-2- 

control technology (BACT) emission limits at the end of the equipment’s useful life. 

For equipment regulated by PR 1147, modernization would require either burner 

upgrades or replacement of burner systems. 

Affected Facilities 

Proposed Rule 1147 affects manufacturers (NAICS 333), distributors and wholesalers 

(NAICS 423) of combustion equipment, as well as owners and operators of ovens, 

dryers, furnaces, and other equipment in the district (NAICS 23, 31, 32, and 33). The 

units affected by the proposed rule are used in industrial, commercial and institutional 

settings for a wide variety of processes. Approximately one fourth of the units currently 

meet the NOx emission limits of PR 1147. Staff estimates that there are as many as 

2,500 permitted units (excluding remediation units) with NOx emission limits greater 

than one pound per day that will potentially become subject to the emission limits of PR 

1147 between 2010 and 2014. An additional 2,500 permitted units with NOx emission 

limits of less than one pound per day will become subject to the emission limits of the 

proposed rule between 2015 and 2019. The approximately 5,000 units subject to the 

emission limits of PR 1147 are located at approximately 3,000 facilities. In addition, 

staff estimates that 100 to 200 remediation units per year will become subject to the 

NOx emission limits of PR 1147 starting in 2011 and all units will meet the NOx 

emission limit by 2020. 

Public Process 

The rule development effort for Rule 1147 is part of an ongoing process to assess low 

NOx technologies for combustion equipment. For this rule development, staff held four 

Task Force meetings on process and burner technologies with representatives from 

affected businesses, manufacturers, trade organizations and other interested parties. At 

these meetings low NOx technology, emission limits, emission testing and compliance 

dates were discussed. Staff also held individual meetings with manufacturers and 

distributors of burner systems and visited local businesses to observe processes and 

equipment affected by PR 1147. A Public Workshop was held on September 30, 2008 

and a Public Consultation meeting on October 28, 2008. 

Summary of Proposal 

PR 1147 applies to gaseous and liquid fueled combustion equipment including, but not 

limited to, ovens, dryers, dehydrators, heaters, kilns, calciners, furnaces, heated pots, 

cookers, roasters, fryers, closed and open heated tanks and evaporators, distillation 

units, degassing units, incinerators, soil remediation units. This proposed rule does not 

apply to solid fuel fired combustion equipment, internal combustion engines regulated 

under District Rule 1110.2, turbines, charbroilers, or boilers, water heaters, thermal 

fluid heaters or enclosed process heaters subject to District Rules 1109, 1146, 1146.1, or 

1146.2. In addition, PR 1147 does not apply to equipment subject to AQMD Rules 

1111, 1112, 1117, 1118, 1121 or 1135. 
-3- 

PR 1147 requires equipment to meet NOx emission limits in the range of 30 ppm to 60 

ppm (referenced to 3% oxygen) depending upon the process and process temperature. 

To provide compliance flexibility, PR 1147 also provides equivalent set of limits, 

expressed in pounds per million Btu. The emission limits in PR 1147 can be achieved 

with low NOx burners. Currently, the lower limit for low NOx burners varies from less 

than 30 ppm to 60 ppm depending upon the burner, process temperature and nature of 

the process. There are a large variety of burners that emit less than 30 ppm NOx for 

process temperatures less than 1200° F. A number of manufacturers provide burners 

meeting the proposed NOx limits for the equipment regulated by the proposed rule. 

PR 1147 also requires operators to keep equipment maintenance records and to install 

meters for monitoring fuel use starting January 1, 2010. Maintenance records must be 

kept on site by facilities for at least three years. Newer units are currently required to 

have fuel or time meters by their permit conditions. PR 1147 will place the same 

requirement on older equipment but allow time for installation. 

PR 1147 provides two options for owner/operators, burner manufacturers and installers 

to provide evidence that replacement burners comply with the emission limit. One 

option is to source test the unit using an AQMD approved protocol and test method. 

The second option is for the manufacturer to certify burners and equipment using an 

AQMD approved protocol and test method. The AQMD would provide certification of 

specific combinations of burners and equipment to the manufacturer and a copy of that 

certification, provided by the manufacturer, must be kept on site by the owner/operator. 

The AQMD will monitor manufacturers, sellers and installers in addition to 

owner/operators to assure that certified installations comply with PR 1147 emission 

limits. 

The set hearing version of PR 1147 released to the public in November included a 

requirement for the operator to periodically source test each unit. In the spirit of 

reducing implementation and compliance costs, instead of requiring owners and 

operators of affected units to periodically re-test each unit, staff is now proposing to 

implement a program where the District conducts random testing on a statistically 

significant sample size of units subject to the rule. Sample size will be selected in a 

manner that provides the District with a high level of confidence regarding the 

industry-wide compliance rates. This testing program could be implemented starting in 

2012 after half of the equipment have replaced burners and completed their initial 

source tests and manufacturers have certified equipment. 

The cost of this random testing program is expected to be significantly less than the 

periodic source testing required in earlier versions of the proposed rule. It is proposed 

that the District recover implementation costs by applying a source testing surcharge or 

other fee type to the annual operating permit fees, applicable to units subject to this rule. 
-4- 

Emission Reductions and Cost Effectiveness 

The proposed rule is estimated to reduce annual average emissions of NOx by 3.5 tons 

per day in 2014 from an annual average inventory of 6.2 tons per day. PR 1147 will 

reduce emissions an additional 0.3 tons per day by 2023. The approximately 6,600 

units subject to the emission limits of PR 1147 are located at approximately 3,000 

facilities. However, only about 2,200 facilities are expected to require retrofit of 

burners in their equipment. 

Rule cost effectiveness is based on replacement of burners. Replacement cost includes 

burner price, tax and installation. The cost effectiveness for burners meeting 30 ppm is 

about $5,000 per ton of NOx reduced. The average cost effectiveness for burners 

meeting 40 or 60 ppm is about $7,000 per ton. The cost effectiveness for commonly 

used 1 to 2 mmBtu/hour burners meeting 30 ppm varies widely from $4,000 to $13,000 

per ton. 

Key Issues 

Key issues raised at public meeting include source testing of air heating equipment, 

source testing many similar units would be burdensome, multiple units requiring retrofit 

in one year, and metal heat treating and forging furnaces must meet temperature 

uniformity requirements in order to meet customer specifications. These key issues and 

staff’s responses are summarized in Attachment B. 

AQMP and Legal Mandates 

The California Health and Safety Code requires the AQMD to adopt an Air Quality 

Management Plan to meet state and federal ambient air quality standards and adopt 

rules and regulations that carry out the objectives of the AQMP. The Health and Safety 

Code also requires the AQMD to implement all feasible measures to reduce air 

pollution. This proposed adoption of Rule 1147 relies on feasible technologies to 

further reduce NOx emissions. The NOx reductions from this proposed rule will further 

reduce emissions by 3.5 tons/day by 2014 with an additional reduction of 0.3 ton/day by 

2023 and help achieve compliance with federal and state ambient air quality standards 

for ozone and PM2.5. 

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Analysis 

Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines § 15252 and 

AQMD Rule 110, the AQMD has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) for 

proposed Rule 1147. The environmental analysis in the Draft EA concluded that 

proposed Rule 1147 would not generate any significant adverse environmental impacts. 

The Draft EA was released for a 30-day public review and comment period from 

October 16, 2008 to November 14, 2008 and no comment letters were received from the 

public regarding the Draft EA. 
-5- 

Since the release of the Draft EA, minor modifications have been made to the 

document. However, none of the modifications alter any conclusions reached in the 

Draft EA, nor provide new information of substantial importance relative to the draft 

document. As a result, these minor revisions do not require recirculation of the Draft 

EA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15073.5. Therefore, the Draft EA is now a Final 

EA and is included as an attachment to this Governing Board package. 

Socioeconomic Analysis 

An analysis of PR 1147 assessing the socioeconomic impacts was conducted and the 

Socioeconomic Impact Assessment was released 30 days prior to the Board hearing. 

The Final Socioeconomic Impact Assessment is included as an attachment to this 

Governing Board package. The socioeconomic assessment for PR 1147 analyzed 2,162 

facilities with a total of 4,924 affected units. The affected facilities belong to a number 

of sectors, of which the sectors of manufacturing, retail and wholesale trade, and repair 

and maintenances services have most of the affected units. 

The average annual cost of PR 1147 is projected to be $9.12 million between 2010 and 

2025. The sectors of fabricated metal, primary metal, and printing and related support 

activities are expected to incur higher shares of the total cost ($1.53, $0.78, and $0.7 

million, respectively). PR 1147 is projected to have 102 jobs forgone annually in the 

entire four-county economy between 2010 and 2025, which is less than one-hundredth 

of one percent of the total four-county employment. 

Resource Impacts

To determine the state of compliance with the proposed limits in PR 1147, staff is 

proposing to initiate a random testing program which will be significantly less costly 

than requiring owners/operators to periodically source test each of their units. To 

recover the cost of the program, staff intends to prepare an amendment to Regulation III 

– Fees for Board consideration in 2009, that establishes a source testing surcharge or 

other appropriate fee type to the annual operating permit fees applicable to the units 

subject to this rule. 

Attachments 

A. Summary of Proposal 

B. Key Issues and Responses 

C. Rule Development Process 

D. Key Contacts List 

E. Resolution 

F. Proposed Rule 

G. Final Staff Report 

H. Socioeconomic Impact Assessment 

I. Final Environmental Assessment 
ATTACHMENT A 

SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL 

Propose Rule 1147 - NOx Reductions from Miscellaneous Sources 

• Applies to units requiring an AQMD permit and not subject to NOx emission limits in other 

AQMD source specific rules (Regulation XI) 

• Rule NOx limits vary from 30 ppm to 60 ppm by equipment category 

• Limits met with low NOx burners 

• Compliance schedule is based on equipment age and permit emission limit (older and 

higher emitting units first) 

• Compliance to be phased in beginning 2010 for in-use units 

• Delayed compliance date for recent burner modification 

• Source Testing – Initial compliance testing 

• Option for manufacturers to certify equipment (reduces the number of individual source 

tests) 

• Periodic random testing by the District to determine state of compliance. 

• Onsite recordkeeping and installation of fuel meters 
7 

ATTACHMENT B 

KEY ISSUES AND RESPONSES 

Propose Rule 1147 - NOx Reductions from Miscellaneous Sources 

Issue – Air heating equipment operating at greater than 18% oxygen content cannot apply 

a simple conversion factor for measuring concentration in ppm. 

Response: One option is to calculate the emission rate in units of lbs per mmBtu. This 

would be an alternate limit in PR 1147. 

Issue – Some types of equipment are similar in configuration and operation. It would be 

burdensome and not necessary to source test each of these units. 

Response: PR 1147 allows for a certification alternative for establishing compliance for 

similar types of equipment. Furthermore, staff has modified the proposed rule to 

replace the periodic source testing requirement that would be applicable to the 

owner/operator for each of their units subject to the rule with a significantly less costly 

random testing program to be conducted by the District. 

Issue – Some companies may have to retrofit many units in one year. The rule should 

allow a more flexible schedule for companies with multiple units 

Response: PR 1147 was revised to allow companies with 5 or more units to phase in 

compliance over 5 years. 

Issue –Metal heat treating and forging furnaces are often unique and must maintain 

temperature uniformity in order to meet customer specifications. 

Response: AQMD staff agrees that maintaining temperature uniformity for such 

applications is very important and commits to work with the affected parties and 

monitor implementation of the rule and will report back to the Stationary Source 

Committee on this issue prior to the effective dates of such units. 
8 

ATTACHMENT C 

RULE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS 

Proposed Rule 1147 – NOx Reductions from Miscellaneous Sources

Fifteen (15) months spent in rule development. 

Initial Rule Development 

August 2007 

• Four Task Force Meetings: February 12, 2008, March 12, 2008, August 13, 

2008 and November 20, 2008 

• Public Workshop: September 30, 2008 

• Stationary Source Committee: October 17, 2008 and November 21, 2008 

• Public Consultation Meeting: October 28, 2008 

• Local Government & Small Business Assistance Advisory Group: 

November 14, 2008 

Approximately 10,000 notices of the public workshop were mailed to 

regulated community, equipment manufacturers, trade associations, equipment 

suppliers, equipment installers and other interested parties. 

Set Public Hearing: November 7, 2008 

CEQA Draft EA Released for 

30-Day Review 

Release Date: October 16, 2008 

Public Hearing: December 5, 2008 

, 2004
9 

ATTACHMENT D 

KEY CONTACTS LIST 

Boeing Company 

BP West Coast Productions, LLC 

California Air Resources Board (CARB) 

Coalition for Clean Air 

County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County 

ECLIPSE, Inc. 

Energy Services 

John Zink Company 

Maxon Corporation 

Mission Foods 

Southern California Gas Company 

U. S. EPA 

Wirth Gas Equipment, Inc. 
10 

ATTACHMENT E 

RESOLUTION NO. - 

A Resolution of the Governing Board of the South Coast Air Quality 

Management District (AQMD) certifying the Final Environmental Assessment for 

Proposed Rule 1147 - NOx Reductions from Miscellaneous Sources.

A Resolution of the AQMD Governing Board adopting Rule 1147 - 

NOx Reductions from Miscellaneous Sources. 

WHEREAS, the AQMD Governing Board has determined with certainty 

that Proposed Rule 1147 - NOx Reductions from Miscellaneous Sources, is a “project” 

pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and 

WHEREAS, the AQMD has had its regulatory program certified pursuant 

to Public Resources Code § 21080.5 and has conducted CEQA review and analysis 

pursuant to such program (AQMD Rule 110); and 

WHEREAS, AQMD staff has prepared a Draft Environmental 

Assessment (EA) pursuant to its certified regulatory program and CEQA Guidelines § 

15252, setting forth the potential environmental consequences of Proposed Rule 1147 - 

NOx Reductions from Miscellaneous Sources; and 

WHEREAS, the Draft EA was circulated for public review, no comment 

letters were received relative to the Draft EA, and the Draft EA has been revised such 

that it is now a Final EA; and 

WHEREAS, it is necessary that the adequacy of the Final EA be 

determined by the AQMD Governing Board prior to its certification; and 

WHEREAS, the Governing Board prior to voting on Proposed Rule 1147 

- NOx Reductions from Miscellaneous Sources, has reviewed and considered the Final 

EA; and 

WHEREAS, the AQMD Governing Board voting on Proposed Rule 1147 

- NOx Reductions from Miscellaneous Sources has reviewed and considered the Final 

EA prior to its certification; and 

WHEREAS, a Mitigation Monitoring Plan pursuant to Public Resources 

Code § 21081.6, has not been prepared since no mitigation measures are necessary; and 
11 

WHEREAS, the AQMD Governing Board finds and determines, taking 

into consideration the factors in § (d)(4)(D) of the Governing Board Procedures, that the 

modifications adopted which have been made to Proposed Rule 1147 - NOx Reductions 

from Miscellaneous Sources, since notice of public hearing was published do not 

significantly change the meaning of the proposed project within the meaning of Health 

and Safety Code § 40726 and would not constitute significant new information 

requiring recirculation of the Draft CEQA document pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 

15073.5; and 

WHEREAS, California Health and Safety Code § 40727 requires that 

prior to adopting, amending or repealing a rule or regulation, the AQMD Governing

Board shall make findings of necessity, authority, clarity, consistency, non-duplication, 

and reference based on relevant information presented at the public hearing and in the 

staff report; and 

WHEREAS, the AQMD Governing Board obtains its authority to adopt, 

amend, or repeal rules and regulations from §§ 39002, 40000, 40001, 40440, 40441, 

40702, 40725 through 40728, 41508, and 41700 of the California Health and Safety 

Code; and 

WHEREAS, the AQMD Governing Board has determined that there is a 

problem that Proposed Rule 1147 - NOx Reductions from Miscellaneous Sources will 

help alleviate, i.e., the Basin does not meet federal and state ambient air quality 

standards for ozone and particulate matter, and Proposed Rule 1147 will promote 

attainment of these standards; and 

WHEREAS, the AQMD Governing Board has determined that a need 

exists to adopt Rule 1147 - NOx Reductions from Miscellaneous Sources to reduce 

emissions of nitrogen oxides which is a precursor to ozone and particulate matter; and 

WHEREAS, the AQMD Governing Board has determined that Proposed 

Rule 1147 - NOx Reductions from Miscellaneous Sources, as proposed is written or 

displayed so that its meaning can be easily understood by the persons directly affected 

by it; and 

WHEREAS, the AQMD Governing Board has determined that Proposed 

Rule 1147 - NOx Reductions from Miscellaneous Sources, as proposed is in harmony 

with, and not in conflict with or contradictory to, existing federal or state statutes, court 

decisions, or regulations; and 

WHEREAS, the AQMD Governing Board has determined that Proposed 

Rule 1147 - NOx Reductions from Miscellaneous Sources, as proposed does not impose 

the same requirements as any existing state or federal regulation and the proposed rule 
12 

is necessary and proper to execute the powers and duties granted to, and imposed upon, 

the District; and 

WHEREAS, the AQMD Governing Board has determined that Proposed 

Rule 1147 - NOx Reductions from Miscellaneous Sources, as proposed, references the 

following statutes which the AQMD hereby implements, interprets or makes specific: 

Health and Safety Code 40001(a) (rules to meet air quality standards); 40440(a) (rules 

to carry out the plan); 40702 (adoption of rules and regulations); and 

WHEREAS, Health and Safety Code § 40727.2 requires the AQMD to 

prepare a written analysis of existing federal air pollution control requirements 

applicable to the same source type being regulated whenever it adopts, or amends a rule, 

such that the AQMD’s analysis of Proposed Rule 1147 is included in the staff report; 

and 

WHEREAS, the AQMD Governing Board has determined that the 

socioeconomic impact assessment of the Proposed Rule 1147 - NOx Reductions from 

Miscellaneous Sources is consistent with the Governing Board March 17, 1989 and 

October 14, 1994 Board Socioeconomic Resolutions for rule adoption; and 

WHEREAS, the AQMD Governing Board has determined that the 

socioeconomic impact assessment of the Proposed Rule 1147 - NOx Reductions from 

Miscellaneous Sources is consistent with the provisions of Health and Safety Code §

40440.5, 40440.8 and 40728.5; and 

WHEREAS, the AQMD Governing Board has reviewed and considered 

the staff's findings related to cost impacts of Proposed Rule 1147 - NOx Reductions 

from Miscellaneous Sources set forth in the socioeconomic impact assessment made 

public with the agenda package for this meeting, and hereby finds and determines that 

cost impacts are as set forth in that assessment; and 

WHEREAS, the AQMD Governing Board has determined that Proposed 

Rule 1147 - NOx Reductions from Miscellaneous Sources may result in increased costs 

to the industry, yet are considered to be reasonable, with total annualized costs as 

specified in the Final Socioeconomic Impact Assessment; and

WHEREAS, the AQMD Governing Board has actively considered the 

Socioeconomic Impact Assessment and has made a good faith effort to minimize such 

impacts; and

WHEREAS, a public hearing has been properly noticed in accordance 

with the provisions of Health and Safety Code § 40725; and 
13 

WHEREAS, the AQMD Governing Board has held a public hearing in 

accordance with all provisions of law; and 

WHEREAS, the AQMD Governing Board specifies the Manager of

Proposed Rule 1147 - NOx Reductions from Miscellaneous Sources as the custodian of 

the documents or other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which 

the adoption of this proposed project is based, which are located at the South Coast Air 

Quality Management District, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California; and 

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the AQMD Governing 

Board hereby certifies, pursuant to the authority granted by law, the Final EA for 

Proposed Rule 1147 - NOx Reductions from Miscellaneous Sources; and 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that because no significant adverse 

environmental impacts were identified as a result of implementing Proposed Rule 1147 

- NOx Reductions from Miscellaneous Sources, Findings, a Statement of Overriding 

Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring Plan are not required; and 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the AQMD Governing Board 

hereby directs staff to present to the Board no later than June 1, 2011 a proposal for 

collecting fees, not to exceed $100 per unit annually, to implement a testing program for 

equipment subject to Proposed Rule 1147 - NOx Reductions from Miscellaneous 

Sources; and 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that in the spirit of permit streamlining 

and reducing associated costs, the AQMD Governing Board does hereby direct staff, to 

the extent feasible, develop standardized permits for units subject to Proposed Rule 

1147. 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the AQMD Governing Board does 

hereby adopt, pursuant to the authority granted by law, Rule 1147 - NOx Reductions 

from Miscellaneous Sources, as set forth in the attached and incorporated herein by 

reference. 

Dated: 

 Clerk of the District Board
SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 

Final Environmental Assessment for Proposed Rule 1147 – NOx Reductions from 

Miscellaneous Sources 

December 2008 

SCAQMD No. 081015JJI 

State Clearinghouse No: 2008101082 

Executive Officer 

Barry R. Wallerstein, D. Env. 

Deputy Executive Officer 

Planning, Rule Development and Area Sources 

Elaine Chang, DrPH 

Assistant Deputy Executive Officer 

Planning, Rule Development and Area Sources 

Laki Tisopulos, Ph.D., P.E. 

