SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix C: Rule Consistency Analysis September 16, 2010



## APPENDIX C

RULE CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS FOR

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO RULE 4354 (GLASS MELTING FURNACES)

September 16, 2010

C-1 Final Staff Report with Appendices for Proposed Amendments to Rule 4354SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix C: Rule Consistency Analysis September 16, 2010

This page intentionally blank.

C-2 Final Staff Report with Appendices for Proposed Amendments to Rule 4354SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix C: Rule Consistency Analysis September 16, 2010



### Appendix C Rule Consistency Analysis for Pr oposed Amendments to Rule 4354

I. REQUIREMENTS OF 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 is required to perform a written analysis that identifies and compares the air pollution control elem ents of the rule or regulation with corresponding elements of existing or proposed District and United

States Environmental Protec tion Agency (EPA) rules, regul ations, and guidelines that apply to the same source category. The ru le elements analyzed ar e emission limits or control efficiency, operating parameters and wo rk practices, monitoring and testing, and recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

II. RULE CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS

A. District Rules

Glass melting furnaces could be subjec t to other District rules including:

• Rule 2010 (Permits Required),

• Rule 2201 (New and Modified Stat ionary Source Review Rule),

• Rule 4101 (Visible Emissions),

• Rule 4102 (Nuisance),

• Rule 4201 (Particulate Matter Concentration),

• Rule 4202 (Particulate Matter Emission Rate),

• Rule 4301 (Fuel Burning Equipment), and

• Rule 4801 (Sulfur Compounds)

The above-listed rules are not in conflict nor are they inconsistent with the requirements of Proposed Rule 4354.

B. Federal EPA Rules and Regulations

1. Federal Control Tec hniques Guideline (CTG)

Beginning in 1975, EPA staff has issued more than 40 CTGs covering a variety of VOC sources. None of the CTGs cover glass melt ing furnaces, therefor e, the proposed rule

is not in conflict with nor inconsistent wit h a federal CTG for this source category.

C-3 Final Staff Report with Appendices for Proposed Amendments to Rule 4354SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix C: Rule Consistency Analysis September 16, 2010

2. Federal New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)

The federal NSPS regulations are found in the Code of Federal Regulations Title 40 Part 60 (40 CFR 60). There are two NSPS regulations that apply to glass melting furnaces – 40 CFR 60 Subpart CC (Standard of Performance for Glass Manufacturing Plants and 40 CFR Subpart PPP (Standards of Performance for Wool Fiberglass Insulation Plants). These NSPSs establis hes requirements and em ission limits for the control of particulate matter. As such, they do not pre scribe standards for NOx, SOx, CO, or VOC for this source category. Theref ore, the District rule provisions for NOx, SOx, CO, or VOC in Proposed Rule 4354 are not in conflict with nor inconsistent with federal NSPS requirements.

District staff examined both NSPS with respect to PM for emission limits, monitoring and testing, and recordkeeping and reporting requi rements. Based on careful review, the District’s proposed rule requirements are not in conflict with nor inc onsistent with either 40 CFR 60 Subpart CC or 40 CFR 60 Subpart PPP.

3. National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) and Maximum Achievable Control Technologies (MACTs)

There is one NESHAP for glass melting fu rnaces - 40 CFR 61 Subpart N (National Emission Standard for Inorganic Ar senic Emissions from Glass Manufacturing Plants). This NESHAP specifically tar gets inorganic arsenic emissi ons, and therefore, does not apply to NOx, SOx, CO, VOC, or PM emission limits. For this reason, the proposed rule requirements are not in conflict with nor inconsistent with 40 CFR 61 Subpart N.

Over the past 10 years, EPA has issued 45 MACT standards under Section 112 of the

1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. These MACT standards have been codified into the Code of Federal Regulations as 40 CFR 63. There are two MACT standards that apply to glass melting furnaces – Subpart NNN (N ational Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing Plants) and Subpart SSSSSS (National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Glass Manufacturing Area Sources). The portions of both MACT s that apply to the glass melting furnaces are particulate emission limits and subsequent recordkeeping. As such, they do not regulate NOx, SOx, CO, or VOC for this so urce category. Therefore, the District’s proposed rule requirements for NOx, SOx, CO, or VOC ar e not in conflict with nor inconsistent with applicable federal MACT requirements.

District staff examined the MACT standards with respect to particulat e matter for emission limits, monitoring and testing, and recordkeeping and reporting requirements. Based on careful review, the District’s proposed rule emission limits, monitoring and testing, and recordkeeping and reporting requirements are not in conflict with nor

inconsistent with either 40 CFR 63 S ubpart NNN or with 40 CFR 63 Subpart SSSSSS.

C-4 Final Staff Report with Appendices for Proposed Amendments to Rule 4354SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix C: Rule Consistency Analysis September 16, 2010

4. Federal Lowest Achievable Emission Ra te (LAER) and Federal Best Available Control Technology (BACT)

EPA staff maintains a database of reasonably av ailable control technology (RACT), best available control technology (BACT), and lowest achievable emission rate (LAER) technologies that have been pr ovided to EPA by state and local permitting agencies. A review of glass furnace permits in the RACT/BACT/LAER Clearinghouse (RBLC)

determined that the limits and technology that could be used to meet the proposed

emission limits is available and in use in other parts of t he United States.

5. EPA Policies and Guidelines

Maintenance of Records

Title V (federal) permits and MACT standards require five-year record maintenance. The proposed recordkeeping for District Rule 4354 requires that operators maintain records for at least five years. Proposed Rule 4354, therefore, is consistent with EPA recordkeeping policy.

Malfunction, Star t-up, and Shutdown

An EPA memorandum titled “State Implement ation Plans (SIPs): Policy Regarding Excess Emissions During Malfunctions, St artup, and Shutdown” from Steven A. Herman, Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Assurance and Robert Perciasepe, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, and dated September 20, 1999 outlines the EPA policy with regard to emissions dur ing malfunction, startup, and shutdown. The startup, shutdown, and id ling provisions in Pr oposed Rule 4354 are

consistent with these guidelines.

III. CONCLUSION

Based on the above analysis, District staff concludes that Proposed Rule 4354 is consistent with other District rules and is not in conflict with these rules. Further, the proposed rule is consistent with EPA rules, regulations, and guidelines that apply to the same source category.

C-5 Final Staff Report with Appendices for Proposed Amendments to Rule 4354SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

Appendix C: Rule Consistency Analysis September 16, 2010

This page intentionally blank.

C-6 Final Staff Report with Appendices for Proposed Amendments to Rule 4354