Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District

1947 Galileo Court, Suite 103

Davis, CA 95616

(530)757-3650

www.ysaqmd.org

PROPOSED REVISIONS TO

RULE 1.1, GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS

FINAL STAFF REPORT

June 22, 2015

Prepared by: Paul Hensleigh

phensleigh@ysaqmd.org
Table of Contents Page

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................. 3

A. BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................ 3

II. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED RULE 1.1 AMENDMENTS........................................................ 4

III. COMPARISON TO OTHER APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS ........... 4

IV. IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED RULE ........................................................................................ 4

V. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF METHODS OF COMPLIANCE ......................................... 5

VI. REGULATORY FINDINGS........................................................................................................... 6

VII. PUBLIC COMMENTS AND STAFF RESPONSES...................................................................... 6

VIII. REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................ 7

ATTACHMENT A PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO RULE 1.1, GENERAL PROVISIONS AND 

DEFINITIONS; STRIKE-OUT UNDERLINE VERSION

ATTACHMENT B NOTICE OF EXEMPTION FROM CEQA GUIDELINES 

ATTACHMENT C RESOLUTION NO. 15-06
Final Staff Report – Rule 1.1 June 22, 2015

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

On July 8, 2015, the Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District (District) Board of Director=s will 

consider the proposed amendment to Rule 1.1, GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS. 

Rule 1.1 contains the basic framework by which the District is able to execute the powers and duties 

granted to and imposed upon it by the California Health and Safety Code and other statutory provisions. 

Rule 1.1 was originally adopted by the District as Regulation I, on October 1, 1971, and has been 

amended several times since. The District is proposing to update the definition of exempt compound 

to include organic compounds the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) has 

determined to have negligible photochemical reactivity. These compounds are listed in Title 40 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations Part 51.100 (40 CFR 51.100).

Rule 1.1 will be revised to update the list of exempt compounds in section 219, consistent with 

compounds exempted by the US EPA. The following compounds will be added to the list of exempt 

compounds:

1. 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene (HFO-1234yf);

2. Trans-1-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoroprop-1-ene (HFO-1233zd(E)); and

3. 2-Amino-2-methyl-1-propanol (AMP);

The proposed amendments will have neither a significant nor a detrimental effect on the environment.

Therefore, staff prepared a Notice of Exemption to satisfy the requirements of the California 

Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The notice states that the revisions to Rule 1.1 are exempt from 

the requirements of CEQA pursuant to Section 15308, Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection 

of the Environment.

A. BACKGROUND

History

Rule 1.1 was originally adopted by the District as Regulation I, on October 1, 1971. Minor 

amendments were made to Regulation I, in 1974, 1980, 1985, 1986, and 1988. These amendments 

primarily added or changed definitions contained in Rule 1.2. In 1988, Rule 1.8, concerning 

administrative penalty settlements, was added to the Regulation.

In 1993, Regulation I was completely revised. The District was required to amend the rule at this time 

due to changes in federal law, and a change in the District=s name. In addition, the District amended 

the definitions and changed the format of the Rule. Rule 1.1, GENERAL PROVISIONS AND 

DEFINITIONS replaced Rules 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, & 1.6, previously separate rules.

The rule was amended again in 1997 to change the definition of Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) to 

be consistent with California Air Resources Board (ARB) and US EPA policy. The rule was amended 

in 2005 to reorder and add some exempt compounds (methyl acetate, methyl formate, 

Hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), Hyrdrofluorocarbons(HFCs), and Hydrofluoroethers (HFEs)) 

and correct a few definitions (hearing board, nonreactive organic compounds, and standard 

temperature). The rule was amended in 2008 to add a few definitions (Air Pollution Control Officer, 

American Society of Testing Methods, California Air Resources Board, and United States 

Environmental Protection Agency). The rule was amended in 2013 to add 8 more exempt compounds 

to the definition of VOC.

Page 3
Final Staff Report – Rule 1.1 June 22, 2015

Overview of source category

As this rule applies to all the rules and regulations of the District, there is no one source category that is 

affected by this rule. The proposed amendments to the rule can affect any source or potential source 

using or intending to use compounds considered by the US EPA to be exempt as a VOC, that are not yet 

considered to be exempt by District Rule 1.1.

District Rule 1.1 defines VOC as any compound containing carbon except exempt compounds as 

defined in Section 214. By this definition, compounds are considered a VOC until they are 

specifically excluded. Therefore it is necessary to update Rule 1.1 when new compounds have been

sufficiently studied and determined to be exempt.

