San Joaquin Valley 

AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT 

awa 

HEALTHY AIR LIVINGm 

GOVERNING BOARD 

Tony Barba, Chair 

Supervisor, Kings County 

J. Steven Worthley, Vice Chair DATE: September 16, 20 10 

Supervisor, Tulare County 

David G. Ayers TO: SJVUAPCD Governing Boar 

Councilmember, City of Hanford 

Judith G. Case FROM: Seyed Sadredin, Executive 

Supervisor, Fresno County Project Coordinator: George Heinen 

Ronn Dominici 

Supervisor, Madera County 

Henry Jay Forman, Ph.D. 

Appointed by Governor 

Ann Johnston 

Mayor, City of Stockton 

Mike Lane 

Councilmember. City of Visalia 

Randy Miller 

Councilmember, City of Taft 

Michael G. Nelson 

Supervisor, Merced County 

William O'Brien 

Supervisor, Stanislaus County 

Leroy Ornellas 

Supervisor, San Joaquin County 

John G. Telles, M.D. 

Appointed by Governor 

Chris Vierra 

Councilmember, City of Ceres 

Raymond A. Watson 

Supervisor, Kern County 

Seyed.Sadredin 

Executive Director 

Air Pollution Control Officer 

Northern Region Office 

4800 Enterprise Way 

Modesto, CA 95356.8718 

(209) 557.6400 FAX 1209) 557.6475 

RE: ADOPT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO 

RULE 4354 (GLASS MELTING FURNACES) 

RECOMMENDATION: 

1. Adopt Proposed Amendments to Rule 4354 (Glass Melting 

Furnaces). 

2. Approve and authorize the Chair to sign the Negative Declaration 

for Rule 4354 (Glass Melting Furnaces) finding there is no 

substantial evidence that adoption of Rule 4354 amendments will 

have a significant adverse effect on the environment. 

3. Authorize .the Chair to sign the attached Resolution. 

BACKGROUND: 

The District Governing Board adopted amendments to Rule 4354 at 

the October 2008 Public Hearing that established more stringent 

emissions limitations for glass melting furnaces. During that hearing, 

there was significant discussion regarding concerns raised by affected 

sources about the information used by the District to evaluate the 

potential cost impacts and cost-effectiveness of the proposed rule 

amendments. As a result, the Governing Board provided additional 

direction to staff to re-evaluate the impact of the rule amendments and 

report back to the Board within 18 months of adoption to 

accommodate additional cost information provided by affected 

businesses. 

Central Region Office 

1990 East Gettysburg Avenue Based on staffs re-evaluation of the adopted rule amendments and 

Fresno, CA 93726.0244 recommendations made at the April 15, 2010 Public Hearing, the 

[559)230-6000 FAX 1559) 230-6061 Board directed staff to develop and propose future rule amendments 

Southern Region Office 

34946 Flyover Court 

Bakersfield, CA 93308-9725 

(661) 392-5500 FAX (661) 392-5585 

www. valleyair. org 
SJVUA PCD Governing Board 

ADOPT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO RULE 4354 (GLASS MELTING FURNACES) 

SEPTEMBER 16,2010 

to Rule 4354 incorporating short-term emission limitation flexibility for flat glass 

manufacturing facilities committed to achieving more stringent long-term emissions 

limitations earlier than would otherwise be required by the rule. This direction was 

based on new information subniitted by Pilkington North America with regard to meeting 

the interim Tier 3 oxides of nitrogen (NOx) emission limits for flat glass manufacturers 

by the January 201 1 compliance date in the rule. 

The Tier 3 and the Tier 4 NOx emission limits will require installation of advanced and 

expensive emission control systems and would necessitate major changes to existing 

furnaces. District staff agrees with the glass manufacturers that the most appropriate 

time to make changes to the furnace in order to install emission control equipment is 

when the furnace is down for periodic repairs to the furnace's insulatirrg refractory. This 

periodic maintenance is commonly known in the industry as "cold repair" or "rebuild". 

Flat glass furnaces can operate for 15 years or more between rebuilds and operate 

continuously between rebuilds. Therefore, the window of opportunity for cost-effective 

installation of emission control equipment is very narrow. Installing emission control 

systems prior to the scheduled furnace rebuild would incur additional significant costs 

due to lost revenue because the furnace is not producing any glass products during the 

installation of the required controls and subsequent start-up periods which nornially take 

several months. 

As an additional factor for consideration, no one could have anticipated the depth or the 

length of the current economic recession. Generally, the two main consumers of flat 

glass are the building trades (windows for homes and buildings) and the automotive 

market (windows and windshields for cars and trucks). Both of these market sectors 

have been particularly hard-hit by the recession and the slowdown in these markets has 

affected their suppliers, including flat glass manufacturers. 