Planning and Rules Manager 

Planning, Rule Development and Area Sources 

Susan Nakamura 

Author: Jeffrey J. Inabinet Air Quality Specialist 

Contributors: Wayne Barcikowski Air Quality Specialist 

 Rizaldy Calungcagin Air Quality Specialist 

Reviewed By: Steve Smith, Ph.D. Program Supervisor, CEQA 

 Joe Cassmassi Planning and Rules Manager, Planning, Rule 

 Development, and Area Sources 

 Gary Quinn, P.E. Program Supervisor, Planning, Rule Development, 

 and Area Sources 

 Barbara Baird District Counsel 

 Linda Vogel Senior Deputy District Counsel 
SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 

GOVERNING BOARD 

CHAIRMAN: WILLIAM A. BURKE, Ed.D. 

Speaker of the Assembly Appointee 

 

VICE CHAIRMAN: S. ROY WILSON, Ed.D. 

Supervisor, Fourth District 

 Riverside County Representative

MEMBERS: 

MICHAEL D. ANTONOVICH 

Supervisor, Fifth District 

Los Angeles County Representative 

MICHAEL A. CACCIOTTI 

Councilmember, City of South Pasadena 

Cities of Los Angeles County, Eastern Region 

BILL CAMPBELL Supervisor, Third District 

Orange County Representative 

JANE CARNEY 

Senate Rules Committee Appointee 

RONALD O. LOVERIDGE 

Mayor, City of Riverside 

Cities Representative, Riverside County 

JOSEPH K. LYOU, Ph.D. 

Governor's Appointee 

GARY OVITT 

Supervisor, Fourth District 

San Bernardino County Representative 

JAN PERRY 

Councilwoman, 9th District 

 City of Los Angeles Representative 

MIGUEL A. PULIDO 

 Mayor, City of Santa Ana 

Cities Representative, Orange County 

TONIA REYES URANGA 

Councilwoman, City of Long Beach 

Cities of Los Angeles County, Western Region 

DENNIS YATES 

Mayor, City of Chino 

Cities Representative, San Bernardino County 

EXECUTIVE OFFICER: 

BARRY R. WALLERSTEIN, D.Env. 
PREFACE 

This document constitutes the Final Environmental Assessment (EA) for Proposed Rule 1147 – NOx 

Emissions from Miscellaneous Sources. The Draft EA was released for a 30-day public review and 

comment period from October 16, 2008 to November 14, 2008. No comment letters were received 

from the public relative to the Draft EA. The environmental analysis in the Draft EA concluded that 

proposed Rule 1147 would not generate any significant adverse environmental impacts. 

 

Minor modifications were made to the proposed rule subsequent to release of the Draft EA for public 

review. To facilitate identifying modifications to the document, added and/or modified text is 

underlined. Staff has reviewed these minor modifications and concluded that they do not make any 

impacts substantially worse or change any conclusions reached in the Draft EA. As a result, these 

minor revisions do not require recirculation of the document pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 

§15088.5. Therefore, this document now constitutes the Final EA for proposed Rule 1147. 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

CHAPTER 1 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 

Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1-1 

California Environmental Quality Act....................................................................................... 1-2

Project Location......................................................................................................................... 1-2 

Project Objective........................................................................................................................ 1-3 

Project Background.................................................................................................................... 1-4 

Project Description..................................................................................................................... 1-5 

Summary of Affected Equipment and Methods of Compliance................................................ 1-8 

CHAPTER 2 - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 

Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 2-1 

General Information................................................................................................................... 2-1 

Environmental Factors Potentially Affected.............................................................................. 2-2 

Determination ............................................................................................................................ 2-3 

Environmental Checklist and Discussion .................................................................................. 2-4 

APPENDICES 

Appendix A – Proposed Rule 1147 

Appendix B – Construction and Operations Calculations 

LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure 1-1: South Coast Air Quality Management District.................................................. 1-3 

LIST OF TABLES 

Table 1-1: Proposed NOx Emission Limits......................................................................... 1-6 

Table 1-2: Compliance Schedule for In-Use Units ............................................................. 1-7 

Table 1-3: Summary of Equipment Categories, Proposed NOx Emission Limits, 

Compliance Methods and Impacts..................................................................... 1-8 

Table 2-1: Air Quality Significance Thresholds ................................................................. 2-8 

Table 2-2A: Peak Construction Emissions Due to Retrofits of Ultra-Low NOx 

Burners Between 2010-2014 for One Unit ........................................................ 2-10 

Table 2-2B: Peak Construction Emissions Due to Retrofits of Ultra-Low NOx 

Burners Between 2010-2014 for Ten Units....................................................... 2-10 

Table 2-2C: Peak Construction Emissions Due to Retrofits of Ultra-Low NOx 

Burners Between 2015-2023 for One Unit ........................................................ 2-10 

Table 2-2D: Peak Construction Emissions Due to Retrofits of Ultra-Low NOx 

Burners Between 2015-2023 for Ten Units....................................................... 2-11 

Table 2-3: Baseline NOx Emission Inventory and Projected NOx 

Emission Reductions.......................................................................................... 2-12 
Table 2-4: Overall Net NOx Emission Reductions During Peak Daily 

“Worst-Case” Construction Activities with Operational Overlap..................... 2-13 

Table 2-5: Overall CO2 Equivalent (eq) Increases Due to Construction Activities ........... 2-17 
C H A P T E R 1 - P R O J E C T D E S C R I P T I O N 

Introduction 

California Environmental Quality Act 

Project Location 

Project Objective 

Project Background 

Project Description 
INTRODUCTION 

The California Legislature created the South Coast Air Quality Management District 

(SCAQMD) in 19771 as the agency responsible for developing and enforcing air 

pollution control rules and regulations in the South Coast Air Basin (Basin) and portions 

of the Salton Sea Air Basin and Mojave Desert Air Basin referred to herein as the district. 

By statute, the SCAQMD is required to adopt an air quality management plan (AQMP) 

demonstrating compliance with all federal and state ambient air quality standards for the 

district2. Furthermore, the SCAQMD must adopt rules and regulations that carry out the 

AQMP3

. The 2007 AQMP concluded that major reductions in emissions of volatile 

organic compounds (VOCs), oxides of sulfur (SOx) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) are 

necessary to attain the air quality standards for ozone and particulate matter (PM10 and 

PM2.5). Ozone, a criteria pollutant, is formed when VOCs react with NOx in the 

atmosphere and has been shown to adversely affect human health. NOx also contributes

to the formation of PM10 and PM2.5. 

PR 1147 implements AQMP control measures CMB-01 (NOx Reductions from NonRECLAIM Ovens, Dryers, and Furnaces) and MCS-01 (Facility Modernization). The 

objective of PR 1147 is to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) from 

miscellaneous gas and liquid fuel fired combustion equipment. The proposed rule will 

regulate equipment that is not specifically addressed in rules under SCAQMD Regulation 

XI – Source Specific Standards. Proposed Rule 1147 applies to combustion equipment 

including, but not limited to: ovens, dryers, dehydrators, heaters, kilns, calciners, 

furnaces, heated pots, cookers, roasters, fryers, closed and open heated tanks and 

evaporators, distillation units, degassing units, incinerators, and soil remediation units. 

This proposed rule does not apply to solid fuel fired combustion equipment, internal 

combustion engines regulated under SCAQMD Rule 1110.2, gas turbines regulated by 

Rule 1134, charbroilers regulated by Rule 1138, refinery boilers regulated by Rule 1109, 

water heaters regulated by Rule 1121, thermal fluid heaters or enclosed process heaters 

subject to Rules 1146, 1146.1, or 1146.2. PR 1147 requires new, modified, relocated and 

in-use combustion equipment subject to the rule to comply with equipment specific NOx 

emission limits. 

Compliance is phased in for equipment based on age. Beginning July 1, 2010, equipment 

that is 25 years or older must meet an emission limit, followed a year later by equipment 

that is 20 to 25 years old and then equipment that is 15 years old. Exceptions to the basic 

schedule include soil remediation equipment that must comply on or after January 1, 

2011, when a combustion modification or change of location occurs or when a new unit 

begins operating. PR 1147 provides additional time for specific categories of equipment 

that have recently replaced burners or have a permit limit of less than one pound per day 

NOx at the time of rule adoption. These dates are: 2014 to achieve the federal PM 2.5 

standard and 2023 to achieve the federal 8-hour ozone standard. The proposed rule is 

 

1

 The Lewis-Presley Air Quality Management Act, 1976 Cal. Stats., ch 324 (codified at Health & Safety 

Code, §§40400-40540). 

2

 Health & Safety Code, §40460 (a). 

3

 Health & Safety Code, §40440 (a). 
estimated to reduce annual average emissions of NOx by 3.5 tons per day by 2014 and 

will increase the NOx reduction to 3.8 tons per day by 2023. 

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT 

PR 1147 regulates NOx emissions from combustion equipment including, but not limited 

to: ovens, dryers, dehydrators, heaters, kilns, calciners, furnaces, heated pots, cookers, 

roasters, fryers, closed and open heated tanks and evaporators, distillation units, 

degassing units, incinerators, and soil remediation units. Because the proposed project 

requires discretionary approval by a public agency, it is a “project” as defined by the 

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). SCAQMD is the lead agency for the 

proposed project and has prepared this final Environmental Assessment (EA) with no 

significant adverse impacts pursuant to its Certified Regulatory Program. California 

Public Resources Code §21080.5 allows public agencies with regulatory programs to 

prepare a plan or other written document in lieu of an environmental impact report once 

the Secretary of the Resources Agency has certified the regulatory program. SCAQMD's 

regulatory program was certified by the Secretary of the Resources Agency on March 1, 

1989, and is codified as SCAQMD Rule 110. Pursuant to Rule 110, SCAQMD has 

prepared this final EA. 

CEQA and Rule 110 require that potential adverse environmental impacts of proposed 

projects be evaluated and that feasible methods to reduce or avoid significant adverse 

environmental impacts of these projects be identified. To fulfill the purpose and intent of 

CEQA, the SCAQMD has prepared this final EA to address the potential adverse 

environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. The final EA is a public 

disclosure document intended to: (a) provide the lead agency, responsible agencies, 

decision makers and the general public with information on the environmental effects of 

the proposed project; and, (b) be used as a tool by decision makers to facilitate decision 

making on the proposed project. 

SCAQMD’s review of the proposed project shows that the project would not have a 

significant adverse effect on the environment. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 

§15252, no alternatives or mitigation measures are required to be included in this final

EA. The analysis in Chapter 2 supports the conclusion of no significant adverse 

environmental impacts. 

PROJECT LOCATION 

PR 1147 would apply to applicable combustion equipment within the jurisdiction of the 

SCAQMD. The SCAQMD has jurisdiction over an area of 10,473 square miles, 

consisting of the four-county South Coast Air Basin (Basin) and the Riverside County 

portions of the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB) and the Mojave Desert Air Basin (MDAB). 

The Basin, which is a subarea of the district, is bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west 

and the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and east. 

The 6,745 square-mile Basin includes all of Orange County and the non-desert portions 

of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties. The Riverside County portion 

of the SSAB and MDAB is bounded by the San Jacinto Mountains in the west and spans 

eastward up to the Palo Verde Valley. The federal non-attainment area (known as the 
Coachella Valley Planning Area) is a subregion of both Riverside County and the SSAB 

and is bounded by the San Jacinto Mountains to the west and the eastern boundary of the 

Coachella Valley to the east (Figure 1-1). 

South Coast

Air Quality Management District

 SCAQMD Jurisdiction

Mojave Desert

Air Basin

Salton Sea

Air Basin

San Diego

Air Basin

South

 Central

 Coast Air Basin

South Coast

 Air Basin

San Diego County Imperial County

Riverside County

Los Angeles

 County

Kern County San Bernardino County

Orange

 County

Santa 

 Barbara

 County

Ventura 

 County

San Joaquin

 Valley

 Air Basin

Figure 1-1 

Boundaries of the South Coast Air Quality Management District 

PROJECT OBJECTIVE 

The general project objectives of PR 1147 are summarized as the following:

• Implement two 2007 AQMP control measures (CMB-01 and MCS-01)

• Regulate relatively uncontrolled NOx sources

• Reduce annual average emissions of NOx by at least 3.5 tons per day by 2014 and 

3.8 tons per day by 2023

• Obtain NOx emissions reductions that will contribute to attain and maintain state 

and federal PM 2.5 and eight-hour ozone standards

• Promote facility modernization and implementation of BACT.

PROJECT BACKGROUND 

PR 1147 would implement two control measures from the SCAQMD 2007 Air Quality 

Management Plan (AQMP): control measures CMB-01 and MCS-01. Control measure 

CMB-01 (NOx Reductions from Non-RECLAIM Ovens, Dryers, and Furnaces) proposes 

reductions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) from ovens, dryers, kilns, furnaces and other 
equipment and process which are not currently regulated by SCAQMD Regulation XI –

Source Specific Standards. Control measure MCS-01 (Facility Modernization) is a new 

control measure developed for the 2007 AQMP that would require affected facility 

operators to upgrade or replace their existing stationary source equipment with the 

cleanest equipment or technologies available. Facility modernization would require 

equipment to meet best available control technology (BACT) emission limits at the end 

of the equipment’s useful life through equipment replacement.

New, modified, or relocated equipment that would be subject to PR 1147 must currently 

meet the requirements of SCAQMD Regulation XIII – New Source Review (NSR), while 

existing equipment must comply with applicable rules in SCAQMD Regulation IV – 

Prohibitions. Equipment subject to NSR must meet a number of requirements, but the 

most important are BACT requirements and offsetting emission increases. The 

SCAQMD’s NSR program includes pre-construction permit review requirements for 

equipment and processes subject to permit requirements. Equipment that is subject to

NSR is required to utilize BACT and include: new equipment, relocation of existing 

permitted equipment, or modification of existing permitted equipment when the 

modification results in an emissions increase. BACT is defined as the most stringent 

emission limitation or control technique which: has been achieved in practice, is 

contained in any state implementation plan (SIP) approved by EPA, or is any other 

emission limitation or control technique found by the Executive Officer to be 

technologically feasible and is cost-effective as compared to adopted rules or measured 

listed in the AQMP. 

Regulation IV includes a number of prohibitory rules that regulate most criteria 

pollutants. Regulation IV rules establish a limit or emissions reduction requirement and 

regulated sources are prohibited from exceeding applicable limits or requirements. 

However, emission limits required by BACT are more stringent than the emission limits 

in Regulation IV. For example, Rule 474 – Fuel Burning Equipment – Oxides of 

Nitrogen, has emission limits that vary from 125 ppm to 400 ppm (referenced to three 

percent oxygen) depending upon the fuel and heat input rating of the equipment. NOx 

emission limits for combustion equipment subject to PR 1147 vary from 60 ppm to 20 

ppm (referenced to three percent oxygen). 

Proposed Rule 1147 affects manufacturers (NAICS 333), distributors and wholesalers 

(NAICS 423) of combustion equipment, as well as owners and operators of ovens, dryers, 

furnaces, and other equipment in the district (NAICS 23, 31, 32, and 33, respectively). 

The units affected by the proposed rule are used in industrial, commercial and 

institutional settings for a wide variety of processes. The approximately 6,600 units 

subject to the emission limits of PR 1147 are located at approximately 3,000 facilities. 

However, approximately 1,600 units located at approximately 800 facilities currently 

meet the NOx emission limits of PR 1147. Staff estimates that there are as many as 

2,500 permitted units (excluding remediation units) with NOx emission limits greater 

than one pound per day that will potentially become subject to the proposed emission 

limits of PR 1147 between 2010 and 2014. An additional 2,500 permitted units with 

NOx emission limits of less than one pound per day will become subject to the emission 

limits of the proposed rule between 2015 and 2019. In addition, staff estimates that 100 
to 200 remediation units per year will become subject to the NOx emission limits of PR 

1147 starting in 2011, and all units will be required to meet the applicable NOx emission 

limit by 2023. 

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 

The following summarizes the key components of the proposed rule. A copy of PR 1147 

is included in Appendix A. 

Purpose and Applicability [subdivision (a)] 

The purpose of PR 1147 is to reduce NOx emissions from gaseous and liquid fuel fired 

combustion equipment. PR 1147 applies to permitted equipment and processes that are 

not currently regulated under an existing source specific rule under SCAQMD Regulation 

XI. The equipment regulated by PR 1147 include, but are not limited to: ovens, dryers, 

dehydrators, heaters, kilns, calciners, furnaces, heated pots, cookers, roasters, fryers, 

closed and open heated tanks and evaporators, distillation units, degassing units, 

incinerators, soil remediation units. This proposed rule does not apply to solid fuel fired 

combustion equipment, internal combustion engines regulated under SCAQMD Rule 

1110.2, gas turbines regulated by Rule 1134, charbroilers regulated by Rule 1138, 

refinery boilers regulated by Rule 1109, water heaters regulated by Rule 1121, thermal 

fluid heaters or enclosed process heaters subject to Rules 1146, 1146.1, or 1146.2. PR 

1147 requires new, modified, relocated and in-use combustion equipment subject to the 

rule to comply with equipment specific NOx emission limits. In addition, PR 1147 does 

not apply to equipment subject to SCAQMD Rules 1111, 1112, 1117, or 1135. 

Definitions [subdivision (b)] 

The following definitions are included in PR 1147: 

• “Annual capacity factor” [paragraph (b)(1)] 

• “Annual heat input” [paragraph (b)(2)] 

• “BTU” [paragraph (b)(3)] 

• “Combustion modification” [paragraph (b)(4)] 

• “Heater” [paragraph (b)(5)] 

• “Heat input” [paragraph (b)(6)] 

• “Heat output” [paragraph (b)(7)] 

• “Independent testing laboratory” [paragraph (b)(8)] 

• “NOx emissions” [paragraph (b)(9)] 

• “Process heater” [paragraph (b)(10)] 

• “Protocol” [paragraph (b)(11)] 

• “Rated heat input capacity” [paragraph (b)(12)] 

• “Responsible official” [paragraph (b)(13)] 
• “Therm” [paragraph (b)(14)] 

• “Unit” [paragraph (b)(15)] 

Requirements [subdivision (c)] 

PR 1147 requires new, modified, relocated and in-use combustion equipment subject to 

the rule to comply with the equipment specific NOx emission limits listed in Table 1-1. 

In addition to limits for specific equipment, PR 1147 also includes limits based on 

process temperature. The proposed emission limits are based on SCAQMD BACT 

determinations, recent SCAQMD permit applications and associated sources tests, and 

discussions with burner manufacturers and vendors. Other criteria considered by 

SCAQMD staff in selection of the proposed NOx limits include cost effectiveness and 

availability from multiple manufacturers. 

 Table 1-1

Proposed NOx Emission Limits

NOx Emission Limit

Equipment Category(ies) PPM @ 3% O2, dry or Pound/mmBtu heat input

Process Temperature

Gaseous Fuel-Fired Equipment ≤ 800° F

> 800 ° F and 

< 1200° F ≥ 1200 ° F

Asphalt Manufacturing Operation 40 ppm 40 ppm 60 ppm or 0.073 

lb/mmBtu

Afterburner, Degassing Unit, Remediation 

Unit, Thermal Oxidizer, Catalytic Oxidizer or 

Vapor Incinerator 1

30 ppm or 0.036 

lb/mmBtu

60 ppm or 

0.073 

lb/mmBtu

60 ppm or 0.073 

lb/mmBtu

Evaporator, Fryer, Heated Process Tank, or 

Parts Washer 

60 ppm or 0.073 

lb/mmBtu

60 ppm or 

0.073 

lb/mmBtu

60 ppm or 0.073 

lb/mmBtu

Metal Heat Treating, Metal Melting Furnace, 

Metal Pot, or Tar Pot

60 ppm or 0.073 

lb/mmBtu

60 ppm or 

0.073 

lb/mmBtu

60 ppm or 0.073 

lb/mmBtu

Oven, Dehydrator, Dryer, Heater, Kiln, 

Crematory, Incinerator, Calciner, Cooker, 

Roaster, Furnace, or Heated Storage Tank

30 ppm or 0.036 

lb/mmBtu

30 ppm or 

0.036 

lb/mmBtu

60 ppm or 0.073 

lb/mmBtu

Make-Up Air Heater or other Air Heater 

located outside of building with temperature 

controlled zone inside building

30 ppm or 0.036 

lb/mmBtu

30 ppm or 

0.036 

lb/mmBtu 

60 ppm or 0.073 

lb/mmBtu

Tenter Frame or Fabric or Carpet Dryer 30 ppm or 0.036 

lb/mmBtu

 30 ppm or 

0.036 

lb/mmBtu

60 ppm or 0.073 

lb/mmBtu

Other Unit or Process Temperature 30 ppm or 0.036 

lb/mmBtu

30 ppm or 

0.036 

lb/mmBtu

60 ppm or 0.073 

lb/mmBtu
 Table 1-1

Proposed NOx Emission Limits (Concluded)

NOx Emission Limit

Equipment Category(ies) PPM @ 3% O2, dry or Pound/mmBtu heat input

Process Temperature

Liquid Fuel-Fired Equipment ≤ 800° F

> 800 ° F and 

< 1200° F ≥ 1200 ° F

All liquid fuel-fired Units 40 ppm or 0.053 

lb/mmBtu

40 ppm or 

0.053 

lb/mmBtu

60 ppm or 0.080 

lb/mmBtu

1 Emission limit applies to burners in units fueled by 100% natural gas that are used to 

incinerate air toxics, VOCs, or other vapors; or to heat a unit. The emission limit applies 

solely when burning 100% fuel and not when the burner is incinerating air toxics, VOCs, or 

other vapors. The unit shall be tested or certified to meet the emission limit while fueled 

with natural gas.