VOCs are significant to air quality because they are considered a precursor to ozone. The potential 

contribution that each VOC makes to ozone formation depends on its photochemical reactivity.

Photochemical reactivity measures a compound’s tendency to participate in photochemical reactions in 

the atmosphere in ways that contribute to ozone formation.

The US EPA defines VOC in 40 CFR 51.100 to include any compound of carbon participating in 

atmospheric photochemical reactions that is not specifically exempted. The regulations include a list 

of compounds explicitly exempted from regulation as VOCs. There is a short list of compounds such 

as carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide, which have not historically been regulated as VOCs, as well as 

a longer list of compounds that the EPA has classified as Anegligibly reactive@. These are compounds 

that, based on studies, have been demonstrated to not contribute significantly to ozone formation. This 

list is established and modified by regulation.

II. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED RULE 1.1 AMENDMENTS

The proposed amendments to Rule 1.1 are as follows:

Section 200 Definitions

The definition of exempt compound has been amended. Three compounds (listed above) are being 

added to the list consistent with compounds the US EPA have determined to be exempt as listed in 40 

CFR 51.100.

III. COMPARISON WITH OTHER APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS

Health and Safety Code Section 40727.2 requires districts to prepare a written analysis (usually in the 

form of a matrix) that identifies all existing federal air pollution control requirements, including, but not 

limited to, emission control standards constituting best available control technology (BACT) that apply

to the same equipment or source type as the rule or regulation proposed for adoption or modification by 

the District. In addition, the analysis shall identify any other District rule or regulation that applies to 

the same equipment or source type. This amendments proposed are administrative in nature, so the 

specified elements (e.g. averaging provisions, operating parameters, monitoring, etc...) are not 

applicable.

IV. IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED RULE

Emissions Impacts

This is an administrative rule and does not have a direct impact on emissions.

Page 4
Final Staff Report – Rule 1.1 June 22, 2015

Cost Effectiveness

CH&SC Section 40703 requires the District, in the process of the adoption of any rule or regulation, to 

consider and make public its findings related to the cost effectiveness of the rule. Cost effectiveness 

for rulemaking purposes is calculated by dividing the cost of air pollution controls required by the rule 

by the amount of air pollution reduced. The amendments to this rule will not directly impact emissions 

and therefore cost effectiveness calculations cannot be performed.

Socioeconomic Impacts

California Health and Safety Code Section 40728.5 (a) requires the District, in the process of the 

adoption of any rule or regulation, to consider the socioeconomic impact if air quality or emission limits 

may be significantly affected. However, districts with a population of less than 500,000 persons are 

exempt from the provisions of Section 40728.5 (a). The District=s population is estimated to be 

approximately 310,000 and well below the 500,000 person threshold. Therefore, a socioeconomic 

analysis for this rulemaking is not required.

Incremental Cost Effectiveness

CH&SC Section 40920.6 requires an assessment of the incremental cost-effectiveness for proposed 

regulations relative to ozone, Carbon Monoxide (CO), Sulfur Oxides (SOx), Nitrogen Oxides (NOx), 

and their precursors. Incremental cost-effectiveness is defined as the difference in control costs 

divided by the difference in emission reductions between two potential control options that can achieve 

the same emission reduction goal of a regulation. The proposed amendments are for an administrative 

rule and therefore, no incremental cost-effectiveness analysis can be done.

V. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF METHODS OF COMPLIANCE

California Public Resource Code Section 21159 requires the District to perform an environmental 

analysis of the reasonably foreseeable methods of compliance. The analysis must include the 

following information:

1. An analysis of the reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts of the methods of 

compliance.

2. An analysis of the reasonably foreseeable mitigation measures.

3. An analysis of the reasonably foreseeable alternative means of compliance with the rule or 

regulation.

This is an administrative rule and does not have direct impact on emissions. Therefore, an evaluation 

under this section cannot be performed.

This rule is an administrative rule and the proposed amendments will have neither a significant nor a 

detrimental effect on the environment or humans due to unusual circumstances. In addition, the 

proposed amendment is considered to be an action taken to maintain and protect the environment. 

Therefore, staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the 

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15308, Actions by Regulatory 

Agencies for Protection of the Environment. Staff prepared a Notice of Exemption (NOE) to meet the 

CEQA Guidelines (Attachment B).