Since October 2008 when the last amendments were adopted for the rule, Pilkington 

has experienced a significant economic downturn that forced a delay in their planned 

furnace rebuild and the associated installation of emission controls. As a result, 

Pilkington's current facility carmot meet the Tier 3 NOx limit by the 201 1 deadline 

without installation of additional emission control equipment in conjunction with a 

furnace rebuild. The Tier 3 NOx limit provides no real transition period because there is 

no intermediate technology that will allow Pilkington's furnace to achieve the Tier 3 NOx 

limit, other than the technology required to achieve the lower Tier 4 limit. 

To address this concern, the District proposes to incorporate short-term emission 

limitation flexibility for flat glass manufacturing facilities committed to achieving more 

stringent long-term err~issions lirnitations earlier than would otherwise be required by the 

rule. This "Tier 4 early enhanced" option would achieve additional early reductions by 

complying with "Tier 4 enhanced" emissions limitations four years earlier than would 

otherwise be required by the rule in return for flexibility in meeting the interim Tier 3 

emissions limitation. 
SJVUAPCD Governing Board 

ADOPT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO RULE 4354 (GLASS MELTING FURNACES) 

SEPTEMBER 16, 2010 

There are three flat glass manufacturers in the Valley. Besides Pilkington, the other two 

facilities are currently meeting the Tier 3 NOx emission limit and have permit conditions 

that would prevent them from increasing their NOx emissions above the Tier 3 limit if it 

were to be removed from the October 2008 version of the rule. 

As detailed in the Final Draft Staff Report, staff finds that removing the Tier 3 limit and 

requiring the lowest NOx limit four years earlier for a single flat glass furnace will not 

affect the District's attainment date. In order to be considered in attainment of an air 

quality standard, the District must have no violations of the standard at its official 

monitoring site for three years. In the Tier 4 early enhanced option, the lower emissions 

from this facility come just ahead of the PM2.5 attainment year of 2014 rather than 

afterwards, as would be expected if Pilkington opted for the Tier 4 enhanced option. By 

implementing the Tier 4 early enhanced option at Pilkington, Valley residents would 

reap the benefits of nearly 33 tons per year of additional NOx reductions beginning in 

2014, rather than in 2018, and the err~ission reductions would continue for the length of 

the furnace campaign. 

DISCUSSION: 

Since the proposed amendments only affect the emission limits and requirements for 

flat glass furnaces, staff will not discuss the existing Rule 4354 requirements for 

container glass furnaces and fiberglass furnaces. 

Current Rule 4354 Requirements 

Under the current rule, flat glass furnaces are required to meet an interim Tier 3 NOx 

limit as well as stringent sulfur oxides (SOX) and particulate matter (PM) lirr~its by 

January 201 1. The Tier 4 NOx limit for flat glass furnaces has a compliance date as 

soon as January 2014 for the standard option and as late as January 2018 for the 

enhanced option. Table 1 summarizes the NOx limits and compliance dates for flat 

glass manufacturers as currently required by the rule. 

Table 1 - Flat Glass NOx Limits of Current Rule 4354 
SJVUAPCD Governing Board 

ADOPT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO RULE 4354 (GLASS MELTING FURNACES) 

SEPTEMBER 16,2010 

Summary of Proposed Amendments to Rule 4354 

The main objective of this rule project is to allow flat glass manufacturers to eliminate 

the Tier 3 NOx emission limits provided they meet the Tier 4 enhanced option emission 

limits four years earlier than otherwise required, namely by January 2014 rather than by 

January 201 8. The current rule also requires that the flat glass manufacturers meet low 

SOX and PMIO limits by January 201 1. For flat glass manufacturers that choose the 

Tier 4 early enhanced option, compliance with the SOX and PM limits would be deferred 

until January 2014, which is the same date as the Tier 4 early enhanced compliance 

date. Revisions were made throughout the rule to accorr~niodate the inclusion of the flat 

glass early enhanced compliance option. These changes include language 

modifications in the monitoring and recordkeeping sections to match the Tier 4 early 

enhanced option compliance date. Table 2 summarizes Pilkington's proposal for the 

Tier 4 early enhanced option. 

Table 2 - Proposed NOx Limits for Flat Glass Early Enhanced Option 

Emission Reduction Analysis 

Tier 2 limit - now 

Tier 3 limit - not available 

Tier 4 earlv enhanced o~tion bv Jan 2014 

Although the rule was amended in 2008, as directed by the District's Governing Board, 

the rule was not submitted to EPA for inclusion into the California State Implementation 

Plan (SIP). Since the amended rule was not submitted into the SIP, the reductions 

associated with the 2008 rule project have not been claimed for attainment 

demonstration purposes. If adopted, this version of the rule will be submitted to EPA 

and the District will claim the reductions from the 2008 rule amendments as part of this 

rule project. Table 3 below summarizes the estimated emissions and the estimated 

emission reductions associated with ,the 2008 rule project. Details of the emission 

calculations are included in Appendix B of the Final Draft Staff Report. 