As specific NOx limits have not been made for every category of equipment and it is 

possible to group equipment based on process characteristics, Table 1-1 also includes 

NOx emission limits for unspecified equipment based on process temperature. Higher 

process temperatures result in higher NOx emissions and this is reflected in the NOx 

limits in Table 1-1. 

Compliance dates for in-use equipment to meet NOx emission limits are listed in Table 1-

2. Compliance is phased in for equipment based on age starting July 1, 2010. Equipment 

that is at least 25 years old must meet the emission limit by 2010. Equipment that is 20 to 

25 years old must meet the emission limit by 2011. Equipment that is 15 years old must 

meet the emission limit by 2012. 

Table 1-2

Compliance Schedule for In-Use Units

Equipment Category(ies) Compliance Date

Remediation unit;

Upon combustion modification or change of 

location for units manufactured prior to 1998

Beginning January 1, 2011

Tar pot;

Permit application for change of ownership or 

new equipment

Beginning January 1, 2012

Afterburner, degassing unit, catalytic oxidizer, 

thermal oxidizer, vapor incinerator, evaporator, 

food oven, fryer, heated process tank, parts 

washer or spray booth make-up air heater 

manufactured prior to 1998

July 1, 2013 

Other unit manufactured prior to 1986 July 1, 2010

Other unit manufactured prior to 1992 July 1, 2011

Other unit manufactured prior to 1998 July 1, 2012

Any unit manufactured after 1997 July 1 of the year the unit is 15 years old
The compliance schedule for afterburners, degassing equipment, catalytic and thermal 

oxidizers, evaporators, vapor incinerators, heated process tanks, food ovens, fryers, parts 

washers and spray booth make-up air heaters differs in order to allow manufacturers 

additional time to certify equipment and develop a greater number of compliant 

equipment. 

PR 1147 provides additional time for operators of specific categories of equipment who 

have recently replaced burners or have a permit limit of less than one pound per day NOx 

at the time of rule adoption according to the following criteria: 

• Units with 75 percent or more of the burner capacity replaced before 

adoption of the rule have an additional ten years from the date of the 

burner modification to meet the emission limit. 

• Units with emissions of less than one pound per day have five additional 

years to comply with the emission limit. 

Additional requirements include keeping records of maintenance and combustion 

modifications and installation of meters to monitor fuel and equipment use. The 

recordkeeping and metering requirements start January 1, 2011. 

Compliance Determination and Certification [subdivisions (d) and (e)] 

PR 1147 identifies test methods for determining compliance with rule requirements and 

establishes a framework for manufacturers who wish to certify the emission level of their 

products. Two of the approved test methods use portable analyzers and one approved 

method is used to determine compliance with the lb/mmBtu emission limit option. 

Emissions testing using the lb/mmBtu compliance option is one alternative for evaluating 

emissions from processes that operate at high oxygen concentrations (18 percent or 

more). 

Instead of requiring owners and operators of affected units to re-test each unit after a 

number of years, staff is proposing to implement a program of random testing to 

determine if specific categories of equipment might require routine testing to assure 

compliance with the emission limit. This testing program could be implemented starting 

in 2012 after half of the equipment have replaced burners and completed their initial 

source tests and manufacturers have certified equipment.

Enforcement [subdivision (f)] 

Copies of source test results and certifications must be kept on site by the operators of 

affected units and made available to the SCAQMD upon request. The SCAQMD will 

inspect distributors, retailers and installers as well as operators and conduct tests as 

necessary to ensure compliance of affected units. 
Exemptions [subdivision (g)] 

Exemptions are provided for equipment and processes that are regulated by other 

SCAQMD source specific rules in Regulation XI. An exemption is also provided for 

flare, afterburner, degassing unit, remediation unit, thermal oxidizer, catalytic oxidizer, 

and vapor incinerator processes in which a fuel, including but not limited to natural gas, 

propane, butane or liquefied petroleum gases, is mixed with air toxics, VOCs or other 

combustible vapors prior to incineration in the unit in order to start-up or maintain 

combustion or temperature in the unit. This exemption does not apply to a burner with a 

separate fuel line used to heat up or maintain temperature of a unit or incinerate air 

toxics, VOCs or other combustible vapors in a gas stream moving past the burner flame.

An exemption is also provided for flares, afterburners, degassing units, thermal oxidizers 

or vapor incinerators in which a fuel; including but not limited to natural gas, propane, 

butane or liquefied petroleum gases; is only used to maintain a pilot for vapor ignition. 

PR 1147 also exempts solid fuel-fired units and provides an exemption for existing 

afterburners incorporating a heat exchanger that captures heat from and oven or furnace.

PR 1147 additionally provides a temporary exemption from the NOx emission limit for 

new afterburners, degassing units, thermal and catalytic oxidizers, vapor incinerators, and 

spray booth make-up air heaters installed after adoption of PR 1147 and before January 1, 

2011. New food ovens, fryers, heated process tanks, parts washers, and evaporators 

installed after the date of adoption and before January 1, 2013 are also exempt from the 

emission limit in Table 1-1 at the time of installation. These two categories of units must 

comply with the NOx emission limit on or before July 1 of the year the unit becomes 15 

years old. New and relocated remediation units installed before January 1, 2011 are 

exempt until the unit is moved or a combustion modification is made.

SUMMARY OF AFFECTED EQUIPMENT AND METHODS OF COMPLIANCE 

The approximately 6,600 units subject to the emission limits of PR 1147 are located at 

approximately 3,000 facilities. However, approximately 1,600 units located at 

approximately 800 facilities currently meet the NOx emission limits of PR 1147. Staff 

estimates that there are as many as 2,500 permitted units (excluding remediation units) 

with NOx emission limits greater than one pound per day that will potentially become 

subject to the proposed emission limits of PR 1147 between 2010 and 2014. An 

additional 2,500 permitted units with NOx emission limits of less than one pound per day 

will become subject to the emission limits of the proposed rule between 2015 and 2019. 

In addition, staff estimates that 100 to 200 remediation units per year will become subject 

to the NOx emission limits of PR 1147 starting in 2011, and all units will be required to 

meet the applicable NOx emission limit by 2023.

Compliance with the NOx emission limits in PR 1147 is expected to be achieved 

primarily by installing ultra-low NOx burners. For existing equipment, compliance with 

PR 1147 means that the owner/operator will either retrofit the existing unit with an ultralow NOx burner that has been guaranteed by the manufacturer as compliant with the NOx 

emission standard or if the existing unit is at the end of its useful life, replace it with a 
new compliant unit. Retrofitting an existing unit would consist of utilizing a retrofit kit 

that requires removing the existing burner and replacing it with a compliant, ultra-low 

NOx burner. Similarly, compliance with PR 1147 for a new unit means that the 

equipment, at the time of manufacture, will be equipped with compliant ultra-low NOx 

burner technology that has been guaranteed by the manufacturer to achieve the NOx 

emission standards. No add-on control equipment is expected to be used for either new 

or existing units to comply with the new NOx emission limits because compliance with 

the proposed NOx limits can be achieved with ultra-low NOx burners. Selective 

Catalytic Reduction (SCR) technology is a compliance option; however, it was not 

assumed due to the size of affected equipment (majority of equipment is assumed to be 

<10mmBTU) and the cost benefit of retrofitting equipment with ultra-low NOx burners 

compared to SCR.

Table 1-3 provides a summary of the various types of equipment that will be affected, the 

proposed emission limits, the compliance method and the associated impacts. 

Table 1-3

Summary of Equipment Categories, Proposed NOx Emission Limits, 

Compliance Methods and Impacts

NOx Emission Limit

Equipment Category(ies) PPM @ 3% O2, dry or Pound/mmBtu heat input

Process Temperature

Gaseous Fuel-Fired Equipment ≤ 800° F

> 800 ° F and 

< 1200° F ≥ 1200 ° F

Asphalt Manufacturing Operation 40 ppm 40 ppm 60 ppm or 0.073 

lb/mmBtu

Afterburner, Degassing Unit, Remediation 

Unit, Thermal Oxidizer, Catalytic Oxidizer or 

Vapor Incinerator 1

30 ppm or 0.036 

lb/mmBtu

60 ppm or 

0.073 

lb/mmBtu

60 ppm or 0.073 

lb/mmBtu

Evaporator, Fryer, Heated Process Tank, or 

Parts Washer 

60 ppm or 0.073 

lb/mmBtu

60 ppm or 

0.073 

lb/mmBtu

60 ppm or 0.073 

lb/mmBtu

Metal Heat Treating, Metal Melting Furnace, 

Metal Pot, or Tar Pot

60 ppm or 0.073 

lb/mmBtu

60 ppm or 

0.073 

lb/mmBtu

60 ppm or 0.073 

lb/mmBtu

Oven, Dehydrator, Dryer, Heater, Kiln, 

Crematory, Incinerator, Calciner, Cooker, 

Roaster, Furnace, or Heated Storage Tank

30 ppm or 0.036 

lb/mmBtu

30 ppm or 

0.036 

lb/mmBtu

60 ppm or 0.073 

lb/mmBtu

Make-Up Air Heater or other Air Heater 

located outside of building with temperature 

controlled zone inside building

30 ppm or 0.036 

lb/mmBtu

30 ppm or 

0.036 

lb/mmBtu 

60 ppm or 0.073 

lb/mmBtu

Tenter Frame or Fabric or Carpet Dryer 30 ppm or 0.036 

lb/mmBtu

 30 ppm or 

0.036 

lb/mmBtu

60 ppm or 0.073 

lb/mmBtu

Other Unit or Process Temperature 30 ppm or 0.036 

lb/mmBtu

30 ppm or 

0.036 

lb/mmBtu

60 ppm or 0.073 

lb/mmBtu
Table 1-3

Summary of Equipment Categories, Proposed NOx Emission Limits, 

Compliance Methods and Impacts (Concluded)

NOx Emission Limit

Equipment Category(ies) PPM @ 3% O2, dry or Pound/mmBtu heat input

Process Temperature

Liquid Fuel-Fired Equipment ≤ 800° F

> 800 ° F and 

< 1200° F ≥ 1200 ° F

All liquid fuel-fired Units 40 ppm or 0.053 

lb/mmBtu

40 ppm or 

0.053 

lb/mmBtu

60 ppm or 0.080 

lb/mmBtu

1 Emission limit applies to burners in units fueled by 100% natural gas that are used to 

incinerate air toxics, VOCs, or other vapors; or to heat a unit. The emission limit applies 

solely when burning 100% fuel and not when the burner is incinerating air toxics, VOCs, 

or other vapors. The unit shall be tested or certified to meet the emission limit while 

fueled with natural gas.
C H A P T E R 2 - E N V I R O N M E N T A L C H E C K L I S T 

Introduction 

General Information 

Environmental Factors Potentially Affected 

Determination 

Environmental Checklist and Discussion 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-1 October 2008 

INTRODUCTION 

The environmental checklist provides a standard evaluation tool to identify a project's potential 

adverse environmental impacts. This checklist identifies and evaluates potential adverse 

environmental impacts that may be created by the proposed project. 

GENERAL INFORMATION 

Project Title: Proposed Rule 1147 – NOx Reductions From 

Miscellaneous Sources 

Lead Agency Name: South Coast Air Quality Management District 

Lead Agency Address: 21865 Copley Drive 

Diamond Bar, CA 91765 

CEQA Contact Person: Mr. Jeffrey Inabinet (909) 396-2453 

Rule 1147 Contact Person Mr. Wayne Barcikowski (909) 396-3077 

Project Sponsor's Name: South Coast Air Quality Management District 

Project Sponsor's Address: 21865 Copley Drive 

Diamond Bar, CA 91765 

General Plan Designation: Not applicable 

Zoning: Not applicable 

Description of Project: PR 1147 will reduce NOx emissions from a large variety of 

equipment and processes that are currently required to have an 

SCAQMD permit to operate, but whose NOx emissions are not 

regulated by SCAQMD Regulation XI. The equipment 

regulated by PR 1147 include, but are not limited to: ovens, 

dryers, dehydrators, heaters, kilns, calciners, furnaces, heated 

pots, cookers, roasters, fryers, closed and open heated tanks and 

evaporators, distillation units, degassing units, incinerators, and 

soil remediation units. PR 1147 requires new, modified, 

relocated and in-use combustion equipment subject to the rule to 

comply with equipment specific NOx emission limits (varies 

from 20-60 ppm based on specific equipment category). The 

proposed emission limits are based on SCAQMD surveys of 

applicable control technologies, recent SCAQMD permit 

applications and associated sources tests, and discussions with 

burner manufacturers and vendors. The proposed rule is 

estimated to reduce annual average emissions of NOx by 3.5 

tons per day by 2014 and 3.8 tons per day by 2023.

Surrounding Land Uses and 

Setting: 

Not applicable. 

Other Public Agencies 

Whose Approval is 

Required: 

Not applicable. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-2 October 2008 

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED 

The following environmental impact areas have been assessed to determine their potential to be 

affected by the proposed project. As indicated by the checklist on the following pages, 

environmental topics marked with an "9" may be adversely affected by the proposed project. 

An explanation relative to the determination of impacts can be found following the checklist for 

each area. 

 Aesthetics  Agriculture Resources  Air Quality 

 Biological Resources  Cultural Resources  Energy 

 Geology/Soils  Hazards & Hazardous 

Materials 

 Hydrology/ 

Water Quality 

 Land Use/Planning  Mineral Resources  Noise 

 Population/Housing  Public Services  Recreation 

 Solid/Hazardous Waste  Transportation/ 

Traffic 

 Mandatory 

Findings of 

Significance 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-3 October 2008 

DETERMINATION 

On the basis of this initial evaluation: 

; I find the proposed project, in accordance with those findings made pursuant to 

CEQA Guideline §15252, COULD NOT have a significant effect on the 

environment, and that an ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT with no 

significant impacts will be prepared. 

 I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the 

environment, there will NOT be significant effects in this case because 

revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project 

proponent. An ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT with no significant 

impacts will be prepared. 

 I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the 

environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT will be prepared. 

 I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" on 

the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an 

earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been 

addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on 

attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT is required, but it 

must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. 

 I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the 

environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed 

adequately in an earlier ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT pursuant to 

applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that 

earlier ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, including revisions or mitigation 

measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is 

required. 

Date: October 16, 2008 Signature:

 Steve Smith, Ph.D. 

 Program Supervisor 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-4 October 2008 

ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND DISCUSSION 

As discussed in Chapter 1, the main focus of PR 1147 is to reduce NOx emissions from a large 

variety of equipment and processes that are currently required to have an SCAQMD permit to 

operate, but whose NOx emissions are not regulated by SCAQMD Regulation XI. The 

equipment regulated by PR 1147 include, but are not limited to: ovens, dryers, dehydrators, 

heaters, kilns, calciners, furnaces, heated pots, cookers, roasters, fryers, closed and open heated 

tanks and evaporators, distillation units, degassing units, incinerators, and soil remediation units. 

PR 1147 requires new, modified, relocated and in-use combustion equipment subject to the rule 

to comply with equipment specific NOx emission limits (varies from 20-60 ppm based on 

specific equipment category). As a result, the proposed rule is estimated to reduce annual 

average emissions of NOx by 3.5 tons per day by 2014 and 3.8 tons per day by 2023. 

Manufacturers, distributors, retailers, refurbishers, installers and operators of both existing and 

new units will be expected to comply with the proposed requirements in PR 1147. Compliance 

with PR 1147 for an existing unit means that the operator will either replace the existing unit 

with a new compliant unit at the end of the equipment’s useful life or retrofit the equipment with 

an ultra-low NOx burner that has been certified by the manufacturer as compliant with the NOx 

emission standard on a retrofit basis. Similarly, compliance with PR 1147 for a new unit means 

that the equipment, at the time of manufacture, will be equipped with compliant ultra-low NOx 

burner technology that has been guaranteed by the manufacturer to achieve the NOx emission 

standards. Further, no add-on control equipment is expected to be used for either new or existing 

units to comply with the new NOx emission limits. As a result, complying with PR 1147 is 

expected to require minor activities using welders, forklifts, etc., to remove and install new 

equipment or replace old burners with compliant low NOx burners. Since compliant equipment 

or low NOx burners will be installed in existing equipment locations, no site preparation or 

grading activities requiring large construction equipment will be necessary. Thus, answers to the 

following checklist items are based on the assumption that compliant ultra-low NOx burner 

technology, either at the time of manufacture or retrofit, will be used to meet the requirements of 

PR 1147. 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

I. AESTHETICS. Would the project: 

a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic 

vista? 

  ;

b) Substantially damage scenic resources, 

including, but not limited to, trees, rock 

outcroppings, and historic buildings within a 

state scenic highway? 

  ;

c) Substantially degrade the existing visual 

character or quality of the site and its 

surroundings? 

  ;
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-5 October 2008 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare 

which would adversely affect day or nighttime 

views in the area? 

  ;

Significance Criteria 

The proposed project impacts on aesthetics will be considered significant if: 

- The project will block views from a scenic highway or corridor. 

- The project will adversely affect the visual continuity of the surrounding area. 

- The impacts on light and glare will be considered significant if the project adds lighting 

 which would add glare to residential areas or sensitive receptors. 

Discussion 

I.a), b), c) & d) PR 1147 applies to equipment and processes that are required to have an 

SCAQMD permit to operate whose NOx emissions are not regulated by SCAQMD Regulation 

XI. Compliance with PR 1147 will be achieved by either installing new compliant units or 

retrofitting existing units by replacing existing burners with ultra-low NOx burner technology, 

generally at existing facilities. The footprint of a compliant new replacement unit versus the 

footprint of an existing, retrofitted unit that meets the ultra-low NOx standards as proposed in PR 

1147 is not expected to be substantially different from each other. Whether owners/operators 

replace their existing units with new compliant units or retrofit their existing units with ultra-low 

NOx burners, implementation of PR 1147 would not require the construction of new buildings or 

other structures that would obstruct scenic resources or degrade the existing visual character of a 

site, including but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings. Further, PR 

1147 would not involve the demolition of any existing buildings or facilities, require any 

subsurface activities, require the acquisition of any new land or the surrendering of existing land, 

or the modification of any existing land use designations or zoning ordinances. Thus, the 

proposed project is not expected to degrade the visual character of any site where a facility is 

located and that operates an affected unit or its surroundings, affect any scenic vista, damage 

scenic resources. Since the proposed project does not require existing facilities to operate at 

night, it is not expected to create any new source of substantial light or glare. 

Based upon these considerations, significant adverse aesthetics impacts are not anticipated and 

will not be further analyzed in this final EA. Since no significant aesthetics impacts were 

identified, no mitigation measures are necessary or required. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-6 October 2008 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. Would the 

project:

 

a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or 

Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as 

shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the 

Farmland mapping and Monitoring Program of 

the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use?

  ;

b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, 

or a Williamson Act contract? 

  ;

c) Involve other changes in the existing environment 

which, due to their location or nature, could result 

in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural 

use? 

  ;

Significance Criteria 

Project-related impacts on agricultural resources will be considered significant if any of the 

following conditions are met: 

- The proposed project conflicts with existing zoning or agricultural use or Williamson Act 

contracts. 

- The proposed project will convert prime farmland, unique farmland or farmland of statewide 

importance as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the farmland mapping and monitoring 

program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use. 

- The proposed project would involve changes in the existing environment, which due to their 

location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. 

II.a), b), & c) Compliance with PR 1147 means either installing new compliant units or 

retrofitting existing units with ultra-low NOx burner technology. The businesses that will be 

affected by the implementation of PR 1147 are located within urbanized areas that are typically 

designated as industrial or commercial. Therefore, installing new equipment units or retrofitting 

existing units to comply with PR 1147 would not result in any new construction of buildings or 

other structures that would convert any classification of farmland to non-agricultural use or 

conflict with zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract. 

Based upon these considerations, significant agricultural resource impacts are not anticipated and 

will not be further analyzed in this final EA. Since no significant agriculture resources impacts 

were identified, no mitigation measures are necessary or required. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-7 October 2008 

 Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

III. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: 

a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 

applicable air quality plan? 

  ;

b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to 

an existing or projected air quality violation? 

 ; 

c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase 

of any criteria pollutant for which the project 

region is non-attainment under an applicable 

federal or state ambient air quality standard 

(including releasing emissions that exceed 

quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? 

 ; 

d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant 

concentrations? 

  ;

e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial 

number of people? 

  ;

f) Diminish an existing air quality rule or future 

compliance requirement resulting in a significant 

increase in air pollutant(s)? 

  ;

III.a) Attainment of the state and federal ambient air quality standards protects sensitive 

receptors and the public in general from the adverse effects of criteria pollutants which are 

known to have adverse human health effects. Based on the discussion under items III. b), c) and 

f), the lower future NOx emission limits proposed in PR 1147, contribute to carrying out the 

goals of the 2007 AQMP, specifically, the goals of control measure CM#2007MCS-01: Facility 

Modernization, by either upgrading or replacing the affected units to meet current BACT 

standards. Further, reducing NOx emissions from all affected PR 1147 sources helps contribute 

to attaining and maintaining the state and federal ambient air quality standards. Thus, because 

PR 1147 implements a portion of this control measure in the 2007 AQMP which results in

achieving NOx reductions, the proposed project does not obstruct implementation of the 

applicable AQMP.