Page 5
Final Staff Report – Rule 1.1 June 22, 2015

VI. REGULATORY FINDINGS

Section 40727(a) of the California Health & Safety Code (H&SC) requires that prior to adopting or 

amending a rule or regulation, an air district=s board make findings of necessity, authority, clarity, 

consistency, nonduplication, and reference. The findings must be based on the following:

1. Information presented in the District=s written analysis, prepared pursuant to H&SC Section 

40727.2;

2. Information contained in the rulemaking records pursuant to H&SC Section 40728; and

3. Relevant information presented at the Board=s hearing for adoption of the rule.

The required findings are:

Necessity: The rule amendment is necessary in order to be consistent with US EPA=s definitions of 

compounds exempt as VOCs. The amendment will prevent unnecessary permitting and control costs 

for sources, potential sources, and the District.

Authority: The District is authorized to adopt rules and regulations by California Health and Safety 

Code, Sections 40001, 40702, 40716, 41010 and 41013. (H&SC Section 40727 (b)(2)).

Clarity: District staff have reviewed the proposed rule and determined that it can be easily understood 

by the affected industry. In addition, the record contains no evidence that the persons directly affected 

by the rule cannot understand the rule. (H&SC Section 40727(b)(3)).

Consistency: The proposed rule does not conflict with, and is not contradictory to, existing statutes, 

court decisions, or state or federal regulations. (H&SC Section 40727(b)(4)).

Non-Duplication: The proposed rule does not duplicate any state laws or regulations regarding the 

attainment and maintenance of state and federal air quality limits. (H&SC Section 40727(b)(5)).

Reference: This rule revision implements the provisions of 40 CFR 51.100.

VII. PUBLIC COMMENTS AND STAFF RESPONSES

Since the revisions to this rule are very minor, and not controversial, the District did not hold a public 

workshop to discuss revisions to the rule. The District will hold a public hearing on July 8, 2015, to 

consider adoption of the proposed amendment to Rule 1.1. Notification was sent to surrounding Air 

Districts, City Managers within the District, building/planning/community development departments 

within the YSAQMD, all city and county libraries within the District, and all Board members. The 

public hearing notice was published in the Vacaville Reporter, Woodland Democrat, and the Davis 

Enterprise on June 5, 2015.

The District received a letter of support for this revision from the American Coatings Association and a 

‘no comment’ letter from US EPA.

A copy of the public hearing notice, the final staff report, and final rule language, were posted on the 

District=s web page prior to the public hearing.

Page 6
Final Staff Report – Rule 1.1 June 22, 2015

VIII. REFERENCES

Federal Code of Regulations, Title 40, Part 51.100.

Page 7
ATTACHMENT A

PROPOSED RULE 1.1, GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS

STRIKE-OUT UNDERLINE VERSION
ATTACHMENT B

NOTICE OF EXEMPTION FROM CEQA GUIDELINES
Notice of Exemption

To: G Office of Planning and Research

1400 Tenth Street, Room 121

Sacramento, CA 95814

 County Clerk G County Clerk

County of Yolo Solano County

625 Court Street Room 105 600 Texas Street

Woodland, CA 95695 Fairfield, CA 94533

From: Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District

1947 Galileo Court, Suite 103

Davis, CA 95618

Project Title: Revision of Rule 1.1- GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS

Project Location: Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District

Project description: The District is proposing to amend Rule 1.1, GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS. 

The District is proposing to update the definition of exempt compound to include 

organic compounds the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) has 

determined to have negligible photochemical reactivity. These compounds are listed in 

Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 51.100 (40 CFR 51.100).

Name of Public Agency Approving Project: Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District

Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project: Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District

Exempt Status:

G Ministerial

G Emergency Project

 Categorical Exemption (CEQA Guidelines Section 15308, Action by Regulatory Agency for 

Protection of the Environment)

G Statutory Exemption

Reason why project is exempt: The revision of Rule 1.1 is an action taken to maintain and protect the 

environment and is therefore exempt from CEQA because it 

constitutes a Class 8 categorical exemption pursuant to CEQA 

Guidelines 15308.

Lead Agency Contact Person: Mat Ehrhardt, Air Pollution Control Officer

Telephone Number: (530) 757-3650

Signature: Date: Title: 
Notice of Exemption

To: G Office of Planning and Research

1400 Tenth Street, Room 121

Sacramento, CA 95814

G County Clerk  County Clerk

County of Yolo Solano County

625 Court Street Room 105 600 Texas Street

Woodland, CA 95695 Fairfield, CA 94533

From: Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District

1947 Galileo Court, Suite 103

Davis, CA 95618

Project Title: Revision of Rule 1.1- GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS

Project Location: Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District

Project description: The District is proposing to amend Rule 1.1, GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS. 

