.. 

17 

MINUTES 

VENTURA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD 

CARMEN RAMIREZ, COUNCIL MEMBER, CITY OF OXNARD - CHAIR 

LINDA PARKS, SUPERVISOR, COUNTY OF VENTURA - VICE CHAIR 

STEVE BENNETT, SUPERVISOR, COUNTY OF VENTURA 

BRIAN BRENNAN, COUNCIL MEMBER, CITY OF SAN BUENA VENTURA 

PETER C. FOY, SUPERVISOR, COUNTY OF VENTURA 

KATHY I. LONG, SUPERVISOR, COUNTY OF VENTURA 

MIKE MORGAN, COUNCIL MEMBER, CITY OF CAMARILLO 

JONATHAN SHARKEY, COUNCIL MEMBER, CITY OF PORT HUENEME 

DOUG TUCKER, COUNCIL MEMBER, CITY OF FILLMORE 

JOHN C. ZARAGOZA, SUPERVISOR, COUNTY OF VENTURA 

November 12, 2013 at 11:00 a.m. 

Public Hearing Regarding the Approval of Proposed New Rule 74.31, Metal Working 

Fluids and Direct-Contact Lubricants, and Proposed Amendments to Rule 23, 

Exemptions from Permit; Approval to Use California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 

Categorical Exemptions for New Rule 74.31, and Proposed Revisions to Rule 23; 

Approval of, and Adoption of, the Proposed Legislative Findings for New Rule 74.31 and 

the Revisions to Rule 23; and Direct the Air Pollution Control Officer, or His Designee, to 

File a CEQA Notice of Exemption Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15062. 

(X) All board members are present, except Board Members Tucker and Foy. 

(X) The following persons are heard: Stan Cowan and Mike Pearse. 

(X) The Board holds a public hearing. 

(X) Upon motion of Board Member Morgan, seconded by Board Member Sharkey, and duly 

carried, the Board hereby approves the attached staff recommendations. 

CLERK'S CERTIFICATE 

I hereby certify that the annexed instrument 

Is a true and correct copy of the document 

which Is on file In this office. 

Michael Powers, 

Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, 

County of Ventura, State of California. 

Item #9 

11/12/13 
0 Vonturo County 

~ Air Pollution 

Contro l Dis trict 

November 12, 20 13 

/\ir Pollution Control Board 

800 South Victoria Avenue 

Ventura, CA. 93009 

669 ( ovolly Square Drive 

Vcnluoo, Cololornio 93003 

rel805/64~ 1400 

lox 805/6<15·1 d44 

www VCClfXd org 

Michool Villegas 

Air Pollution Control Officer 

SUBJECT: PUBUC I fEARING TO APPROV I·: PROPOSED NEW RULE 74.3 1, 

METALWORKING fLUIDS AND DIRECT-CONTACT LUBRICANTS, AND 

PROPOSED AMENDMl~N S TO RULE 23, EXEMPTIONS fROM PERMIT; 

AND DETERMINATION THAT BOTII RULE-M/\KING PROJECTS ARI ~ 

CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT UNDER THE CALIFORNI/\ 

HNVIORNM ENTAL QUALITY ACT 

RECOMMEN DED ACTIONS: 

I. Approve the use of CEQA Categorical Exemptions for new Rule 74.3 I, and proposed 

revis.ions to Rule 23 (Attachment I). 

2. Approve and adopt the proposed Legislative Findings for new Rule 74.3 I and the 

revisions to Rule 23, (Attachment 2). 

3. Approve and Adopt new Rule 74.3 1 and revised Rule 23(Attachments 3 and 4). 

4. Direct the Clerk of the Board to forward two certified minute orders, and an affidavit of' 

publication of the public hearing notice for all proposed actions to the Air Pollution 

Control District within twenty clays. 

5. Direct Air Pollution Control Ofticer or his designee to file a CEQA Notice of Exemption 

pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15062. 