III.b), c) & f) For a discussion of these items, refer to the following analysis. 

Air Quality Significance Criteria 

To determine whether or not air quality impacts from adopting and implementing the proposed 

amendments are significant, impacts will be evaluated and compared to the criteria in Table 2-1. 

If impacts equal or exceed any of the criteria in Table 2-1, air quality impacts will be considered 

significant. All feasible mitigation measures will be identified and implemented to reduce 

significant impacts to the maximum extent feasible. 

Construction Air Quality Impacts 

Compliance with PR 1147 means that owners/operators of the affected combustion equipment 

will either replace their existing equipment at the end of the equipment’s useful life and install 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-8 October 2008 

new equipment with compliant ultra-low NOx burners already installed, or retrofit their existing 

equipment by replacing the old burners with new, compliant ultra-low NOx burners. 

Any operator who chooses to install new equipment or retrofit an existing unit to comply with 

PR 1147 is not expected to construct any new buildings or other structures as part of the 

equipment replacement or retrofit process. However, some physical modifications would be 

necessary depending on whether the operator chooses to replace the existing equipment with a 

new unit or to retrofit the existing unit with ultra-low NOx burner. For example, for completely 

replacing existing equipment with new compliant equipment, the existing equipment would need 

to be shut down and allowed to cool, disconnected from fuel and electric utilities, dismantled and 

removed. For the purpose of this analysis, the new equipment is assumed to be installed at or 

near the location of the existing equipment. 

The physical modifications that are typically involved with retrofitting existing equipment would 

be removing the old burners, installing new burners, and installing new or reworking existing 

flue gas ductwork. Specifically, owners/operators of affected facilities who choose to replace 

existing burners with ultra-low NOx burners will first need to pre-order and purchase the 

appropriate size, style and number of burners, shut down the combustion unit to let it cool, and 

change out the burners. The burner change-out may involve a contractor or vendor to remove 

the bolts, possibly cut and re-weld metal seals and re-fire the burners for equipment start-up. 

Additional work may be necessary such as upgrading the operation control system or installing a 

fuel injection system with electronic controls. Once the ultra-low NOx burners are in place, the 

combustion equipment can be fired up and can operate with lower NOx emissions. Thus, 

minimal secondary construction impacts are anticipated from the installation of the majority 

ultra-low NOx burners. 

Table 2-1 

Air Quality Significance Thresholds4

Mass Daily Thresholds 

Pollutant Construction Operation 

NOx 100 lbs/day 55 lbs/day 

VOC 75 lbs/day 55 lbs/day 

PM10 150 lbs/day 150 lbs/day 

PM2.5 55 lbs/day 55 lbs/day 

Sox 150 lbs/day 150 lbs/day 

CO 550 lbs/day 550 lbs/day 

Lead 3 lbs/day 3 lbs/day 

Toxic Air Contaminants and Odor Thresholds 

Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) 

Accidental Release of Acutely 

Hazardous Materials (AHMs) 

MICR > 10 in 1 million ; HI > 1.0 (project increment) 

CAA §112(r) threshold quantities 

Odor Project creates an odor nuisance pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 402 

 

4

 CEQA Air Quality Handbook, SCAQMD, November 1993. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-9 October 2008 

Table 2-1 

Air Quality Significance Thresholds (Concluded) 

Ambient Air Quality for Criteria Pollutants (a)

NO2 

1-hour average 

annual average 

SCAQMD is in attainment; project is significant if it causes or 

contributes to an exceedance of the following attainment standards: 

0.25 ppm (state) 

0.053 ppm (federal) 

PM10 

24-hour average 

annual geometric average 

annual arithmetic mean 

10.4 μg/m3

 (construction) (b) & 2.5 μg/m3 (operation) 

1.0 μg/m3 

20 μg/m3

PM2.5 

24-hour average 10.4 μg/m3

 (construction) (b) & 2.5 μg/m3 (operation)

Sulfate 

24-hour average 1 ug/m3

CO 

1-hour average 

8-hour average 

SCAQMD is in attainment; project is significant if it causes or 

contributes to an exceedance of the following attainment standards: 

20 ppm (state) 

9.0 ppm (state/federal) 

(a)Ambient air quality thresholds for criteria pollutants based on SCAQMD Rule 1303, Table A-2 unless otherwise stated. 

(b)Ambient air quality threshold based on SCAQMD Rule 403. 

KEY: MICR = maximum individual cancer risk HI = Hazard Index 

 ug/m3

 = microgram per cubic meter ppm = parts per million 

 AHM = acutely hazardous material; TAC = toxic air contaminant 

To estimate what the impacts would be for installing ultra-low NOx burners, the following 

general assumptions were made: 

• Equipment replacement would occur at the end of the equipment’s useful life. 

• 2,462 gaseous units that currently have NOx emissions greater than one pound per day 

will be retrofitted with ultra-low NOx burners between 2010 and 2014. 

• 2,462 gaseous units that currently have NOx emissions equal to or less than one pound 

per day will be retrofitted with ultra-low NOx burners between 2015 and 2023. 

• Per unit, installation of an ultra-low NOx burner will take one day. 

• 492 units on average will be retrofitted per year using an average of two per day (260 

work days per year). 

• To provide a “worst-case analysis”, it is assumed that up to 10 units will have an ultralow NOx burner installed in the same day. 

• One contractor/vendor plus one welder per unit will be needed to retrofit existing 

equipment with an ultra-low NOx burner. 

• One construction worker to install one ultra-low NOx burner.

• One pick-up truck to deliver one ultra-low NOx burner.
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-10 October 2008 

Tables 2-2A through 2-2D summarize the peak construction emissions due to retrofits of ultralow NOx burners between the years 2010-2014 and 2015-2023. Under both compliance 

scenarios, construction air quality impacts do not exceed any applicable significance thresholds. 

Therefore, construction air quality impacts are concluded to be less than significant. There may 

be limited construction emissions prior to 2010 due to early retrofitting or equipment 

replacement. However, this scenario is expected to include a small number of facilities, and 

therefore, the respective air quality impacts are concluded to be less than significant.

Table 2-2A

Peak Construction Emissions Due to Retrofits of Ultra-Low NOx

Burners Between 2010-2014 for One Unit

PEAK CONSTRUCTION VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5

2010-2014 lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day

Onsite Emissions (welding machine) 0.16 0.45 0.58 0.00 0.05 0.0476

Offsite Emissions (construction worker 

vehicle and pick-up truck deliveries) 0.30 2.25 2.11 0.00 0.08 0.0723

Total Emissions (one unit) 0.46 2.70 2.69 0.00 0.13 0.1199

SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD 75 550 100 150 150 55

SIGNIFICANT? NO NO NO NO NO NO

Table 2-2B

Peak Construction Emissions Due to Retrofits of Ultra-Low NOx

Burners Between 2010-2014 for Ten Units

PEAK CONSTRUCTION VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5

2010-2014 lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day

Onsite Emissions (welding machines) 1.60 4.50 5.80 0.00 0.50 0.476

Offsite Emissions (construction worker 

vehicles and pick-up truck deliveries) 3.00 22.50 21.10 0.00 0.80 0.723

Peak Daily Total for 10 units installed in 

one day 4.60 27.00 26.90 0.00 1.30 1.20

SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD 75 550 100 150 150 55

SIGNIFICANT? NO NO NO NO NO NO

Table 2-2C

Peak Construction Emissions Due to Retrofits of Ultra-Low NOx

Burners Between 2015-2023 for One Unit

PEAK CONSTRUCTION VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5

2015-2023 lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day

Onsite Emissions (welding machine) 0.11 0.40 0.46 0.00 0.04 0.0384

Offsite Emissions (construction worker 

vehicle and pick-up truck deliveries) 0.21 1.48 1.32 0.00 0.05 0.048

Total Emissions (one unit) 0.32 1.88 1.78 0.00 0.09 0.0864

SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD 75 550 100 150 150 55

SIGNIFICANT? NO NO NO NO NO NO
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-11 October 2008 

Table 2-2D

Peak Construction Emissions Due to Retrofits of Ultra-Low NOx

Burners Between 2015-2023 for Ten Units

PEAK CONSTRUCTION VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5

2015-2023 lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day

Onsite Emissions (welding machines) 1.10 4.00 4.60 0.00 0.40 0.384

Offsite Emissions (construction worker 

vehicles and pick-up truck deliveries) 2.10 14.80 13.20 0.00 0.50 0.48

Peak Daily Total for 10 units installed in 

one day 3.20 18.80 17.80 0.00 0.90 0.864

SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD 75 550 100 150 150 55

SIGNIFICANT? NO NO NO NO NO NO

The specific number of units that will be retrofitted on a given day is not known. Based on the 

peak daily impacts, however, from one unit retrofit, up to 37 units could be retrofitted on a given 

day, before the significance threshold is triggered. Given the time it takes to engineer, order, and 

deliver ultra-low NOx burners, as well as the availability of construction workers and the 

staggered compliance schedule, it is unlikely that 37 units would be retrofitted on a single day.

Refer to Appendix B for the construction estimates for installing ultra-low NOx burners on the 

affected equipment. 

Summary of Operational Air Quality Impacts 

The overall objective of the proposed project is to lower NOx emissions from a large variety of 

combustion equipment and processes. To comply with the lowered NOx emission limits in PR 

1147, all affected units will either be replaced with new compliant equipment or retrofitted with 

compliant ultra-low NOx burners by July 1, 2013, or July 1 of the year the unit is 15 years old if 

the unit was manufactured after 1997. PR 1147 is expected to permanently reduce NOx 

emissions from these affected source categories by approximately 3.5 tons per day by 2014 and 

3.8 tons per day by 2023. No other operational emissions changes are expected from 

implementing PR 1147. 

To determine the overall emission impact of the PR 1147, staff has first examined the effects of 

the proposed rule per topic category. 

Changes to NOx Emissions

PR 1147 would require affected equipment to meet NOx emission limits in the range of 20 ppm 

to 60 ppm (referenced to three percent oxygen) depending upon the process and process 

temperature. Table 1-1 in Chapter 1 contains a summary of the affected equipment categories 

and gaseous fuel limits proposed in PR 1147. The proposed compliance dates for each affected 

equipment category are presented in Table 1-2 in Chapter 1. 

As summarized in Table 2-3, the 2002 NOx emissions inventory for equipment subject to 

Proposed Rule 1147 was 4.9 tons per day (2007 AQMP). The 2014 annual average inventory is 

projected to be 6.2 tons per day. Table 2-3 also shows the estimated NOx emission reductions 

and remaining emissions after implementation of proposed Rule 1147. By January 1, 2015, 

proposed Rule 1147 is expected to reduce the NOx inventory from affected equipment subject to 

the rule by 3.5 tons per day. An additional 0.3 ton of NOx per day will be reduced by 2023. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-12 October 2008 

Emission reductions were calculated based on typical uncontrolled emissions, the proposed 

emission limits, and information from the SCAQMD permit database. Based on a review of 

equipment permit limits, approximately 25 percent of the equipment in each category already 

meet the proposed rule NOx emission limits. Staff estimates the average reduction for 

uncontrolled units will be approximately 75 percent. Applying a 75 percent reduction to threefourths of the inventory produces an overall reduction of about 56 percent. 

Emission reduction estimates for each rule category are based upon the number of units in that 

rule category and an average emission reduction per unit. Yearly reduction estimates are based 

on the percentage of equipment which is anticipated to be subject to the emission limits in that 

year. The percent of equipment subject to emission limits in each specific year is based upon a 

survey of the SCAQMD permit database. Emission reductions in the first five years are due to 

units with permitted NOx emission limits greater than one pound per day. Emission reductions 

in the last eight years are due to NOx reductions from units with permit limits of one pound per 

day or less. 

Typical uncontrolled NOx emissions and projected NOx emissions reductions are presented in 

Table 2-3. 

Table 2-3

Baseline NOx Emission Inventory and Projected NOx Emission Reductions 

Fuel Equipment Category 

Typical 

Uncontrolled 

NOx 

Emissions 

Proposed 

NOx 

Emission 

Limit 

No. of 

Units 

NOx 

Baseline 

Emission 

Inventory 

(tons/day)

NOx Emission 

Reductions 

(tons/day)

Asphalt Operations 90-120 ppm 40 ppm 71 0.071 0.0550 

Open Heated Tank or 

Evaporator 120 ppm 200 0.199 0.1540 

Degassing, Incinerator, 

or Soil Remediation > 

1200° F 

120 ppm 480 0.478 0.3704 

Fryer 120 ppm 101 0.100 0.0776 

Metal Heat Treating 150-210 ppm 136 0.135 0.1048 

Metal Melting Furnace 150-210 ppm 118 0.117 0.0909 

Metal or Tar Pot 90-210 ppm 237 0.236 0.1841 

Other > 1200° F 120 ppm 

60 ppm or 

0.073 

lb/mmBtu 

295 0.293 0.2275 

Oven, Dehydrator, 

Dryer, Heater, etc. ≤

800° F 

120 ppm 

20 ppm or 

0.024 

lb/mmBtu 

2335 2.32 1.8019 

Natural 

Gas 

Degassing, Incinerator, 

or Soil Remediation ≤

1200° F 

120 ppm 

30 ppm or 

0.036 

lb/mmBtu 

479 0.477 0.3699 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-13 October 2008 

Table 2-3 

Baseline NOx Emission Inventory and Projected NOx Emission Reductions (Concluded) 

Fuel Equipment Category 

Typical 

Uncontrolled 

NOx 

Emissions 

Proposed 

NOx 

Emission 

Limit 

No. of 

Units 

NOx 

Baseline 

Emission 

Inventory 

(tons/day)

NOx Emission 

Reductions 

(tons/day)

Make Up Air Heater 120 ppm 34 0.034 0.0260 

Oven, Dehydrator, 

Dryer, Heater, etc. > 

800 and 

≤ 1200° F 

120 ppm 161 0.160 0.1244 

Tenter Frame or Carpet 

Dryer 90-120 ppm 45 0.048 0.0347 

Other Air Heater 

Outside Building 120 ppm 15 0.015 0.0116 

Natural 

Gas

Other with Process 

Temperature ≤ 1200° F 120 ppm 

30 ppm or 

0.036 

lb/mmBtu 

196 0.195 0.1511 

Liquid Fuel > 1200° F 120-180 ppm 

60 ppm or 

0.080 

lb/mmBtu 

0 0.000 0.0000 

Liquid 

Fuel 

Liquid Fuel ≤ 1200° F 120-180 ppm 

40 ppm or 

0.053 

lb/mmBtu 21 0.021 0.0162 

Total: 4,924 4.899 3.8000 

Accounting for construction NOx emissions for each year of construction, there will still be a net 

NOx emission reduction benefit. As already noted, none of the construction emissions for any 

year are estimated to exceed the construction significance threshold for NOx. Based on the NOx 

emission reductions anticipated for the proposed project, the overall net air quality effects for 

NOx emissions during each year of construction activities for the proposed project will not 

exceed the NOx air quality significance threshold for construction. No other pollutants exceed 

the air quality significance thresholds during construction or operation. The analysis indicates 

that there will be an overall reduction in NOx emissions when the construction and operational 

phases overlap. Thus, there are no significant adverse construction or operational air quality 

impacts generated by the proposed project. The overall NOx emission reduction benefits are 

summarized in Table 2-4. Refer to Appendix B for the operation estimates for installing ultralow NOx burners on the affected equipment. 

Table 2-4 

Overall 1

 Net NOx Emission Reductions During Peak Daily “Worst-Case” Construction 

Activities with Operational Overlap (lbs/day) 

Daily NOx 

Emission 

Reductions 

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Asphalt 

Operations (71) -30.4 -30.4 -30.4 -5.0 -5.0 -2.6 -2.6 -2.6 -0.174 -0.174 -0.174 -0.174 -0.174 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-14 October 2008 

Table 2-4 (Continued) 

Overall 1 Net NOx Emission Reductions During Peak Daily “Worst-Case” Construction 

Activities with Operational Overlap (lbs/day) 

Daily NOx 

Emission 

Reductions 

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Open Heated 

Tank or 

Evaporator 

(200) 

-85 -85 -85 -14.2 -14.2 -7.3 -7.3 -7.3 -0.486 -0.486 -0.486 -0.486 -0.486 

Degassing, 

Incinerator or 

Soil 

Remediation 

> 1200° F (480) 

-204.8 -204.8 -204.8 -34.2 -34.2 -17.54 -17.54 -17.54 -1.17 -1.17 -1.17 -1.17 -1.17 

Fryer (101) -42.8 -42.8 -42.8 -7.2 -7.2 -3.68 -3.68 -3.68 -0.244 -0.244 -0.244 -0.244 -0.244 

Metal Heat 

Treating (136) -57.8 -57.8 -57.8 -9.6 -9.6 -4.96 -4.96 -4.96 -0.33 -0.33 -0.33 -0.33 -0.33 

Metal Melting 

Furnace (118) -50.2 -50.2 -50.2 -8.4 -8.4 -4.3 -4.3 -4.3 -0.286 -0.286 -0.286 -0.286 -0.286 

Metal or Tar 

Pot (237) -101.8 -101.8 -101.8 -17.0 -17.0 -8.72 -8.72 -8.72 -0.582 -0.582 -0.582 -0.582 -0.582 

Other 

> 1200° F (295) -125.8 -125.8 -125.8 -21.0 -21.0 -10.78 -10.78 -10.78 -0.718 -0.718 -0.718 -0.718 -0.718 

Oven, 

Dehydrator, 

Dryer, Heater, 

etc. ≤ 800° F 

(2335) 

-995.8 -995.8 -995.8 -166.0 -166.0 -85.36 -85.36 -85.36 -5.69 -5.69 -5.69 -5.69 -5.69 

Degassing, 

Incinerator or 

Soil 

Remediation 

≤ 1200° F (479) 

-204.4 -204.4 -204.4 -34.0 -34.0 -17.52 -17.52 -17.52 -1.168 -1.168 -1.168 -1.168 -1.168 

Make Up Air 

Heater (34) -1.44 -1.44 -1.44 -2.4 -2.4 -1.24 -1.24 -1.24 -0.082 -0.082 -0.082 -0.082 -0.082 

Oven, 

Dehydrator, 

Dryer, Heater, 

etc. > 800° and 

≤ 1200° F (161) 

-68.8 -68.8 -68.8 -11.4 -11.4 -5.9 -5.9 -5.9 -0.392 -0.392 -0.392 -0.392 -0.392 

Tenter Frame or 

Carpet Dryer 

(45) 

-19.2 -19.2 -19.2 -3.2 -3.2 -1.64 -1.64 -1.64 -0.11 -0.11 -0.11 -0.11 -0.11 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-15 October 2008 

Table 2-4 (Concluded) 

Overall 1 Net NOx Emission Reductions During Peak Daily “Worst-Case” Construction 

Activities with Operational Overlap (lbs/day) 

Daily NOx 

Emission 

Reductions 

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Other Air 

Heater Outside 

Building (15) 

-6.4 -6.4 -6.4 -1.0 -1.0 -0.54 -0.54 -0.54 -0.036 -0.036 -0.036 -0.036 -0.036 

Other with 

Process 

Temperature 

< 1200° F (196) 

-83.4 -83.4 -83.4 -14.0 -14.0 -7.16 -7.16 -7.16 -0.478 -0.478 -0.478 -0.478 -0.478 

Liquid Fuel 

> 1200° F (0) -0.0 -0.0 -0.0 -0.0 -0.0 -0.0 -0.0 -0.0 -0.0 -0.0 -0.0 -0.0 -0.0 

Liquid Fuel 

≤ 1200°F (21) -9.0 -9.0 -9.0 -1.4 -1.4 -0.76 -0.76 -0.76 -0.052 -0.052 -0.052 -0.052 -0.052 

Accumulated 

Total NOx 

Emission 

Reductions 

-2100 -2100 -2100 -350 -350 -180 -180 -180 -12 -12 -12 -12 -12 

2

Worst Case 

Daily NOx 

Increases 

during 

Construction of 

Ultra-Low NOx 

Burners 

6.90 6.90 6.90 6.90 6.90 5.94 5.94 5.94 5.94 5.94 5.94 5.94 5.94 

Net 

Accumulated 

NOx Emission 

Reductions 

(Increase) 

after 

Construction 

-2093.1 -2093.1 -2093.1 -343.1 -343.1 -174.06 -174.06 -174.06 -6.06 -6.06 -6.06 -6.06 -6.06 

NOx 

Significance 

Threshold 

(For 

Construction 

Activities) 

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 

Significant For 

NOx? NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO 

1

 Because NOx emission reductions are permanent, they accumulate each compliance date milestone until total 

 NOx emissions are realized. 

2 Based on worst-case construction scenario of the replacement of 10 units in one day. * A minus sign denotes emission reductions. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-16 October 2008 

Summary of Global Warming Impacts 

Significant changes in global climate patterns have recently been associated with global 

warming, an average increase in the temperature of the atmosphere near the Earth’s surface, 

attributed to accumulation of GHG emissions in the atmosphere. GHGs trap heat in the 

atmosphere, which in turn heats the surface of the Earth. Some GHGs occur naturally and are 

emitted to the atmosphere through natural processes, while others are created and emitted solely 

through human activities. The emission of GHGs through the combustion of fossil fuels (i.e., 

fuels containing carbon) in conjunction with other human activities, appears to be closely 

associated with global warming. State law defines GHG to include the following: carbon 

dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), 

perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) (Health and Safety Code §38505(g)). 

