ns, and su lfur co mpou ndsco nce ntrati on be reference d i n th e ru lel angua ge. Re spo nse22

. The P ropo sed R ul e 2 .12 amen dmen t l angua geh as bee n e di ted to reference

the rel evant EP A and CAR B test method s. S u b s e q u e n tt o h o l d i n g t h e p u b l i c wo r ks h o p a n d a d d re s s i n g t h e re c e i v e d c o m m e n t s , s t a ff prep ared a pub li c h eari ng no tic e for the heari ng wh ic h was to be hel d Dec embe r 9, 200 9. The n oti ce was sen t to al l the same parti es w hi ch rece ived the publ icworkshopnoti ce. The h e a ri n g n o ti ce wa s p u b l i sh e d i n th e D a i l y D e mo cra t (1 1 /1 1 ), V a ca v i l l e R e p o rt e r (11/ 1 2 ), Da v isE nterp ris e (11/1 2), the W in ters Ex pres s (11/12 ), the D ixon Tribu ne (11/1 3), a nd the W e stS a cra me n toP re ss( 1 1 /1 8 ). B e ca u set h e a b o v e re fere n ce d n o ti ced a te s d i d n o t me e t 3 0 day s for a D e ce mb e r 9 hea rin g, the rul e was del ayed unti l the Jan uary mee tin g and thepu blic hea rin g was ren o ti ce d in theDa i l yDe mo cra t (1 2 /0 7 ), V a ca v i l l e R e p o rt e r (1 2 /0 5 ), D a v i s E n te rp ri se( 1 2 /0 4 ), th e W i n te rsE x p re ss( 1 2 /1 0 ), the Di xon Tribu ne (12 /06), and theW est Sa cramen to P ress (12/ 09). A copy of

the updat ed docum ents ( t h e p ro p o s e d staf f report and pro posed r ule la nguage) were po sted on the Di stri ct’ s w ebp age on Dec embe r 3. T he Di stri ct re cei v ed no more commentsasa resu lt of the add iti ona l noti ce.Fi nal St affR epor t- R ul e 2. 3, 2. 4, 2. 7, 2. 11, & 2. 12 D ecem ber29, 200 9

A TTACH M EN T A PR O PO SE D A M EN DM EN TS TO RU LE 2. 3, RI NG EL M A NN CHA RT, RULE 2.11, PA RT ICULA T E MA TT ER CONCENT RA

T IO N, RULE 2.12, SPECIFIC CO NTA MI NA NT S; S T R IK E -OU TU N D E R L IN E V E R S IONFi nal St affR epor t- R ul e 2. 3, 2. 4, 2. 7, 2. 11, & 2. 12 D ecem ber29, 200 9

A TTACH M EN T B NOTICE OF EXEM PT IO N FROM CEQA GUI DELINESFi nal St affR epor t- R ul e 2. 3, 2. 4, 2. 7, 2. 11, & 2. 12 D ecem ber29, 200 9

A TTACH M EN T C RE SOLU T ION NO. 1 0-01Fi nal St affR epor t- R ul e 2. 3, 2. 4, 2. 7, 2. 11, & 2. 12 D ecem ber29, 200 9

A TTACH M EN T D WRI TT EN COM MENTS REC EIVED