STATEMENT Of MATTER FOR BOARD CONSIDERATION: 

f3ackground 

As a nonattainment area for the state ozone ambient air quality standards, Ventura County is 

subject to the terms and conditions or the Ca lifornia Clean Air Act (Health & Sa l'cty Code § 

39000 et seq.). In particular, Health and Safety Code Section 40914, subdi vision (a) requires 

that a local air pollution control district in a nonattainment area show a five percent annual 

emission reduction in district-wide air pollutant emissions. But subdivision 40914(b) of the 

llealth & Safety Code provides an exemption from this annual five percent reduction in districtwide emissions showing i r the local air pollution control district uses an alternative emission 
Air Pollution Control Board 

November 12, 20 13 

Page 2 

reduction strategy that (I) is equal to or better than the district-wide emission reduction effort; 

(2) includes "all feasible measures" of air pollutant emission reduction; and (3) promulgates an 

expeditious adoption schedule for "all feasible measures." 

Proposed new Rule 74.31 is designed to reduce reactive organic compound (ROC) emissions 

from the usc or metalworking fluids and direct contact lubricants at machine shops, metal 

product numul~1cturers, sheet metal fabricators, and metal forgi ng operations. ROC is a 

precursor to the formation of ozone, which is a public health hazard. Ir your f3oard decides to 

adopt this new rule, it will require operators of these stationary sources of air pollution to replace 

high-ROC lubricants, cutting oils, coolants, corrosion inhibitors, and other metalworking f'l uicls 

with low-ROC metalworking fluids. This new rule is expected to produce a significant amount 

of ROC emission reductions (approximately 41 tons per year) from a previously uncontrolled 

emission source category. 

A 2006 Technology Assessment performed by the Institute for Research and Assistance (IRTA) 

l'or the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) about a similar air pollution 

control rule in that jurisdiction provided the research and technical justification for this proposed 

new rule adoption. 

Proposed New and Amended Existing Rule Action 

The rule is based on SCAQMD Rule 1144, which was a collaborative effort between SCAQMD 

and industry represented by the Independent Lubricant Manufacturers Association (ILMA), a 

national trade association. APCD staff has worked closely with the largest metalworking fluid 

manufacturer and ILMA member, W.S. Dodge Oil. A letter of support from Dodge Oil for this 

rule adoption has been included as Attachment 5. The following quote fi·om the letter 

cxcmplilies their support: 

''We (Dodge Oil) believe Rule 74.31, which closely follows SCAQMD Rule 1144, is an 

outstanding example of simultaneously protecting our environment while allowing 

manuf~1cturcrs to continue to prosper." 

The proposal to amend Rule 23, Exemptions from Permit, is a companion rule-making action to 

proposed new Rule 74.31. Amended Rule 23 will clarify that existing sources cutTently exempt 

fi·om APCD permit requirements, including approximately 300 machine shops in the county, will 

continue to retain their permit exemption status. Also, existing metal torging operations, which 

currently arc required to obtain and maintain APCD permits because of their particulate matter 

emissions in addition to ROC emissions, will still be required to obtain and maintain those 

permits. ·r hus, the proposed amendments to Rule 21 will maintain the status quo by not 

n.:quiring any existing source to obtain an APCD permit if they currently are not required to have 

one. 

Expected Em ission Reductions and Cost Analysis 

Estimated ROC emissions in Ventura County from metalworking fluids and direct contact 

lubricants subject to the proposed rule are 76 tons of ROC per year bused on a comparative 
1\ir Pollution Control Board 

November 12, 20 I J 

Page J 

analysis of Ventura County emissions from this source category based upon a survey performed 

by the SCAQMD. Estimated emission reductions from the proposed rule action arc about 4 I 

tons ROC per year or a 54 percent reduction. These ROC emission reductions are expected to 

come from the replacement of high-ROC metalworking fluids with low-ROC lluids, including 

medium nnpthenic oils, paraffinic oi ls, vegetable oils, synthetic or semi-synthetic oils, or waterreducible fluids. 

Low ROC products are currently available for each of the categories in Rule 74.31, as the 

metalworking industry has already spent millions of dollars in research and rctormulation costs 

to comply with SCAQMD Rule 11 44. The costs of these product reformulations have not been 

passed on to end users, resulting in minima l cost to machine shops. In fact, new emulsion-type 

products may allow for increased production rates and extend tool life by 50 percent or great0r, 

resulting in a net savings to the end user. This proposed new rule does not require any 

metalworking stationary source operator to install add-on control devices to comply with the 

rule, which can be expensive, especially for smaller sources. 