The most common GHG that results from human activity is CO2, followed by CH4 and N2O. 

The combustion processes affected by the proposed project will generate GHG emissions, 

primarily CO2 and CH4, which are evaluated in the following section. The following analysis 

focuses on directly emitted CO2 and CH4 because these are the primary GHG pollutants emitted 

during the combustion process and are the GHG pollutants for which emission factors are 

available. Other GHGs cannot be analyzed at this time because emission factors are not 

currently available. The remaining GHGs, such as HFCs and PFCs, are determined to not result 

from the proposed project, and therefore, will not have an effect on the proposed project. CO2 

and CH4 emissions were estimated using emission factors from CARB EMFAC2007 and 

Offroad2007 models and EPA’s AP-42. 

The analysis of GHGs is a much different analysis than the analysis of criteria pollutants for the 

following reasons. For criteria pollutants, the significance thresholds are based on daily 

emissions because attainment or non-attainment is based on daily exceedances of applicable 

ambient air quality standards. Further, several ambient air quality standards are based on 

relatively short-term exposure effects on human health, e.g., one-hour and eight-hour standards. 

Since the half-life of CO2 is approximately 100 years, for example, the effects of GHGs occur 

over a longer term which means they affect the global climate over a relatively long time frame. 

As a result, the SCAQMD’s current position is to evaluate the effects of GHGs over a longer 

timeframe than a single day. Although GHG emissions are typically considered to be cumulative 

impacts because they contribute to global climate effects, this final EA analyzes the GHG 

emissions as project specific impacts because of the close relationship between CO and CO2 

emissions from the compliance options. 

Based on the type and size of equipment affected by PR 1147, CO2 emissions from the operation 

of the retrofitted or replaced equipment are likely to decrease from current levels due to 

improved burner efficiency. Therefore, no fuel penalty is associated with PR 1147 and CO2 

emissions were not required to be evaluated for operational activities. However, there are 

construction emissions of criteria pollutants and GHGs associated with installing ultra-low NOx 

burners. Table 2-5 summarizes the CO2 impacts from construction activities. Refer to 

Appendix B for the GHG estimates for installing ultra-low NOx burners on the affected 

equipment. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-17 October 2008 

Table 2-5

Overall CO2 Equivalent (eq) Increases Due to Construction Activities (metric tons/year) 1

Compliance Years 

Annual CO2eq Emission Increases Due to: 2010-2014 2015-2023

Installing Ultra-Low NOx Burners on 2,462 

Gaseous Units > 1lb/day 424.13 0 

Installing Ultra-Low NOx Burners on 2,462 

Gaseous Units ≤ 1lb/day 0 433.59 

CO2eq Increases (metric tons/year) 424.13 433.59 

1 1 metric ton = 2,205 pounds 

Neither SCAQMD nor any other air regulatory agency in California has formally established a 

significance threshold for GHG emissions yet. In the absence of a specific significance 

threshold, SCAQMD staff has evaluated significance for projects where it is the lead agency on a 

case-by-case basis. In this analysis, SCAQMD staff has used a variety of benchmarks to 

evaluate GHG impacts. As additional information is compiled with regard to the level of GHG 

emissions that constitute a significant cumulative climate change impact, SCAQMD will 

continue to revisit and possibly revise the level of GHG emissions considered to be significant. 

In its CEQA & Climate Change document (January, 2008), the California Air Pollution Control 

Officers Association (CAPCOA) identifies many potential GHG significance threshold options. 

The CAPCOA document indicates that establishing quantitative thresholds is a balance between 

setting the level low enough to capture a substantial portion of future residential and nonresidential development, while also setting a threshold high enough to exclude small 

development projects that will contribute a relatively small fraction of the cumulative statewide 

GHG emissions. For example, CAPCOA identifies one potential significance threshold as 

10,000 metric tons per year, which was considered by the Market Advisory Committee for 

inclusion in a Greenhouse Gas Cap and Trade System in California. Another potential threshold 

identified by CAPCOA is 25,000 metric tons per year, which is CARB’s proposed mandatory 

reporting threshold under Assembly Bill (AB) 32. As shown in Table 2-5, GHG emissions 

increases from implementing PR 1147 would be orders of magnitude lower than both of these 

reporting thresholds. 

Finally, another approach to determining significance is to estimate what percentage of the total 

inventory of GHG emissions are represented by emissions from a single project. If emissions are 

a relatively small percentage of the total inventory, it is possible that the project will have little or 

no effect on global climate change. According to available information, the statewide inventory 

of CO2 equivalent (CO2eq.) emissions is as follows: 1990 GHG emissions equal 427 million 

metric tons of CO2eq. and 2020 GHG emissions equal 600 million metric tons of CO2eq. with 

business as usual (542 metric tons per year by 2010 and 571 metric tons per year by 2015 

extrapolating known data). 

The CO2 emission increase from PR 1147 construction activities would be approximately 424.13 

metric tons of CO2 between 2010 and 2014 and 433.59 metric tons of CO2 between 2015 and 

2023. This small percentage (0.000002 percent) of GHG emissions from PR 1147 construction 

activities as compared to the total projected statewide GHG emissions inventory is another basis 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-18 October 2008 

for the SCAQMD’s conclusion that GHG emissions from implementing PR 1147 are less than 

significant. 

PR 1147 is part of a comprehensive ongoing regulatory program that includes implementing 

related SCAQMD 2007 AQMP control measures as amended or new rules to attain and maintain 

with a margin of safety all state and national ambient air quality standards for all areas within its 

jurisdiction. The 2007 AQMP estimates a CO2 reduction of 427,849 metric tons per year by 

2014, and a CO2 reduction of 1,523,445 metric tons per year by 2020. Therefore, PR 1147 in 

connection with other 2007 AQMP control measures is not considered to be cumulatively 

considerable and, therefore, is not considered to be a significant cumulative GHG impact. 

Since GHG emissions are considered cumulative impacts, and the GHG emission increases from 

PR 1147 construction activities are considerably below the 10,000 metric ton per year Market 

Advisory Committee threshold, 25,000 metric ton per year CARB proposed mandatory reporting 

threshold under AB 32, a small percentage of the total statewide GHG inventory, and, with other 

control measures in the 2007 AQMP, which is a comprehensive ongoing regulatory program that 

would reduce overall CO2 emissions; adverse cumulative GHG impacts from PR 1147 are not 

considered significant. 

Conclusion

Based on the preceding discussion, PR 1147 is expected to reduce NOx emissions by 

approximately 3.5 tons per day by 2014, which is an air quality benefit. An additional 0.30 ton 

per day of NOx emissions will be reduced by 2023. Thus, PR 1147 is not expected to result in 

significant adverse air quality impacts. Further, implementing PR 1147 would not diminish an 

existing air quality rule or future compliance requirement, nor conflict with or obstruct 

implementation of the applicable air quality plan. The proposed project has no provision that 

would cause a violation of any air quality standard or directly contribute to an existing or 

projected air quality violation. Since air quality impacts from implementing PR 1147 are seen as 

benefits and do not exceed any of the air quality significance thresholds in Table 2-1, air quality 

impacts are not considered to be cumulatively considerable as defined in CEQA Guidelines 

§15065(c). Therefore, the proposed project is not expected to result in a cumulatively 

considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant. 

III.d) Affected facilities are not expected to increase exposure by sensitive receptors to 

substantial pollutant concentrations from the implementation of PR 1147 for the following 

reasons: 1) the affected facilities are existing facilities located in industrial or commercial areas; 

2) the limited emission increases associated with the proposed changes (equipment replacement 

or retrofitting existing equipment) are concluded to be less than significant; and, 3) installation of 

any new, or retrofits of any existing equipment subject to PR 1147 is expected to reduce NOx 

emissions from affected equipment. Therefore, significant adverse air quality impacts to 

sensitive receptors are not expected from implementing PR 1147. 

III.e) Historically, the SCAQMD has enforced odor nuisance complaints through SCAQMD 

Rule 402 - Nuisance. Affected facilities are not expected to create objectionable odors affecting 

a substantial number of people for the following reasons: 1) the affected facilities are existing 

facilities located in industrial or commercial areas with appropriate controls in place; 2) no 

heavy-duty construction equipment with associated diesel exhaust odors are necessary to install 

ultra-low NOx burners; 3) typically no odors are associated with combustion equipment 

operating in accordance with Rule 1147; and, 4) installation of any new or retrofits of any 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-19 October 2008 

existing equipment subject to PR 1147 is expected to reduce NOx emissions from affected 

equipment. Therefore, no significant odor impacts are expected to result from implementing the 

PR 1147. 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the 

project:

 

a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly 

or through habitat modifications, on any species 

identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special 

status species in local or regional plans, policies, 

or regulations, or by the California Department 

of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service?

  ;

b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian 

habitat or other sensitive natural community 

identified in local or regional plans, policies, or 

regulations, or by the California Department of 

Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service? 

  ;

c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally 

protected wetlands as defined by §404 of the 

Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, 

marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct 

removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or 

other means? 

  ;

d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any 

native resident or migratory fish or wildlife 

species or with established native resident or 

migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of 

native wildlife nursery sites? 

  ;

e) Conflicting with any local policies or ordinances 

protecting biological resources, such as a tree 

preservation policy or ordinance? 

  ;
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-20 October 2008 

 Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat 

Conservation plan, Natural Community 

Conservation Plan, or other approved local, 

regional, or state habitat conservation plan? 

  ;

Significance Criteria 

Impacts on biological resources will be considered significant if any of the following criteria 

apply: 

- The project results in a loss of plant communities or animal habitat considered to be rare, 

threatened or endangered by federal, state or local agencies. 

- The project interferes substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory wildlife 

species. 

- The project adversely affects aquatic communities through construction or operation of the 

project. 

Discussion 

IV.a), b), c), & d) PR 1147 would only affect combustion equipment located at existing 

facilities in industrial or commercial areas, which have already been greatly disturbed. 

Compliance with PR 1147 means either installing new compliant units or retrofitting existing 

units with ultra-low NOx burner technology. Therefore, installing new equipment units or 

retrofitting existing units to comply with PR 1147 would not result in any new construction of 

buildings or other structures. In general, the areas where affected equipment are located

currently do not typically support riparian habitat, federally protected wetlands, or migratory 

corridors. Additionally, special status plants, animals, or natural communities are not expected 

to be found in close proximity to the affected facilities. 

IV.e) & f) PR 1147 is not envisioned to conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting 

biological resources nor local, regional, or state conservation plans because it will only affect 

combustion equipment primarily located at existing facilities in industrial or commercial areas. 

Additionally, PR 1147 will not conflict with any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural 

Community Conservation Plan, or any other relevant habitat conservation plan for the same 

reason. 

The SCAQMD, as the Lead Agency for the proposed project, has found that, when considering 

the record as a whole, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for any 

new adverse effects on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. 

Accordingly, based upon the preceding information, the SCAQMD has, on the basis of 

substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect contained in §753.5 (d), Title 14 

of the California Code of Regulations. 

Based upon these considerations, significant adverse biological resources impacts are not 

anticipated and will not be further analyzed in this final EA. Since no significant adverse 

biological resources impacts were identified, no mitigation measures are necessary or required. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-21 October 2008 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the 

project:

 

a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the 

significance of a historical resource as defined 

in §15064.5? 

  ;

b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the 

significance of an archaeological resource as 

defined in §15064.5? 

  ;

c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique 

paleontological resource or site or unique 

geologic feature? 

  ;

d) Disturb any human remains, including those 

interred outside a formal cemeteries? 

  ;

Significance Criteria 

Impacts to cultural resources will be considered significant if: 

- The project results in the disturbance of a significant prehistoric or historic archaeological 

site or a property of historic or cultural significance to a community or ethnic or social group. 

- Unique paleontological resources are present that could be disturbed by construction of the 

proposed project. 

- The project would disturb human remains. 

Discussion 

V.a), b), c), & d) Since only minor construction-related activities associated with installing 

compliant equipment at affected facilities are expected, the implementation of PR 1147 is 

expected, so no impacts to historical resources are expected to occur as a result of this project. 

PR 1147 is not expected to require physical changes to the environment, which may disturb 

paleontological or archaeological resources. Furthermore, it is envisioned that the areas where 

the affected facilities exist are already either devoid of significant cultural resources or whose 

cultural resources have been previously disturbed. 

Based upon these considerations, significant adverse cultural resources impacts are not expected 

from the implementing PR 1147 and will not be further assessed in this final EA. Since no 

significant cultural resources impacts were identified, no mitigation measures are necessary or 

required. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-22 October 2008 

 Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

VI. ENERGY. Would the project: 

a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation 

plans? 

  ;

b) Result in the need for new or substantially 

altered power or natural gas utility systems? 

  ;

c) Create any significant effects on local or 

regional energy supplies and on requirements for 

additional energy? 

  ;

d) Create any significant effects on peak and base 

period demands for electricity and other forms of 

energy? 

  ;

e) Comply with existing energy standards?   ;

Significance Criteria 

Impacts to energy and mineral resources will be considered significant if any of the following 

criteria are met: 

- The project conflicts with adopted energy conservation plans or standards. 

- The project results in substantial depletion of existing energy resource supplies. 

- An increase in demand for utilities impacts the current capacities of the electric and natural 

gas utilities. 

- The project uses non-renewable resources in a wasteful and/or inefficient manner. 

Discussion 

VI.a) & e) PR 1147 would only affect equipment and processes that are required to have an 

SCAQMD permit to operate, but whose NOx emissions are not currently regulated by SCAQMD 

Regulation XI. Compliance with PR 1147 means either installing new compliant units or 

retrofitting existing units with ultra-low NOx burner technology. Installation of new ultra-low 

NOx burners or replacing existing equipment with new compliant equipment is expected to 

result in a slight reduction in demand for natural gas, as new burners or new construction is 

expected to be more efficient than existing affected equipment. As a result, PR 1147 would not 

conflict with energy conservation plans, use non-renewable resources in a wasteful manner, or 

result in the need for new or substantially altered power or natural gas systems. Since PR 1147 

would affect primarily existing equipment operating at existing facilities, it will not conflict with 

adopted energy conservation plans because existing facilities would be expected to continue 

implementing any existing energy conservation plans, because it is expected that compliant 

equipment will be more efficient than existing equipment. Additionally, operators of affected 

facilities are expected to comply with existing energy conservation plans and standards to 

minimize operating costs, while still complying with the requirements of PR 1147. Accordingly 

these impact issues will not be further analyzed in the final EA. 

VI.b), c), & d) PR 1147 would not create any significant effects on peak and base period 

demands for electricity and other forms of energy since no construction of buildings or other 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-23 October 2008 

structures are anticipated as a result of the affected facilities operating equipment that is either 

manufactured or retrofitted with ultra-low NOx burner technology. 

The majority of the universe of sources that would be regulated by PR 1147 is fired with natural 

gas. As discussed in the air quality section regarding GHG emissions, due to ultra-low NOx 

burner retrofits, implementation of PR 1147 is expected to result in a slight decrease in the 

demand for natural gas. Based upon these considerations, the proposed project is not expected to 

use energy in a wasteful manner, and will not exceed SCAQMD energy significance thresholds. 

There will be no substantial depletion of energy resources nor will significant amounts of fuel be 

needed when compared to existing supplies. 

In light of the preceding discussion, PR 1147 would not create any significant effects on peak 

and base period demands for electricity and other forms of energy and it is expected to comply 

with existing energy standards. Therefore, PR 1147 is not expected to generate significant 

adverse energy resources impacts and will not be discussed further in this final EA. Since no 

significant energy impacts were identified, no mitigation measures are necessary or required. 

 Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: 

a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial 

adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, 

or death involving: 

  ;

• Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as 

delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo 

Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the 

State Geologist for the area or based on other 

substantial evidence of a known fault? 

  ;

• Strong seismic ground shaking?   ;

• Seismic–related ground failure, including 

liquefaction? 

  ;

• Landslides?   ;

b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of 

topsoil? 

  ;

c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is 

unstable or that would become unstable as a result 

of the project, and potentially result in on- or 

offsite landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, 

liquefaction or collapse? 

  ;

d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 

18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), 

creating substantial risks to life or property? 

  ;
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-24 October 2008 

 Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the 

use of septic tanks or alternative waste water 

disposal systems where sewers are not available 

for the disposal of waste water? 

  ;

Significance Criteria 

Impacts on the geological environment will be considered significant if any of the following 

criteria apply: 

- Topographic alterations would result in significant changes, disruptions, displacement, 

excavation, compaction or over covering of large amounts of soil. 

- Unique geological resources (paleontological resources or unique outcrops) are present that 

could be disturbed by the construction of the proposed project. 

- Exposure of people or structures to major geologic hazards such as earthquake surface 

rupture, ground shaking, liquefaction or landslides. 

- Secondary seismic effects could occur which could damage facility structures, e.g., 

liquefaction. 

- Other geological hazards exist which could adversely affect the facility, e.g., landslides, 

mudslides. 

Discussion 

VII.a) Southern California is an area of known seismic activity. Structures must be designed to 

comply with the Uniform Building Code Zone 4 requirements if they are located in a seismically 

active area. The local city or county is responsible for assuring that a proposed project complies 

with the Uniform Building Code as part of the issuance of the building permits and can conduct 

inspections to ensure compliance. The Uniform Building Code is considered to be a standard 

safeguard against major structural failures and loss of life. The goal of the code is to provide 

structures that will: 1) resist minor earthquakes without damage; 2) resist moderate earthquakes 

without structural damage but with some non-structural damage; and 3) resist major earthquakes 

without collapse but with some structural and non-structural damage. 

The Uniform Building Code bases seismic design on minimum lateral seismic forces (“ground 

shaking”). The Uniform Building Code requirements operate on the principle that providing 

appropriate foundations, among other aspects, helps to protect buildings from failure during 

earthquakes. The basic formulas used for the Uniform Building Code seismic design require 

determination of the seismic zone and site coefficient, which represent the foundation conditions 

at the site. Accordingly, buildings and equipment at existing affected facilities are likely to 

conform with the Uniform Building Code and all other applicable state codes in effect at the time 

they were constructed. 

PR 1147 would only affect combustion equipment located primarily at existing facilities in 

industrial or commercial areas. Since implementing PR 1147 is expected to involve the 

installation of new compliant equipment or the retrofitting of existing units with ultra-low NOx 

burners at existing facilities, no new buildings or structures are expected to be constructed in 

response to the proposed project. As a result, substantial exposure of people or structure to the 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-25 October 2008 

risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic-related activities is not anticipated and will not be 

further analyzed in this final EA. 

VII.b) PR 1147 would only affect combustion equipment located at existing facilities in 

industrial or commercial areas. Since implementing PR 1147 is expected to involve the 

installation of new compliant equipment at the end of the equipment’s useful life or the 

retrofitting of existing units with ultra-low NOx burners at existing facilities, no soil disruption 

from excavation, grading, or filling activities; changes in topography or surface relief features; 

erosion of beach sand; or changes in existing siltation rates are anticipated in response to the 

proposed project. 

VII.c) Since PR 1147 would only affect combustion equipment located primarily at existing 

facilities, it is expected that the soil types present at the affected facilities will not be further 

susceptible to expansion or liquefaction. Subsidence is not anticipated to be a problem since no 

excavation, grading, or filling activities will occur at affected facilities. Further, the proposed 

project does not involve drilling or removal of underground products (e.g., water, crude oil, et 

cetera) that could produce new, or make worse existing subsidence effects. Additionally, the 

affected areas are not envisioned to be prone to new risks from landslides or have unique 

geologic features since the affected facilities are located in industrial or commercial areas where 

such features have already been altered or removed. Finally, since affected equipment are 

located at existing facilities, the proposed project is not expected to alter or make worse any 

existing potential for subsidence, liquefaction, etc. 

VII.d) & e) Since the proposed project will affect operations at primarily existing facilities, it is 

expected that people or property will not be exposed to new impacts relative to expansive soils or 

soils incapable of supporting water disposal, nor will any existing impacts be made worse. 

Further, the proposed project does not require installation of septic tanks or other alternative 

waste water systems. The main effect of the proposed project will be the installation of new 

compliant equipment or the retrofitting of existing units with ultra-low NOx burners at the 

affected facilities. 

Based upon these considerations, significant geology and soils impacts are not expected from the 

implementation of PR 1147 and will not be further analyzed in this final EA. Since no 

significant geology and soils impacts were identified, no mitigation measures are necessary or 

required. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-26 October 2008 

 Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS 

MATERIALS. Would the project:

 

a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the 

environment through the routine transport, use, 

disposal of hazardous materials? 

  ;

b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the 

environment through reasonably foreseeable 

upset and accident conditions involving the 

release of hazardous materials into the 

environment? 

  ;

c) Emit hazardous emissions, or handle hazardous 

or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or 

waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or 

proposed school? 

  ;

d) Be located on a site which is included on a list 

of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant 

to Government Code §65962.5 and, as a result, 

would create a significant hazard to the public 

or the environment? 

  ;

e) For a project located within an airport land use 

plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, 

within two miles of a public airport or public 

use airport, would the project result in a safety 

hazard for people residing or working in the 

project area? 