NOx limit Lblton glass produced 

7.0 

-- 

2.9 
SJVUA PCD Governing Board 

ADOPT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO RULE 4354 (GLASS MELTING FURNACES) 

SEPTEMBER 16, 2010 

Table 3 - Estimated Emissions and Emission Reductions from 2008 Final Staff Report 

r 

Pollutant 

NOx 

Container 

Fiberglass 

Flat Glass 

Additional reductions 

Tier 4 early enhanced 

Total NOx 

sox 

Container 

Fiberglass 

Flat Glass 

Impact of Proposed Changes on Other Flat Glass Manufacturers 

Claimed 2008 Baseline 

Emissions, tpd 

2.66 

0.53 

4.80 

Not applicable 

7.99 

Total SOX 

PMIO 

Container 

Fiberglass 

Flat Glass 

Total PMIO 

District staff considered the impact of the proposed amendments on flat glass 

manufacturers other than Pilkington, including any potential competitive disadvantqge 

caused by the proposed amendments. There are two flat glass manufacturers besides 

Pilkington located in the District. One facility already meets the Tier 4 NOx, SOX and 

PMIO limits because of a rebuild in 2008. The second facility is already meeting the 

Tier 3 NOx and the 201 1 SOX and PMIO limits. Additionally, both of these facilities 

have made investments in emission control technologies as part of prior rebuilds that 

included facility expansions, and are not expected to be at a competitive disadvantage 

as a result of the proposed amendments. For these reasons, the other flat glass 

manufacturers are not expected to be affected by the proposed amendnients to Rule 

4354. 

Claimed Errrission 

Reduction, tpd 

1.16 

0.01 

2.1 1 

0.09 

3.37 

1.54 

0.02 

1.57 

Cost Effectiveness Analysis 

- -- 

0.38 

0.00 

0.74 

3.13 

0.38 

0.007 

0.59 

0.98 

The California Health and Safety Code 40920.6(a) requires District staff to conduct a 

cost effectiveness analysis of available emission control options prior to adopting each 

Best Available Retrofit Control Technology (BARCT) rule. Since the proposed rule 

1.12 

0.02 

0.002 

0.08 

0.1 1 
SJVUAPCD Governing Board 

ADOPT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO RULE 4354 (GLASS MELTING FURNACES) 

SEPTEMBER 16,2010 

modifies certain compliance dates and does not change existing emission limits, the 

requirement to perform a cost effectiveness analysis does not apply. 

Socioeconomic Analysis 

Pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 40728.5, "whenever a district 

intends to propose the adoption, amendment, or repeal of a rule or regulation that will 

significantly affect air quality or emissions limitations, that agency shall, to the extent 

data is available, perform an assessment of the socioeconomic impacts of the adoption 

amendment, or repeal of the rule or regulation." Since the proposed rule does not 

change an existing err~issior~ limitation, the requirement to perform a socioeconomic 

impact analysis does not apply. 

Rule Consistency Analysis 

Prior to adopting, amending, or repealing a rule or regulation, California Health and 

Safety Code Section 40727.2 requires a written analysis that identifies and compares 

requirements of the proposed rule with corresponding, existing and proposed District 

rules and corresponding United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules, 

regulations, and guidelines. Based on the analysis, District staff concludes that the 

proposed amendments to Rule 4354 are consistent with other District rules and are not in 

conflict with these rules. Further, the proposed rule amendments are consistent with EPA 

rules, regulations, and guidelines that apply to the same source category. The analysis is 

presented in Appendix C of the Final Draft Staff Report. 

Environmental Impacts 

Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), staff investigated the 

possible environmental impacts of the proposed amendments to Rule 4354. A 

proposed negative declaration has been issued by the District and made available for 

public review. The public review period ended on August 13, 2010. Upon approval of 

this project, a Notice of Determination for a Negative Declaration will be filed. 

Rule Development Process 

District staff conducted a public workshop in June 2010 in order to present and receive 

comments on draft amendments to.Rule 4354. Comments received from affected 

source operators, consultants, vendors and manufacturers of control technologies, the 

California Air Resources Board (ARB) and the United States Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) have been evaluated and, if appropriate, incorporated into proposed rule 

provisions. 

The proposed rule and final draft staff report was published and mailed to affected 

sources and interested parties prior to the public hearing to consider the adoption of 

proposed amendments to Rule 4354 by the District Governing Board. 
SJVUAPCD Governing Board 

ADOPT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO RULE 4354 (GLASS MELTING FURNACES) 

SEPTEMBER 16,2010 

FISCAL IMPACTS: 

District staff expects no fiscal impact to the District to result from this action. 

Attachments: 

Initial Study and Negative Declaration for Proposed Amendments to Rule 4354 (22 pages) 

Proposed Rule 4354 - (28 pages) 

Resolution for Proposed Amendments to Rule 4354 (5 pages) 

Final Draff Staff Report with Appendices for Proposed Rule 4354 - (42 pages)