The cost-e1Jectiveness analysis tor this proposed new ru le was based on the 2006 IRTA 

Technology Assessment and SCAQMD Rule 1144 staff Reports. The cost-cfTcctiveness of 

replacing the high-ROC meta lworking fluids with low-ROC products ranges rrom an annual cost 

savings of $7,500 to $0.40 per pound cost of ROC reduced. This indicates that this rule-making 

proposal is very cost-cflective especially relative to new emission sources, which may be 

required to spend as much as $9.00 per pound of ROC reduced to install best available control 

technology (BACT) pursuant to District Rule 26 New Source Review. The staff report 

(Attachment 6) contains a more comprehensive analysis of emission reduction and 

socioeconomic impacts. 

Another important aspect of this proposal is that administrative costs of compliance to local 

industry will be minimal. For all affected sources, except three permitted metal forging 

operations, APCD permits and emission source recordkceping will not be required. Instead, the 

proposal contains a sales prohibition of noncompliant metal working flu ids to prohibit the sale or 

distribution of such tluids having an ROC content exceeding the limits speciiled in the rule. 

SC AQMD Rule I I 44 contains a similar sales prohibition on noncompliant metalworking Ouids. 

This rule provision places the burden of compliance on the metalworking fluid manufacturers to 

only supply legal products and to educate their suppliers and customers of the rule's 

requirements. Sales prohibitions are an cl'fcctive tool to enforce rules directed at nonpermittcd 

sources and have been adopted in several APCD rules including rules regulating architectural 

coatings, auto refinishing, adhesives, and pleasure crall coatings. 

Public Comments on thie Rule-Making Action 

A public consultation meeting was held on April 29, 20 I 3. That meeting was attended by 

Custom Unique Machine Shop, Smith Precision, and W.S. Dodge Oil (ILMA Representative). 

On July I, 2013, staff held a public workshop that was attcndcd by Silvas Oil (distributor), I lass 

Automation, Blaser Swisslube (t1uid manufacturer), W.S. Dodge Oil, and ILMA's general 

counsel. Also, staff received several minor comments from EPA, which have been included in 

the proposed rule, and no comments were received from AIU3. Staff has worked closely with 
Air Pollution Control Board 

November 12,2013 

Pnge 4 

TLMA who suppot1s this rule adoption that will reduce significant ROC emissions with little 

impact on the regulated community. 1LMA is interested in this Ventura County regulation 

because they would like to see the SCAQMD rule adopted nationwide for rule uniformity 

purposes. On August 27, 20 t 3, by unanimous vote, the Advisory Committee recommended 

approval of new Rule 74.31 and proposed revisions to Rule 23(Attachment 7). 

PROPOSED STATUTORY FINDINGS: 

In accordance with Health and Safety Code Sections 40703,40727,40727.2, 40728.5 and 

40920.6(a), your Board must adopt findings of necessity, authority, clarity, consistency, nonduplication, reterence, cost-etTectiveness, incremental cost-effectiveness, and socioeconomic 

impacts, based upon relevant information presented at the public hearing, prior to adopting new 

Rule 74.3 I and related amendments to existing Rule 23 .. Health and Safety Code Section 

40727.2 requires a written analysis, comparison, and consideration of existing air pollution 

regulations that apply to the same type of source. Therefore, if your Board approves the 

proposed revisions to these rules, it is recommended that your Board also adopt the proposed 

tindings that address these statutory requirements (Attachment 2). 

The proposed new Rule74.31 and proposed revisions to Rule 23 have been determined by 

District staff to be categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality 1\.ct (CEQA) 

under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15307, Protection ofNatural Resources, and 15308, Protection 

of Environment. The Notice of Exemption with respect to these CEQA exemptions is included 

as Attachment I. 

This board item has been reviewed by County Counsel. If you have any questions, please 

contact Mike Villegas at 645-1440 or Stan Cowen at 645-1408. 

Attachments: 

I. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

Proposed Notice of CEQA Ex'emption 

Proposed I .egislative Findings 

Proposed new Rule 74.3 1 

Strikeout/under! ine version of revised Rule 23 

Letter of support from W .S. Dodge Oil 

final Staff Report 

Advisory Committee Voting Record 

·,