  ;

f) For a project within the vicinity of a private 

airstrip, would the project result in a safety 

hazard for people residing or working in the 

project area? 

  ;

g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere 

with an adopted emergency response plan or 

emergency evacuation plan? 

  ;

h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk 

of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, 

including where wildlands are adjacent to 

urbanized areas or where residences are 

intermixed with wildlands? 

  ;

i) Significantly increased fire hazard in areas with 

flammable materials? 

  ;
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-27 October 2008 

Significance Criteria 

Impacts associated with hazards will be considered significant if any of the following occur: 

- Non-compliance with any applicable design code or regulation. 

- Non-conformance to National Fire Protection Association standards. 

- Non-conformance to regulations or generally accepted industry practices related to operating 

policy and procedures concerning the design, construction, security, leak detection, spill 

containment or fire protection. 

- Exposure to hazardous chemicals in concentrations equal to or greater than the Emergency 

Response Planning Guideline (ERPG) 2 levels. 

Discussion 

VIII.a) There are no provisions in PR 1147 that would increase the amount of hazardous 

materials used or generated by facility owners/operators. Further, because implementation of PR 

1147 would involve the installation of new compliant equipment at the end of the equipment’s 

useful life or the retrofitting of existing units with ultra-low NOx burners at existing facilities, no 

raw material deliveries or waste disposal truck trips that handle hazardous materials will be 

associated with the proposed project after the applicable compliance dates. 

As indicated in the discussion under energy, PR 1147 applies to combustion equipment 

operations that are mainly fired with natural gas, though a small percentage are fired with liquid 

fuel; both are flammable substances. Because the ultra-low NOx burner technology is more 

efficient than existing burner technologies, implementation of PR 1147 is expected to slightly 

reduce the demand for fuel compared to what is currently used at existing affected facilities. As 

a result, implementation of PR 1147 is not expected to noticeably change or may slightly reduce

any existing flammability hazard that may be associated with operating these combustion 

devices. In summary, implementation of PR 1147 is not expected to increase any existing 

flammability hazard associated with firing ultra-low NOx burners. 

VIII.b) & i) Since PR 1147 would primarily affect existing combustion equipment that is 

primarily located at existing facilities, existing emergency planning is anticipated to adequately 

minimize the risk associated installing new compliant equipment or retrofitting existing 

equipment with ultra-low NOx burners. Businesses are required to report increases in the 

storage or use of flammable and otherwise hazardous materials to local fire departments. As 

noted in item VIII.a), PR 1147 is not expected to increase the amount of materials used or 

generated at affected facilities that would contain hazardous materials nor is it expected to 

significantly increase the demand of fuels (natural gas and liquid fuel) or other flammable 

substances. 

In addition, local fire departments ensure that adequate permit conditions are in place to protect 

against potential risk of upset. The Uniform Fire Code and Uniform Building Code set standards 

intended to minimize risks from flammable or otherwise hazardous materials. Local 

jurisdictions are required to adopt the uniform codes or comparable regulations. Local fire 

agencies require permits for the use or storage of hazardous materials and permit modifications 

for proposed increases in their use. Permit conditions depend on the type and quantity of the 

hazardous materials at the facility. Permit conditions may include, but are not limited to, 

specifications for sprinkler systems, electrical systems, ventilation, and containment. The fire 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-28 October 2008 

departments make annual business inspections to ensure compliance with permit conditions and 

other appropriate regulations. 

Further, all hazardous materials are expected to be used in compliance with established OSHA or 

Cal/OSHA regulations and procedures, including providing adequate ventilation, using 

recommended personal protective equipment and clothing, posting appropriate signs and 

warnings, and providing adequate worker health and safety training. When taken together, the 

above regulations provide comprehensive measures to reduce hazards of explosive or otherwise 

hazardous materials. Compliance with these and other federal, state and local regulations and 

proper operation and maintenance of equipment should ensure the potential for explosions or 

accidental releases of hazardous materials is not significant. 

VIII.c), e), & f) In general, the purpose of PR 1147 is to achieve NOx emission reductions from 

large variety of combustion equipment at existing facilities, which will ultimately improve air 

quality and reduce adverse human health impact related to poor air quality. Since operations of 

these equipment categories occur primarily at existing facilities located in industrial or 

commercial areas, implementation of PR 1147 is not expected to increase existing, or create any 

new hazardous emissions which would adversely affect existing/proposed schools or 

public/private airports located in close proximity to the affected facilities. Accordingly, these 

impact issues are not further evaluated in this final EA. 

VIII.d) Even if some affected facilities are designated pursuant to Government Code §65962.5 

as a large quantity generator of hazardous waste, it is not anticipated that complying with PR 

1147 will alter in any way how operators of affected facilities manage their hazardous wastes 

and that they will continue to be managed in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and 

local rules and regulations. 

VIII.g) Aside from the use of natural gas and liquid fuel for fueling the equipment, it should 

again be noted that the proposed rule has no provisions that dictate the use of, or generate any 

new hazardous material. Under PR 1147, owners or operators of the affected facilities have the 

flexibility of choosing the type of compliant combustion equipment (i.e. to install new equipment 

or retrofit existing equipment with ultra-low NOx burners) for their operations. Either way, the 

installation of new compliant equipment or the retrofit of existing equipment will not pose a 

substantial safety hazard. Therefore, it is not anticipated that PR 1147 would require changes to 

impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or 

emergency evacuation plan. 

In addition, Health and Safety Code §25506 specifically requires all businesses handling 

hazardous materials to submit a business emergency response plan to assist local administering 

agencies in the emergency release or threatened release of a hazardous material. Business 

emergency response plans generally require the following: 

• Identification of individuals who are responsible for various actions, including 

reporting, assisting emergency response personnel and establishing an emergency 

response team; 

• Procedures to notify the administering agency, the appropriate local emergency 

rescue personnel, and the California Office of Emergency Services; 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-29 October 2008 

• Procedures to mitigate a release or threatened release to minimize any potential 

harm or damage to persons, property or the environment; 

• Procedures to notify the necessary persons who can respond to an emergency 

within the facility; 

• Details of evacuation plans and procedures; 

• Descriptions of the emergency equipment available in the facility; 

• Identification of local emergency medical assistance; and 

• Training (initial and refresher) programs for employees in: 

1. The safe handling of hazardous materials used by the business; 

2. Methods of working with the local public emergency response agencies; 

3. The use of emergency response resources under control of the handler; 

4. Other procedures and resources that will increase public safety and 

prevent or mitigate a release of hazardous materials. 

In general, every county or city and all facilities using a minimum amount of hazardous materials 

are required to formulate detailed contingency plans to eliminate, or at least minimize, the 

possibility and effect of fires, explosion, or spills. In conjunction with the California Office of 

Emergency Services, local jurisdictions have enacted ordinances that set standards for area and 

business emergency response plans. These requirements include immediate notification, 

mitigation of an actual or threatened release of a hazardous material, and evacuation of the 

emergency area. 

VIII.h) Since the facilities that operate equipment subject to the requirements in PR 1147 are 

located at existing industrial or commercial sites in urban areas where wildlands are not 

prevalent, risk of loss or injury associated with wildland fires is not expected. Accordingly, this 

impact issue is not further evaluated in this final EA. 

Based upon these considerations, significant hazards and hazardous materials impacts are not 

expected from the implementation of PR 1147 and will not be further analyzed in this final EA. 

Since no significant hazards and hazardous materials impacts were identified, no mitigation 

measures are necessary or required. 

 Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. 

Would the project:

 

a) Violate any water quality standards or waste 

discharge requirements? 

  ;
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-30 October 2008 

 Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or 

interfere substantially with groundwater 

recharge such that there would be a net deficit 

in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local 

groundwater table level (e.g. the production rate 

of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a 

level which would not support existing land 

uses or planned uses for which permits have 

been granted)? 

  ;

c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern 

of the site or area, including through alteration 

of the course of a stream or river, in a manner 

that would result in substantial erosion or 

siltation on- or offsite? 

  ;

d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern 

of the site or area, including through alteration 

of the course of a stream or river, or 

substantially increase the rate or amount of 

surface runoff in a manner that would result in 

flooding on- or offsite? 

  ;

e) Create or contribute runoff water which would 

exceed the capacity of existing or planned 

stormwater drainage systems or provide 

substantial additional sources of polluted 

runoff? 

  ;

f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?   ;

g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard 

area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard 

Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other 

flood hazard delineation map? 

  ;

h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area 

structures which would impede or redirect flood 

flaws? 

  ;

i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk 

of loss, injury or death involving flooding, 

including flooding as a result of the failure of a 

levee or dam? 

  ;

j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?   ;

k) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of 

the applicable Regional Water Quality Control 

Board? 

  ;
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-31 October 2008 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

l) Require or result in the construction of new 

water or wastewater treatment facilities or 

expansion of existing facilities, the construction 

of which could cause significant environmental 

effects? 

  ;

m) Require or result in the construction of new 

storm water drainage facilities or expansion of 

existing facilities, the construction of which 

could cause significant environmental effects? 

  ;

n) Have sufficient water supplies available to 

serve the project from existing entitlements and 

resources, or are new or expanded entitlements 

needed? 

  ;

o) Require in a determination by the wastewater 

treatment provider which serves or may serve 

the project that it has adequate capacity to serve 

the project's projected demand in addition to the 

provider's existing commitments? 

  ;

Significance Criteria 

Potential impacts on water resources will be considered significant if any of the following 

criteria apply: 

Water Quality: 

- The project will cause degradation or depletion of ground water resources substantially 

affecting current or future uses. 

- The project will cause the degradation of surface water substantially affecting current or 

future uses. 

- The project will result in a violation of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

(NPDES) permit requirements. 

- The capacities of existing or proposed wastewater treatment facilities and the sanitary sewer 

system are not sufficient to meet the needs of the project. 

- The project results in substantial increases in the area of impervious surfaces, such that 

interference with groundwater recharge efforts occurs. 

- The project results in alterations to the course or flow of floodwaters. 

Water Demand: 

- The existing water supply does not have the capacity to meet the increased demands of the 

project, or the project would use a substantial amount of potable water. 

- The project increases demand for water by more than five million gallons per day. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-32 October 2008 

Discussion 

The expected options for compliance with the proposed future NOx emission limits will either 

involve the installation of new compliant equipment at the end of the equipment’s useful life or 

the retrofitting of existing units with ultra-low NOx burners at existing facilities. No additional 

water demand or wastewater generation is expected to result from the operation of the units 

equipped with ultra-low NOx burners at the affected facilities because this type of control 

technology does not entail the use of water in the NOx control process. Further, PR 1147 has no 

provision that would require the construction of additional water resource facilities, increase the 

need for new or expanded water entitlements, or alter existing drainage patterns. The proposed 

project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with 

groundwater recharge. PR 1147 would not create or contribute runoff water that would exceed 

the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional 

sources of polluted runoff. Further, since compliance with PR 1147 does not involve wastewater 

processes, there would be no change in the composition or volume of existing wastewater 

streams from the affected facilities. In addition, the proposed amended rule is not expected to 

require additional wastewater disposal capacity, violate any water quality standard or wastewater 

discharge requirements, or otherwise substantially degrade water quality. 

IX.a), f), k), l), & o) Complying with the proposed project will not change existing operations at 

affected facilities, nor would it result in generation of increased volumes of wastewater because 

the ultra-low NOx burners do not require water as part of the NOx control process. As a result, 

there are no potential changes in wastewater volume or composition expected from facilities 

complying with the requirements in PR 1147. Further, PR 1147 is not expected to cause affected 

facilities to violate any water quality standard or wastewater discharge requirements since there 

would be no wastewater volumes generated as a result of implementing with PR 1147. PR 1147 

is not expected to have significant adverse water demand or water quality impacts for the 

following reasons: 

• The proposed project does not increase demand for water by more than 5,000,000 

gallons per day. 

• The proposed project does not require construction of new water conveyance 

infrastructure. 

• The proposed project does not create a substantial increase in mass inflow of 

effluents to public wastewater treatment facilities. 

• The proposed project does not result in a substantial degradation of surface water 

or groundwater quality. 

• The proposed project does not result in substantial increases in the area of 

impervious surfaces, such that interference with groundwater recharge efforts 

occurs. 

• The proposed project does not result in alterations to the course or flow of 

floodwaters. 

IX.b) & n) Because the NOx control process of the burners in the equipment affected by PR 

1147 does not rely on water, no increase to any affected facilities’ existing water demand is 

expected. Because ultra-low NOx burner technology does not utilize water, implementation of 

PR 1147 will not increase demand for, or otherwise affect groundwater supplies or interfere with 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-33 October 2008 

groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of 

the local groundwater table level. In addition, implementation of PR 1147 will not increase 

demand for water from existing entitlements and resources, and will not require new or expanded 

entitlements. Since equipment affected by PR 1147 generally occur in existing structures at 

existing facilities, no paving is required that might interfere with groundwater recharge. 

Therefore, no water demand impacts are expected as the result of implementing PR 1147. 

IX.c), d), & e) Implementation of PR 1147 will occur at existing facilities, that are typically 

located in industrial or commercial areas that are paved and already have drainage infrastructures 

in place. Since PR 1147 does not involve major construction activities including site 

preparation, grading, etc., no changes to storm water runoff, drainage patterns, groundwater 

characteristics, or flow are expected. Therefore, these impact areas are not expected to be 

affected by PR 1147. 

IX.g), h), i), & j) The proposed project will not require construction of new housing, contribute to 

the construction of new building structures, or require modifications or changes to existing 

structures. Further, PR 1147 is not expected to require additional workers at affected facilities. 

Therefore, PR 1147 is not expected to generate construction of any new structures in 100-year flood 

areas as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood 

delineation map. As a result, PR 1147 is not expected to expose people or structures to significant 

new flooding risks, or make worse any existing flooding risks. Finally, PR 1147 will not affect in 

any way any potential flood hazards inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mud flow that may already 

exist relative to existing facilities or create new hazards at existing facilities. 

IX.m) PR 1147 will not increase storm water discharge, since no construction activities are 

expected at affected facilities. Further, no new areas at existing affected facilities are expected to be 

paved, so the proposed project will not increase storm water runoff during operation. Therefore, no 

new storm water discharge treatment facilities or modifications to existing facilities will be required 

due to the implementation of PR 1147. Accordingly, PR 1147 is not expected to generate significant 

adverse impacts relative to construction of new storm water drainage facilities. 

Based upon these considerations, significant hydrology and water quality impacts are not expected 

from the implementation of PR 1147 and will not be further analyzed in this final EA. Since no 

significant hydrology and water quality impacts were identified, no mitigation measures are 

necessary or required. 

 Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

X. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the 

project:

 

a) Physically divide an established community?   ;
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-34 October 2008 

 Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, 

or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over 

the project (including, but not limited to the 

general plan, specific plan, local coastal program 

or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of 

avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? 

  ;

c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation 

or natural community conservation plan?

  ;

Significance Criteria 

Land use and planning impacts will be considered significant if the project conflicts with the 

land use and zoning designations established by local jurisdictions. 

Discussion 

X.a) PR 1147 would only affect combustion equipment primarily at existing facilities. The 

expected options for compliance with the proposed future NOx emission limits in PR 1147 will 

involve the installation of new compliant equipment at the end of the equipment’s useful life or 

the retrofitting of existing units with ultra-low NOx burners. Since PR 1147 affects equipment 

operating at existing facilities, it does not include any components that would require physically 

dividing an established community. 

X.b) & c) There are no provisions in PR 1147 that would affect land use plans, policies, or 

regulations. Land use and other planning considerations are determined by local governments 

and no land use or planning requirements will be altered by regulating NOx emissions from 

affected natural gas-fired or liquid fuel fired combustion equipment. Replacing one type of 

combustion equipment with another similar type of combustion equipment or replacing old 

burners with new ultra-low NOx burners is not considered a change in operations at affected 

facilities that would require changes to an existing conditional use permit. Since PR 1147 would 

establish lower NOx emission limits for these combustion devices, PR 1147 would not affect in 

any way habitat conservation or natural community conservation plans, agricultural resources or 

operations, and would not create divisions in any existing communities. Therefore, present or 

planned land uses in the region will not be significantly adversely affected as a result of PR 

1147. 

Based upon these considerations, significant land use and planning impacts are not expected 

from the implementation of PR 1147 and will not be further analyzed in this final EA. Since no 

significant land use and planning impacts were identified, no mitigation measures are necessary 

or required. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-35 October 2008 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

XI. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: 

a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral 

resource that would be of value to the region and the 

residents of the state? 

  ;

b)Result in the loss of availability of a locallyimportant mineral resource recovery site delineated 

on a local general plan, specific plan or other land 

use plan? 

  ;

Significance Criteria 

Project-related impacts on mineral resources will be considered significant if any of the 

following conditions are met: 

- The project would result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be 

of value to the region and the residents of the state. 

- The proposed project results in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource 

recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan. 

Discussion 

XI.a) & b) There are no provisions in PR 1147 that would result in the loss of availability of a 

known mineral resource of value to the region and the residents of the state, or of a locallyimportant mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other 

land use plan. 

Based upon these aforementioned considerations, significant mineral resources impacts are not 

expected from the implementation of PR 1147 and will not be further analyzed in this final EA. 

Since no significant mineral resources impacts were identified, no mitigation measures are 

necessary or required. 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

XII. NOISE. Would the project result in: 

a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels 

in excess of standards established in the local 

general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable 

standards of other agencies? 

  ;

b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive 

groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? 

  ;

c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise 

levels in the project vicinity above levels existing 

without the project? 

  ;
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-36 October 2008 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in 

ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above 

levels existing without the project? 

  ;

e) For a project located within an airport land use plan 

or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 

two miles of a public airport or public use airport, 

would the project expose people residing or working 

in the project area to excessive noise levels? 

  ;

f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airship, 

would the project expose people residing or working 

in the project area to excessive noise levels? 

  ;

Significance Criteria 

Impacts on noise will be considered significant if: 

- Construction noise levels exceed the local noise ordinances or, if the noise threshold is 

currently exceeded, project noise sources increase ambient noise levels by more than three 

decibels (dBA) at the site boundary. Construction noise levels will be considered significant 

if they exceed federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) noise 

standards for workers. 

- The proposed project operational noise levels exceed any of the local noise ordinances at the 

site boundary or, if the noise threshold is currently exceeded, project noise sources increase 

ambient noise levels by more than three dBA at the site boundary. 

Discussion 

XII.a) PR 1147 would only affect combustion equipment at existing facilities. Since installation 

of new equipment or retrofitting existing equipment does not require heavy-duty construction 

equipment, significant adverse noise impacts are not anticipated during the construction phase. 

The expected options for compliance with the proposed future NOx emission limits in PR 1147 

will involve either the installation of new equipment at the end of the equipment’s useful life or 

the retrofitting of existing units with ultra-low NOx burners. No other physical modifications or 

changes associated with the implementation of PR 1147 are expected. Thus, the proposed 

project is not expected to expose persons to the generation of excessive noise levels above 

current facility levels because the proposed project will result in affected facilities operating the 

same type of equipment at equivalent or similar noise levels and low NOx combustion 

technology is not typically a noise intensive technology. It is expected that any facility affected 

by PR 1147 will comply with all existing noise control laws or ordinances. Further, 

Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and California-OSHA have established 

noise standards to protect worker health. It is expected that all workers at affected facilities will 

continue complying with applicable noise standards. 

XII.b) PR 1147 is not anticipated to expose people to or generate excessive groundborne 

vibration or groundborne noise levels since no major construction activities are expected to occur 

at the existing facilities and the affected equipment are not inherently noisy or create excessive 

vibrations. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-37 October 2008 

XII.c) A permanent increase in ambient noise levels at the affected facilities above existing 

levels as a result of implementing the proposed project is unlikely to occur because any new 

equipment that would be installed as part of implementing PR 1147 will be replacing existing 

equipment with the same or similar noise profiles and retrofitting existing equipment with ultralow NOx burners will not change the noise profile of the existing equipment. Therefore, the 

existing noise levels are unlikely to change and raise ambient noise levels in the vicinities of the 

existing facilities to above a level of significance in response to implementing PR 1147. 

XII.d) No increase in periodic or temporary ambient noise levels in the vicinity of affected 

facilities above levels existing prior to PR 1147 is anticipated because the proposed project 

would not require construction-related activities at affected facilities or change the existing 

operations at the affected facilities. See also the response to item XII.a). 

XII.e) & f) Implementation of PR 1147 would not consist of improvements within the existing 

facilities requiring major construction activities. Even if an affected facility is located near a 

public/private airport, there are no new noise impacts expected from any of the existing facilities 

as a result of complying with the proposed project. Thus, PR 1147 is not expected to expose 

people residing or working in the project vicinities to excessive noise levels. See also the 

response to item XII.a). 

Based upon these considerations, significant noise impacts are not expected from the 

implementation of PR 1147 and are not further evaluated in this final EA. Since no significant 

noise impacts were identified, no mitigation measures are necessary or required. 

 Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the 

project:

 

a) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly 

(for example, by proposing new homes and 

businesses) or indirectly (e.g. through extension of 

roads or other infrastructure)?

  ;

b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, 

necessitating the construction of replacement 

housing elsewhere?