The District is proposing to update the definition of exempt compound to include 

organic compounds the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) has 

determined to have negligible photochemical reactivity. These compounds are listed in 

Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 51.100 (40 CFR 51.100).

Name of Public Agency Approving Project: Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District

Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project: Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District

Exempt Status:

G Ministerial

G Emergency Project

 Categorical Exemption (CEQA Guidelines Section 15308, Action by Regulatory Agency for 

Protection of the Environment)

G Statutory Exemption

Reason why project is exempt: The revision of Rule 1.1 is an action taken to maintain and protect the 

environment and is therefore exempt from CEQA because it 

constitutes a Class 8 categorical exemption pursuant to CEQA 

Guidelines 15308.

Lead Agency Contact Person: Mat Ehrhardt, Air Pollution Control Officer

Telephone Number: (530) 757-3650

Signature: Date: Title: 
ATTACHMENT C

RESOLUTION NO. 15-06
RESOLUTION NO. 15-06

RESOLUTION AMENDING YOLO-SOLANO AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT RULE 1.1

WHEREAS, California Health and Safety Code section 40702 provides that an air quality 

management district shall adopt rules and regulations as may be necessary or proper to execute the powers and 

duties granted to, and imposed upon, the district by Division 26 of the Health and Safety Code; and

WHEREAS, Health and Safety Code section 40727 provides that before adopting, amending, or 

repealing a rule or regulation, a district board shall make findings of necessity, authority, clarity, consistency, 

nonduplication, and reference, based upon information developed pursuant to section 40727.2, information in 

the rulemaking record maintained pursuant to section 40728, and relevant information presented at the public 

hearing required by section 40725; and

WHEREAS, section 15308 of the CEQA Guidelines provides that actions taken by regulatory agencies 

as authorized by state law to assure the maintenance, restoration, or enhancement of the environment where the 

regulatory process involves procedures for protection of the environment, are categorically exempt from CEQA 

review (Class 8 Categorical Exemption); and

WHEREAS, District staff identified definitions within Rule 1.1, General Provision and Definitions 

which required updating for consistency with federal and state policy.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the Yolo-Solano Air 

Quality Management District hereby finds, authorizes, directs and declares as follows:

1. The Board of Directors has considered and hereby adopts by reference the staff report prepared 

in this matter.

2. The Board of Directors makes the following findings pursuant to Health and Safety Code 

section 40727:

a. Necessity: Information in the District=s rulemaking record maintained pursuant to 

Health and Safety Code section 40728 demonstrates a need for amending District Rule 

1.1;

b. Authority: Health and Safety Code section 40702 permits the District to amend District 

Rule 1.1; 

c. Clarity: District Rule 1.1 as amended is written so that its meaning can be easily 

understood by the persons directly affected by it;

d. Consistency: District Rule 1.1 as amended is in harmony with, and not in conflict with 

or contradictory to, existing statutes, court decisions, or state or federal regulations;

e. Nonduplication: District Rule 1.1 as amended does not impose the same requirements 
as an existing state or federal regulation;

f. Reference: By adopting District Rule 1.1, the District implements the provisions of 40 

CFR 51.100.

3. The Board of Directors finds that the District has complied with the procedural requirements 

set forth in Chapters 6 and 6.5 of Part 3 of Division 26 of the Health and Safety Code.

4. The Board of Directors finds that amending District Rule 1.1 is an action taken by a regulatory 

agency as authorized by state law to assure the maintenance, restoration, or enhancement of the 

environment where the regulatory process involves procedures for protection of the 

environment, and is therefore categorically exempt from CEQA review as a Class 8 

Categorical Exemption.

5. The Board of Directors hereby amends District Rule 1.1, General Provisions and Definitions, 

as set forth in Exhibit 1 (Attachment A of the Staff Report), which is attached and incorporated 

by reference. The amendment is effective July 8, 2015.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management 

District this 8th day of July, 2015, by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

____________________________________

Harold Anderson, Chair

Board of Directors

Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District

Attest: Approved as to Form:

__________________________ ______________________________

Denise Almaguer, Clerk Hope Welton, District Counsel

Board of Directors