  ;

c) Displace substantial numbers of people, 

necessitating the construction of replacement 

housing elsewhere? 

  ;

Significance Criteria 

Impacts of the proposed project on population and housing will be considered significant if the 

following criteria are exceeded: 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-38 October 2008 

- The demand for temporary or permanent housing exceeds the existing supply. 

- The proposed project produces additional population, housing or employment inconsistent 

with adopted plans either in terms of overall amount or location. 

Discussion 

XIII.a) Because the installation of new equipment or retrofitting of existing equipment only 

requires two construction workers at most (one to deliver materials and one to install it), it is 

expected that construction workers can be drawn from the existing labor pool in southern 

California. Further, the proposed project is not anticipated to generate any significant effects, 

either direct or indirect, on the district's population or population distribution as no additional 

workers are anticipated to be required at facilities subject to the proposed amendments. Human 

population within the jurisdiction of the SCAQMD is anticipated to grow regardless of 

implementing PR 1147. As such, PR 1147 will not result in changes in population densities or 

induce significant growth in population. 

XIII.b) & c) Because the proposed project primarily affects existing facilities located mostly in 

industrial and commercial areas, PR 1147 is not expected to result in the creation of any industry 

that would affect population growth, directly or indirectly induce the construction of single- or 

multiple-family units, or require the displacement of people elsewhere. 

Based upon these considerations, significant population and housing impacts are not expected 

from the implementation of PR 1147 and are not further evaluated in this final EA. Since no 

significant population and housing impacts were identified, no mitigation measures are necessary 

or required. 

 Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal 

result in substantial adverse physical impacts 

associated with the provision of new or 

physically altered governmental facilities, need 

for new or physically altered government 

facilities, the construction of which could cause 

significant environmental impacts, in order to 

maintain acceptable service ratios, response 

times or other performance objectives for any of 

the following public services:

 

 a) Fire protection?   ;

 b) Police protection?   ;

 c) Schools?   ;

 d) Parks?   ;

 e) Other public facilities?   ;
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-39 October 2008 

Significance Criteria 

Impacts on public services will be considered significant if the project results in substantial 

adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered 

governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered government facilities, the 

construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain 

acceptable service ratios, response time or other performance objectives. 

Discussion 

XIV.a) & b) PR 1147 would only affect combustion equipment at existing facilities. The 

expected options for compliance with the proposed future NOx emission limits in PR 1147 will 

involve either the installation of new equipment at the end of the equipment’s useful life or the 

retrofitting of existing units with ultra-low NOx burners that will be compliant with fire 

department standards. No other physical modifications or changes associated with the 

implementation of PR 1147 are expected. The overall amount of natural gas and liquid fuel 

usage at any one facility over their current levels is not expected to change substantially or 

increase the chances for fires or explosions that could affect local fire departments. Finally, PR 

1147 is not expected to increase the need for security at affected facilities, which could adversely 

affect local police departments. 

XIV.c) & d) The local labor pool (e.g., workforce) of particular affected facility areas is 

expected to remain the same since PR 1147 would not trigger any changes to current facility 

operations. Therefore, with no increase in local population anticipated, no significant adverse 

impacts are expected to local schools or parks. 

XIV.e) The proposed project will result in replacing existing equipment with functionally 

identical new equipment at the end of the existing equipment’s useful life or retrofitting existing 

equipment with ultra-low NOx burners at existing facilities. Besides permitting the equipment or 

altering permit conditions, there is no other need for government services. Implementation of PR 

1147 would not result in the need for new or physically altered government facilities in order to 

maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives. There will 

be no increase in population and, therefore, no need for physically altered government facilities. 

Based upon these considerations, significant public services impacts are not expected from the 

implementation of PR 1147 and are not further evaluated in this final EA. Since no significant 

public services impacts were identified, no mitigation measures are necessary or required. 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

XV. RECREATION. 

a) Would the project increase the use of existing 

neighborhood and regional parks or other 

recreational facilities such that substantial physical 

deterioration of the facility would occur or be 

accelerated?

  ;
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-40 October 2008 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

b) Does the project include recreational facilities or 

require the construction or expansion of recreational 

facilities that might have an adverse physical effect 

on the environment?

  ;

Significance Criteria 

Impacts to recreation will be considered significant if: 

- The project results in an increased demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other 

recreational facilities. 

- The project adversely affects existing recreational opportunities. 

Discussion 

XV.a) & b) As previously discussed under “Land Use and Planning,” there are no provisions in 

the PR 1147 that would affect land use plans, policies, or regulations. Land use and other 

planning considerations are determined by local governments and no land use or planning 

requirements will be altered by the changes proposed in PR 1147. The proposed project would 

not increase the demand for or use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other 

recreational facilities or require the construction of new or expansion of existing recreational 

facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment because it will not 

directly or indirectly increase or redistribute population. 

Based upon these considerations, significant recreation impacts are not expected from the 

implementation of PR 1147 and are not further evaluated in this final EA. Since no significant 

recreation impacts were identified, no mitigation measures are necessary or required. 

 Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

XVI. SOLID/HAZARDOUS WASTE. Would the 

project:

 

a)Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted 

capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste 

disposal needs? 

  ;

b)Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and 

regulations related to solid and hazardous waste? 

  ;

Significance Criteria 

The proposed project impacts on solid/hazardous waste will be considered significant if the 

following occurs: 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-41 October 2008 

- The generation and disposal of hazardous and non-hazardous waste exceeds the capacity of 

designated landfills. 

Discussion 

XVI.a) & b) Implementation of PR 1147 would require facility operators to either install new 

compliant equipment at the end of the equipment’s useful life or retrofit existing equipment with 

ultra-low NOx burners beginning on or after July 1, 2010 through July 1, 2013. The date the 

lower NOx emission limits become effective as a result of implementing PR 1147 are in addition 

to other requirements for existing equipment that already comply with a 12 ppm NOx limit. PR 

1147 may involve replacing older equipment with newer lower NOx emitting equipment or 

retrofitting existing equipment with ultra-low NOx burners. Because affected equipment has a 

finite lifetime, it will ultimately have to be replaced at the end of its useful life. For some 

equipment, PR 1147 may accelerate replacement. However, affected equipment may be 

refurbished and used elsewhere or the scrap metal from replaced units has economic value and is 

expected to be recycled, so any solid or hazardous waste impacts specifically associated with PR 

1147 are expected to be minor. As a result, no substantial change in the amount or character of 

solid or hazardous waste streams is expected to occur. PR 1147 is not expected to increase the 

volume of solid or hazardous wastes from affected facilities, require additional waste disposal 

capacity, or generate waste that does not meet applicable local, state, or federal regulations. 

Based upon these considerations, PR 1147 is not expected to increase the volume of solid or 

hazardous wastes that cannot be handled by existing municipal or hazardous waste disposal 

facilities, or require additional waste disposal capacity. Further, implementing PR 1147 is not 

expected to interfere with any affected facility’s ability to comply with applicable local, state, or 

federal waste disposal regulations. Since no solid/hazardous waste impacts were identified, no 

mitigation measures are necessary or required. 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

XVII.TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the 

project:

 

a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in 

relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of 

the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase 

in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to 

capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at 

intersections)? 

  ;

b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level 

of service standard established by the county 

congestion management agency for designated roads 

or highways? 

  ;

c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including 

either an increase in traffic levels or a change in 

location that results in substantial safety risks? 

  ;
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-42 October 2008 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature 

(e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or 

incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? 

  ;

e) Result in inadequate emergency access?   ;

f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?   ;

g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs 

supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus 

turnouts, bicycle racks)? 

  ;

Significance Criteria 

Impacts on transportation/traffic will be considered significant if any of the following criteria 

apply: 

- Peak period levels on major arterials are disrupted to a point where level of service (LOS) is 

reduced to D, E or F for more than one month. 

- An intersection’s volume to capacity ratio increase by 0.02 (two percent) or more when the 

LOS is already D, E or F. 

- A major roadway is closed to all through traffic, and no alternate route is available. 

- There is an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and 

capacity of the street system. 

- The demand for parking facilities is substantially increased. 

- Water borne, rail car or air traffic is substantially altered. 

- Traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians are substantially increased. 

- The need for more than 350 employees 

- An increase in heavy-duty transport truck traffic to and/or from the facility by more than 350 

truck round trips per day 

- Increase customer traffic by more than 700 visits per day. 

Discussion 

XVII.a) & b) PR 1147 affects a large variety of combustion equipment operating primarily at 

existing facilities and has no potential to adversely affect transportation. The expected options 

for compliance with the proposed future NOx emission limits in PR 1147 will involve the 

installation of new compliant equipment at the end of the equipment’s useful life or the 

retrofitting of existing units with ultra-low NOx burners, which would only require two 

construction workers at most to deliver materials and install them. PR 1147 would have no 

affect on existing operations at the affected facilities that would change or cause additional 

transportation demands or services. Therefore, since only two additional construction-related 

trips per facility and no operational-related trips per facility are anticipated, the implementation 

of PR 1147 is not expected to significantly adversely affect circulation patterns on local 

roadways or the level of service at intersections near affected facilities. Finally, affected 

facilities are dispersed throughout the District, so it is not expected that construction-related trips 

to affected facilities would overlap to an appreciable extent.
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-43 October 2008 

XVII.c) The expected options for compliance with the proposed future NOx emission limits in 

PR 1147 will involve the installation of new compliant equipment or the retrofitting of existing 

units with ultra-low NOx burners. However, PR 1147 will not require operators of existing 

facilities to construct buildings or other structures that could interfere with flight patterns so the 

height and appearance of the existing structures are not expected to change. Therefore, 

implementation of PR 1147 is not expected to adversely affect air traffic patterns. Further, PR 

1147 will not affect in any way air traffic in the region because it will not require transport of 

any materials by air. 

XVII.d) As the physical modifications that are expected to occur by implementing PR 1147 are 

limited to the confines of existing facilities, no offsite modifications to roadways are anticipated 

for the proposed project that would result in an additional design hazard or incompatible uses. 

XVII.e) Any equipment replacements or retrofits associated with implementing PR 1147 will 

likely occur in or about the same location within the confines of each existing facility such that 

no changes to emergency access at or in the vicinity of the affected facilities would be expected. 

As a result, PR 1147 is not expected to adversely impact emergency access. 

XVII.f) Other than the equipment replacements or retrofits associated with implementing PR 

1147, no changes to the parking capacity at or in the vicinity of the affected facilities are 

expected. Further, PR 1147 is not expected to require additional workers (with the exception of 

retrofitting or equipment replacement), so additional parking capacity will not be required. 

Therefore, PR 1147 is not expected to adversely impact on- or off-site parking capacity. 

XVII.g) Other than the equipment replacements or retrofits associated with implementing PR 

1147, no facility modifications or changes are expected that would conflict with alternative 

transportation, such as bus turnouts, bicycle racks, et cetera. 

Based upon these considerations, PR 1147 is not expected to generate significant adverse 

transportation/traffic impacts and, therefore, this topic will not be considered further. Since no 

significant transportation/traffic impacts were identified, no mitigation measures are necessary or 

required. 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF 

SIGNIFICANCE. 

 

a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the 

quality of the environment, substantially reduce the 

habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or 

wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining 

levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal 

community, reduce the number or restrict the range 

of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate 

important examples of the major periods of 

California history or prehistory?

  ;
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-44 October 2008 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No Impact 

b) Does the project have impacts that are individually 

limited, but cumulatively considerable? 

("Cumulatively considerable" means that the 

incremental effects of a project are considerable 

when viewed in connection with the effects of past 

projects, the effects of other current projects, and the 

effects of probable future projects.)

  ;

c) Does the project have environmental effects that will 

cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, 

either directly or indirectly?

  ;

XVIII.a) As discussed in the “Biological Resources” section, PR 1147 is not expected to 

significantly adversely affect plant or animal species or the habitat on which they rely because 

the affected equipment is located at primarily existing facilities in industrial or commercial areas 

which have already been greatly disturbed and that currently do not support such habitats. 

Additionally, special status plants, animals, or natural communities are not expected to be found 

within close proximity to the facilities affected by PR 1147. 

XVIII.b) Based on the foregoing analyses, since PR 1147 will not generate any project-specific 

significant environmental impacts, PR 1147 is not expected to cause cumulative impacts in 

conjunction with other projects that may occur concurrently with or subsequent to the proposed 

project. Related projects to the currently proposed project include existing and proposed rules 

and regulations, as well as 2007 AQMP control measures. Furthermore, the effects of PR 1147 

will not be "cumulatively considerable" because there are no, or minor, incremental impacts and 

there will be no contribution to a significant cumulative impact caused by other projects that 

would exist in absence of the proposed project. For example, the environmental topics checked 

‘No Impact’ (e.g., aesthetics, agriculture resources, biological resources, cultural resources, 

energy, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land 

use and planning, mineral resources, noise, population and housing, public services, recreation, 

solid/hazardous waste and transportation and traffic) would not be expected to make any 

contribution to potential cumulative impacts whatsoever. For the environmental topic checked 

‘Less than Significant Impact’ (e.g., air quality), the analysis indicated that project impacts 

would not exceed any project-specific significance thresholds. This conclusion is based on the 

fact that the analyses for each of these environmental areas concluded that there would be no 

incremental effects of the proposed project would be minor and, therefore, not considered to be 

cumulatively considerable. Also, in the case of air quality impacts, the net effect of 

implementing the proposed project with other proposed rules and regulations, and control 

measures in the 2007 AQMP is an overall reduction in district-wide emissions contributing to the 

attainment of state and national ambient air quality standards. Therefore, the proposed project 

has no potential for generating significant adverse cumulative or cumulatively considerable 

impacts. 

XVIII.c) Based on the foregoing analyses, PR 1147 is not expected to cause adverse effects on 

human beings. Significant air quality impacts are not expected from the implementation of PR 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PR 1147 2-45 October 2008 

1147. The direct impact from the proposed project, however, is an air quality benefit with an 

overall average NOx reduction of 3.5 tons per day by 2014, increasing to 3.8 tons per day by 

2023. No significant adverse impacts to aesthetics, agriculture resources, biological resources, 

cultural resources, energy, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and 

water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, population and housing, public 

services, recreation, solid/hazardous waste and transportation and traffic are expected as a result 

of the implementation of PR 1147. 

As discussed in items I through XVIII above, the proposed project has no potential to cause 

significant adverse environmental effects. 
A P P E N D I X A 

P R O P O S E D R U L E 1 1 4 7 
(September 9, 2008) 

PROPOSED RULE 1147. NOx REDUCTIONS FROM MISCELLANEOUS 

 SOURCES 

(a)Purpose and Applicability 

The purpose of this rule is to reduce nitrogen oxide emissions from gaseous and 

liquid fuel fired combustion equipment as defined in this rule. This rule applies to 

ovens, dryers, dehydrators, heaters, kilns, calciners, furnaces, heated pots, cookers, 

roasters, fryers, closed and open heated tanks and evaporators, distillation units, 

degassing units, incinerators, soil remediation units and other combustion equipment 

with nitrogen oxide emissions that requires a District permit and is not specifically 

required to comply with a nitrogen oxide emission limit by other District Regulation 

XI rules. This rule does not apply to solid fuel fired combustion equipment, internal 

combustion engines subject to District Rule 1110.2, turbines, charbroilers, or boilers, 

water heaters, thermal fluid heaters and enclosed process heaters subject to District 

Rules 1109, 1121, 1146, 1146.1, or 1146.2 and equipment subject to District Rules 

1111, 1112, 1117, or 1135. This rule applies to manufacturers, distributors, retailers, 

refurbishers, installers, owners, operators, and maintenance and repair of units subject 

to this rule. 

(b)Definitions 

(1) ANNUAL CAPACITY FACTOR means the ratio of the ANNUAL HEAT 

INPUT of a unit in a calendar year to the amount of fuel it could have burned 

if it had operated at the rated heat input capacity for 100 percent of the time 

during the calendar year. 

(2) ANNUAL HEAT INPUT means the actual amount of heat released by fuels 

burned in a unit during a calendar year, based on the fuel's higher heating 

value. 

(3) BTU means British thermal unit or units. 

(4) COMBUSTION MODIFICATION means replacement of a burner(s) or 

combustion control system(s). 

(5) HEATER means any combustion equipment that is fired with gaseous and/or 

liquid fuels and which transfers heat from combusted fuel to materials or air 

contained in the unit or in an adjoining cabinet, container or structure. Heater 

does not include any boiler or PROCESS HEATER designed to transfer heat 
to water or process streams that is subject to any NOx emission limits of 

District Rules 1109, 1146, 1146.1 or 1146.2, and does not include any internal 

combustion engine or turbine. 

(6) HEAT INPUT means the higher heating value of the fuel to the unit measured 

as BTU per hour. 

(7) HEAT OUTPUT means the enthalpy of the working fluid output of the unit. 

(8) INDEPENDENT TESTING LABORATORY means a testing laboratory that 

meets the requirements of District Rule 304, subdivision (k) and is approved 

by the District to conduct certification testing under the PROTOCOL. 

(9) NOx EMISSIONS means the sum of nitrogen oxide and nitrogen dioxide in 

the flue gas, collectively expressed as nitrogen dioxide. 

(10) PROCESS HEATER means any equipment that is fired with gaseous and/or 

liquid fuels and which transfers heat from combusted fuel to water or process 

streams. PROCESS HEATER does not include any furnace, kiln or oven used 

for melting, heat treating, annealing, drying, curing, baking, cooking, 

calcining, or vitrifying; or any unfired waste heat recovery heater that is used 

to recover sensible heat from the exhaust of any combustion equipment. 

(11) PROTOCOL means a South Coast Air Quality Management District approved 

test protocol for determining compliance with emission limits for applicable 

equipment. 

(12) RATED HEAT INPUT CAPACITY means the gross HEAT INPUT of the 

combustion UNIT, which shall be specified on a permanent rating plate 

attached by the manufacturer to the device and supported by required 

documentation. If the UNIT has been altered or modified such that its gross 

HEAT INPUT is higher or lower than the rated HEAT INPUT capacity 

specified on the original manufacturer’s permanent rating plate, the new gross 

HEAT INPUT shall be considered as the rated HEAT INPUT capacity and 

shall be specified on a permanent supplemental rating plate attached to the 

device. 

(13) RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL means: 

(A) For a corporation: a president or vice-president of the corporation in 

charge of a principal business function or a duly authorized person 

who performs similar policy-making functions for the corporation; or 
(B) For a partnership or sole proprietorship: general partner or proprietor, 

respectively. 

(14) THERM means 100,000 BTU. 

(15) UNIT means any oven, dryer, dehydrator, heater, kiln, calciner, furnace, 

heated pot, cooker, roaster, fryer, heated tank and evaporator, distillation unit, 

degassing unit, incinerator, soil remediation units and other combustion 

equipment with nitrogen oxide emissions requiring a District permit and not 

specifically required to comply with a NOx emission limit by other District 

Regulation XI rules. UNIT does not mean any solid fuel fired combustion 

equipment, internal combustion engine subject to District Rule 1110.2, 

turbine, charbroiler, or boiler, water heater, thermal fluid heaters or enclosed 

process heater subject to District Rules 1109, 1121, 1146, 1146.1, or 1146.2 or 

equipment subject to District Rules 1111, 1112, 1117, or 1135. 

(c)Requirements 

(1) On or after (date of adoption) any person owning or operating a unit subject to 

this rule shall not operate the unit in a manner that exceeds the applicable 

nitrogen oxide emission limit specified in Table 1 at the time a District permit 

is required for operation of a new, relocated or modified unit or, for in-use 

units, in accordance with the compliance schedule in Table 2, or at the time of 

a combustion modification. 

Table 1 – NOx Emission Limit 

Equipment Category(ies) Gaseous Fuel Limit 

(ppm @ 3% O2, dry) or 

(lb/mmBtu heat input) 

Asphalt Operations 40 ppm 

Degassing, Incinerator, or Soil Remediation > 1200° F 1

Fryer 

Heated Open Tank or Evaporator 

Metal Heat Treating 

Metal Melting Furnace 

Metal or Tar Pot 

Other - Process Temperature > 1200° F 

60 ppm or 0.073 lb/mmBtu 

Oven, Dehydrator, Dryer, Heater, Kiln, Calciner, 

Cooker, Roaster or Furnace with Process Temperature 

≤ 800° F 

20 ppm or 0.024 lb/mmBtu 
Table 1 – NOx Emission Limit (continued) 

Equipment Category(ies) Gaseous Fuel Limit 

(ppm @ 3% O2, dry) or 

(lb/mmBtu heat input) 

Degassing, Incinerator, or Soil Remediation ≤ 1200° F 1

Make-Up Air Heater 

Oven, Dehydrator, Dryer, Heater, Kiln, Calciner, 

Cooker, Roaster or Furnace with Process Temperature 

> 800 ° F and ≤ 1200° F 

Tenter Frame or Carpet Dryer 

Other Air Heater located outside of building with 

temperature controlled zone inside building 

Other with Process Temperature ≤ 1200° F 

30 ppm or 0.036 lb/mmBtu 

Equipment Category(ies) Liquid Fuel Limit 

(ppm @ 3% O2, dry) or 

(lb/mmBtu heat input) 

Units with Process Temperature > 1200° F 60 ppm or 0.080 lb/mmBtu 

Units with Process Temperature ≤ 1200° F 40 ppm or 0.053 lb/mmBtu 

1 Emission limit applies when burning 100% natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, 

 propane or butane. 

Table 2 – Compliance Schedule for In-Use Units 

Equipment Category (ies) Compliance Date 

Combustion modification or change of 

location for Soil Remediation UNIT January 1, 2011 

Degassing, Evaporator, Incinerator, 

Tank, or Spray Booth Make-Up Air 

Heater manufactured prior to 1998 

July 1, 2013 

Other UNIT manufactured prior to 1986 July 1, 2010 

Other UNIT manufactured prior to 1992 July 1, 2011 

Other UNIT manufactured prior to 1998 July 1, 2012 

Any UNIT manufactured after 1997 

excluding Soil Remediation UNIT July 1 of the year the unit is 15 years old 

(2) Unit age shall be based on the original date of manufacture and determined 

by: 

(A) Original manufacturer's identification or rating plate permanently fixed 

to the equipment. If not available, then; 
(B) Invoice from manufacturer for purchase of equipment. If not 

available, then; 

(C) Information submitted to AQMD with prior permit applications for the 

specific unit. If not available, then; 

(D) Unit is deemed by AQMD to be 20 years old. 

(3) Owners or operators of units operating with flue gas oxygen concentrations 

greater than 19% shall use a District approved test protocol to determine 

compliance with the emission limit specified in Table 1. The test protocol 

shall be submitted to the District at least 90 days prior to the scheduled test 

and be approved by the District Source Testing Division. 

(4) Notwithstanding the requirements of paragraph (c)(1), units with combustion 

modifications completed prior to (date of adoption) that resulted in 

replacement of more than 75% of the of the rated heat input capacity shall 

comply with the applicable emission limit specified in Table 1 of paragraph 

(c)(1) ten years from the date the modification was performed. 

(5) The date a combustion modification, as specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and 

(c)(4), is performed; shall be determined according to subparagraph (c)(2)(B), 

if not available, then subparagraph (c)(2)(C). 

(6) Notwithstanding the requirements of paragraph (c)(1), a unit with a District 

permit to construct or permit to operate, and with a permit emission limit of 

one pound per day or less of nitrogen oxides on (date of adoption), shall 

comply with the applicable emission limit specified in Table 1 of paragraph 

(c)(1) five years later than the applicable compliance date in Table 2 of (c)(1). 

(7) On or after January 1, 2010, any person owning or operating a unit subject to 

this rule shall perform combustion system maintenance in accordance with the 

manufacturer's schedule and specifications as identified in a manual and other 

written materials supplied by the manufacturer or distributor. The owner or 

operator shall maintain on site at the facility where the unit is being operated a 

copy of the manufacturer’s and/or distributor's written instructions and retain 

a record of the maintenance activity for a period of not less than three years. 

The owner or operator shall maintain on site at the facility where the unit is 

being operated, for as long as the unit is retained, a copy of the most recent 

District certification or District approved source test reports, conducted by an 

independent third party, demonstrating the specific unit complies with the 
emission limit. The source test report(s) must identify that the source test was 

conducted pursuant to a District approved protocol. The model and serial 

numbers of the specified unit shall clearly be indicated on the source test 

report(s). The maintenance instructions, maintenance records and the source 

test report(s) or District certification shall be made available to the Executive 

Officer upon request. 

(8) On or after January 1, 2010, any person owning or operating a unit subject to 

this rule shall install and maintain in service non-resettable, totalizing, fuel 

and time meters for each unit’s fuel(s). Owners or operators of a unit with a 

combustion system that operates at only one firing rate shall install a nonresettable, totalizing, time or fuel meter for each fuel. 

(9) Meters specified in paragraph (c)(8) that require electric power to operate 

shall be provided a permanent supply of electric power that cannot be 

unplugged, switched off, or reset except by the main power supply circuit for 

the building and associated equipment. Any person operating a unit subject to 

this rule shall not shut off electric power to a unit meter unless the unit is not 

operating and is shut down for maintenance or safety. 

(10) A unit may be demonstrated to meet the applicable emission limit in Table 1 

pursuant to the provisions of subdivisions (d) or (e). A unit shall demonstrate 

compliance with the emission limit in Table 1 every five years. 

(11) Compliance by Certification 

 For units that do not allow adjustment of the fuel and combustion air for the 

combustion system by the owner or operator, and upon approval by the 

Executive Officer, an owner or operator may demonstrate compliance with the 

emission limit and demonstration requirement of this subdivision by 

certification granted to the manufacturer for any model of equipment sold for 

use in the District. Any unit certified pursuant to subdivision (e) shall be 

deemed in compliance with the emission limit in Table 1 and demonstration 

requirement of this subdivision for a period of five years from the date the unit 

is installed. 
(12) Identification of Units 

(A) New Manufactured Units 

The manufacturer shall display the model number and the rated heat 

input capacity of the unit complying with subdivision (c) on the 

shipping container and permanent rating plate. The manufacturer shall 

also display the District certification status on the shipping container 

and on the unit when applicable. 

(B) Modified Units 

A unit with a modified combustion system (new or modified burners) 

shall display the new rated heat input capacity on a new permanent 

supplemental rating plate. The gross heat input shall be based on the 

maximum fuel input corrected for fuel heat content, temperature and 

pressure. Gross heat input shall be demonstrated by a calculation 

based on fuel consumption recorded by an in-line fuel meter. 

(13) The owner or operator shall maintain on site a copy of all documents 

identifying the unit’s rated heat input capacity for as long as the unit is 

retained. The rated heat input capacity shall be identified by a manufacturer’s 

or distributor’s manual or invoice and a permanent rating plate attached to the 

unit. If a unit is modified, the rated heat input capacity shall be calculated 

pursuant to subparagraph (c)(12)(B). The documentation of rated heat input 

capacity for modified units shall include the name of the company and person 

modifying the unit, a description of all modifications, the dates the unit was 

modified and calculation of rated heat input capacity. The documentation for 

modified units shall be signed by the highest ranking person modifying the 

unit. 

(d) Compliance Determination 

(1) All emission determinations shall be made using a District approved test 

protocol. 

(2) All parts per million emission limits specified in subdivision (c) are 

referenced at 3 percent volume stack gas oxygen on a dry basis averaged over 

a period of 15 consecutive minutes or more. 
(3) Compliance with the NOx emission limits of subdivision (c) and 

determination of stack-gas oxygen and carbon dioxide concentrations for this 

rule shall be determined according to the following procedures: 

(A) District Source Test Method 100.1 – Instrumental Analyzer 

Procedures for Continuous Gaseous Emission Sampling (March 1989); 

or 

(B) District Source Test Method 7.1 – Determination of Nitrogen Oxide 

Emissions from Stationary Sources (March 1989); or 

(C) ASTM Method D6522-00 – Standard Test Method for Determination 

of Nitrogen Oxides, Carbon Monoxide, and Oxygen Concentrations in 

Emissions from Natural Gas-Fired Reciprocating Engines, 

Combustion Turbines, Boilers, and Process Heaters Using Portable 

Analyzers; or 

(D) United States Environmental Protection Agency Conditional Test 

Method CTM-030 – Determination of Nitrogen Oxides, Carbon 

Monoxide, and Oxygen Emissions from Natural Gas-Fired Engines, 

Boilers and Process Heaters Using Portable Analyzers; and 

(E) District Source Test Method 10.1 – Carbon Monoxide and Carbon 

Dioxide by Gas Chromatograph/Non-Dispersive Infrared Detector 

(GC/NDIR) – Oxygen by Gas Chromatograph-Thermal Conductivity 

(GC/TCD) (March 1989); or 

(F) Any alternative test method determined approved before the test in 

writing by the Executive Officers of the District, the California Air 

Resources Board and the United States Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

(4) Records of source tests shall be maintained for as long as the unit is retained 

and made available to District personnel upon request. Emissions determined 

to exceed any limits established by this rule through the use of any of the test 

methods specified in subparagraphs (d)(3)(A) through (d)(3)(F) shall 

constitute a violation of this rule. 

(5) For any operator who chooses the pound per million Btu of heat input 

compliance option of subdivision (c), NOx emissions in pounds per million 

Btu of heat input shall be calculated using procedures in 40 CFR Part 60, 

Appendix A, Method 19, Sections 2 and 3. 
(e)Certification 

(1) Unit Certification 

For units that do not allow adjustment of the fuel and combustion air for the 

combustion system by the owner or operator, any manufacturer that 

distributes for sale or sells units or burner systems for use in the District may 

elect to apply to the Executive Officer to certify such units or burner systems 

as compliant with subdivision (c). 

(2) Manufacturer Confirmation of Emissions 

Any manufacturer’s application to the Executive Officer to certify a model of 

equipment as compliant with the emission limit and demonstration 

requirement of subdivision (c) shall obtain confirmation from an independent 

testing laboratory prior to applying for certification that each unit model 

complies with the applicable requirements of subdivision (c). This 

confirmation shall be based upon District approved emission tests of standard 

model units and a District approved protocol shall be adhered to during the 

confirmation testing of all units subject to this rule. Emission testing shall 

comply with the requirements of paragraphs (d)(1) through (d)(5). 

(3) When applying for unit(s) certification, the manufacturer shall submit to the 

Executive Officer the following: 

(A) A statement that the model is in compliance with subdivision (c). The 

statement shall be signed and dated by the manufacturer’s responsible 

official and shall attest to the accuracy of all statements; 

(B) General Information 

(i) Name and address of manufacturer, 

(ii) Brand name, if applicable, 

(iii) Model number, as it appears on the unit rating plate; and 

(iv) Rated Heat Input Capacity, gross output of burner(s) and 

number of burners; 

(C) A description of each model being certified; and 

(D) A source test report verifying compliance with the applicable emission 

limit in subdivision (c) for each model to be certified. The source test 

report shall be prepared by the confirming independent testing 

laboratory and shall contain all of the elements identified in the 

District approved Protocol for each unit tested. The source test shall 
have been conducted no more than ninety (90) days prior to the date of 

submittal to the Executive Officer. 

(4) When applying for unit certification, the manufacturer shall submit the 

information identified in paragraph (e)(3) no more than ninety (90) days after 

the date of the source test identified in subparagraph (e)(3)(D) and at least 120 

days prior to the date of the proposed sale and installation of any District 

certified unit. 

(5) The Executive Officer shall certify a unit model which complies with the 

provisions of subdivision (c) and of paragraphs (e)(2), (e)(3), and (e)(4). 

(6) Certification status shall be valid for four years from the date of approval by 

the Executive Officer. After the fourth year, recertification shall be required 

by the Executive Officer according to the requirements of paragraphs (e)(2), 

(e)(3), and (e)(4). 

(f) Enforcement 

The Executive Officer may inspect distributors, retailers, and installers of units 

located in the District, and conduct such tests as are deemed necessary to ensure 

compliance with subdivisions (c) and (e). 

(g)Exemptions 

(1) The provisions of this rule shall not apply to units: 

(A) subject to the nitrogen oxide limits of District Rules 1109, 1110.2, 

1111, 1112, 1117, 1121, 1134, 1135, 1146, 1146.1, or 1146.2; or 

(B) located at RECLAIM facilities. 

(2) The provisions of this rule shall not apply to charbroilers. 

(3) New degassing units, evaporators, incinerators, tanks, and spray booth makeup air heaters installed after (date of adoption) and before January 1, 2011 are 

exempt from the emission limit in Table 1 until July 1 of the year the unit is 

15 years old. 

(4) New or relocated remediation units installed after (date of adoption) and 

before January 1, 2011 are exempt from the emission limit in Table 1 until a 

combustion modification or change of location on or after January 1, 2011. 
A P P E N D I X B 

C O N S T R U C T I O N A N D O P E R A T I O N S C A L C U L A T I O N S 
PR 1147 B-2 LIST OF WORKSHEETS Worksheet B-1: Retrofit with Ultra-Low NOx Burners between 2010-2014........................... B-3 Worksheet B-2: Retrofit with Ultra-Low NOx Burners between 2015-2023........................... B-6 Worksheet B-3: Emissions Summary Due to Retrofits of Ultra-Low NOx ............................. 

 Burners between 2010-2014 and 2015-2023 ......................... B-9 
PR 1147 B-3 Worksheet B-1: Retrofit with Ultra-Low NOx Burners between 2010-2014 

PAR 1147 Affected Equipment No. of Units Construction Activity  1 Install Ultra-Low NOx burners on 2,462 gaseous units between 2010-2014 Construction Schedule - 1 day per unit Activity Equipment Type 

No. of 

Equipment Hrs/day Crew Size 

Off-Road Mobile Source Operations Welding Machine 1 2 1 Off-Road Mobile Source Operations Pick-up Truck 1 - 1 

Construction Equipment Emission 

Factors VOC CO NOx Sox PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 

Equipment Type* lb/hr lb/hr lb/hr lb/hr lb/hr lb/hr lb/hr lb/hr Welding Machine (composite) 0.0805 0.2246 0.2920 0.0003 0.0270 0.0259 25.6000 0.0073 *Equipment is assumed to be diesel fueled. Source: CARB’s Off-Road Mobile Source Emission Factors for Scenario Year 2010 http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/offroad/offroadEF07_25.xls

Construction Vehicle (Mobile Source) Emission Factors for Years 2010-2014

 VOC CO NOx Sox PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 

Construction Related Activity lb/mile lb/mile lb/mile lb/mile lb/mile lb/mile lb/mile lb/mile Offsite (Construction Worker Vehicle) 0.00091 0.00826 0.00092 0.00001 0.00009 0.00005 1.09568 0.00008146 Offsite (Pickup truck deliveries) 0.00258 0.01840 0.02060 0.00003 0.00075 0.00064 2.73220 0.00012576 Passenger Vehicles/Delivery Trucks for Scenario Year 2010 http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/onroad/onroadEF07_26.xls
PR 1147 B-4 

Construction Worker Number of Trips and Trip Length Vehicle 

No. of One-Way 

Trips/Day 

Trip Length 

(miles) 

Offsite (Construction Worker) 2 25 Offsite (Delivery Truck – Medium Duty) 2 50 Incremental Increase in Onsite Combustion Emissions from Construction Equipment Equation: Emission Factor (lb/hr) x No. of Equipment x Work Day (hr/day) = Onsite Construction Emissions (lbs/day) 

 VOC CO NOx Sox PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 

Equipment Type lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day Welding Machine 0.16 0.45 0.58 0.00 0.05 0.048 51.20 0.0146 TOTAL 0.16 0.45 0.58 0.00 0.05 0.048 51.20 0.0146 Incremental Increase in Offsite Combustion Emissions from Construction Vehicles Equation: Emission Factor (lb/mile) x No. of One-Way Trips/Day x Number of workers x Trip length (mile) = Offsite Construction Emissions (lbs/day

 VOC CO NOx Sox PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 

Vehicle lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day Offsite (Construction Worker Vehicle) 0.05 0.41 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 54.78 0.004073 Offsite (Pickup truck deliveries) 0.26 1.84 2.06 0.00 0.08 0.06 273.22 0.012576 TOTAL 0.30 2.25 2.11 0.00 0.08 0.07 328.00 0.016649 Source: EMFAC 2007 (v2.3) Emission Factors (On-Road Vehicles, Scenario Year 2010) http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/onroad/onroadEF07_26.xlsTotal Incremental Combustion Emissions from Construction Activities 

 VOC CO NOx Sox PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 

 lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day Group I: Equipment & Workers’ Vehicles (1 unit) 0.46 2.70 2.69 0.00 0.13 0.11 379.20 0.031249 Significant Threshold 75 550 100 150 150 55 n/a n/a Exceed Significance? NO NO NO NO NO NO n/a n/a 
PR 1147 B-5 

Incremental Increase in Fuel Usage From Construction Equipment and Workers’ Vehicles Construction Activity 

Total Project 

Hours of 

Operation* 

Equipment 

Type 

Diesel 

Fuel 

Usage 

(gal/hr)** 

Diesel Fuel 

Usage 

(gal/project)** 

Gasoline 

Fuel 

Usage 

(gal/yr)*** 

Operation of Portable Equipment 2 

Welding Machines 1.182 2.36 N/A 

Workers’ Vehicles – Commuting N/A 

Light-Duty Trucks N/A N/A 2.50 

Workers’ Vehicles – Offsite Delivery/Haul N/A 

Pickup truck for deliveries**** N/A N/A 5.00 

TOTAL 2.36 7.50 

*Assume construction will take approximately 1 day (8 hrs/day max), but welder will only be needed for ~2 hours per day. **Based on CARB’s Off-Road Model (Version 2.0) for Equipment Year 2010. ***Assume that construction workers’ commute vehicle and pick-up truck use gasoline and get 20 mi/gal and round trip length is 50 miles. 
PR 1147 B-6 Worksheet B-2: Retrofit with Ultra-Low NOx Burners between 2015-2023 

PAR 1147 Affected Equipment No. of Units Construction Activity  1 Install Ultra-Low NOx burners on 2,462 gaseous units between 2015-2023 Construction Schedule - 1 day per unit Activity Equipment Type 

No. of 

Equipment Hrs/day Crew Size 

Off-Road Mobile Source Operations Welding Machine 1 2 1 On-Road Mobile Source Operations Pick-up Truck 1 - 1 

Construction Equipment Emission 

Factors VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 

Equipment Type* lb/hr lb/hr lb/hr lb/hr lb/hr lb/hr lb/hr lb/hr Welding Machine (composite) 0.0534 0.1994 0.2301 0.0003 0.0187 0.0179 25.6 0.0048 *Equipment is assumed to be diesel fueled. Source: CARB's Off-Road Mobile Source Emission Factors for Scenario Year 2015 http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/offroad/offroadEF07_25.xls

Construction Vehicle (Mobile 

Source) Emission Factors for Year 

2015-2023 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 

Construction Related Activity lb/mile lb/mile lb/mile lb/mile lb/mile lb/mile lb/mile lb/mile Offsite (Construction Worker Vehicle) 0.00066 0.00614 0.00060 0.00001 0.00009 0.00006 1.10920 0.00005923 Offsite (Pickup truck deliveries) 0.00173 0.01169 0.01285 0.00003 0.00050 0.00041 2.81240 0.00008076 Source: Passenger Vehicles/Delivery Trucks for Scenario Year 2015 http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/onroad/onroadEF07_26.xlsConstruction Worker Number of Trips and Trip Length Vehicle 

No. of One-Way 

Trips/Day 

Trip Length 

(miles) 

Offsite (Construction Worker) 2 25 Offsite (Pickup truck deliveries) 2 50 
PR 1147 B-7 

Incremental Increase in Onsite Combustion Emissions from Construction Equipment Equation: Emission Factor (lb/hr) x No. of Equipment x Work Day (hr/day) = Onsite Construction Emissions (lbs/day) 

 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 

Equipment Type lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day Welding Machine 0.11 0.40 0.46 0.00 0.04 0.038 51.20 0.0096 TOTAL 0.11 0.40 0.46 0.00 0.04 0.038 51.20 0.0096 Incremental Increase in Offsite Combustion Emissions from Construction Vehicles Equation: Emission Factor (lb/mile) x No. of One-Way Trips/Day x Number of workers x Trip length (mile) = Offsite Construction Emissions (lbs/day

 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 

Vehicle lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day Offsite (Construction Worker Vehicle) 0.03 0.31 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 55.46 0.0029615 Offsite (Delivery Truck - pickup truck) 0.17 1.17 1.29 0.00 0.05 0.04 281.24 0.008076 TOTAL 0.21 1.48 1.32 0.00 0.05 0.04 336.70 0.0110375 Source: EMFAC 2007 (v2.3) Emission Factors (On-Road Vehicles, Scenario Year 2015) http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/onroad/onroadEF07_26.xlsTotal Combustion Emissions from Construction Activities 

 VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 

 lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day Group I: Equipment & Workers' Vehicles (1 unit) 0.32 1.88 1.78 0.00 0.09 0.078 387.90 0.0206375 Significant Threshold 75 550 100 150 150 55 n/a n/a Exceed Significance? NO NO NO NO NO NO n/a n/a Incremental Increase in Fuel Usage From Construction Equipment and Workers' Vehicles Construction Activity 

Total Project 

Hours of 

Operation* 

Equipment 

Type 

Diesel 

Fuel 

Usage 

(gal/hr)** 

Diesel Fuel 

Usage 

(gal/project)** 

Gasoline 

Fuel 

Usage 

(gal/yr)*** 

Operation of Portable Equipment 2 

Welding Machines 1.179 2.36 N/A 

Workers' Vehicles - Commuting N/A 

Light-Duty Trucks N/A N/A 2.50 

Workers' Vehicles - Offsite Delivery/Haul N/A 

Pickup truck for deliveries**** N/A N/A 5.00 

TOTAL 2.36 7.50 
PR 1147 B-8 

*Assume construction will take approximately 1 day (8 hrs/day max), but welder will only be needed for ~2 hours per day. **Based on CARB's Off-Road Model (Version 2.0) for Equipment Year 2015. ***Assume that construction workers' commute vehicle and pick-up truck use gasoline and get 20 mi/gal and round trip length is 50 miles. 
PR 1147 B-9 Worksheet B-3: Emissions Summary Due to Retrofits of Ultra-Low NOx Burners between 2010-2014 and 2015-2

Emissions Summary Due to Retrofits of Ultra-Low NOx Burners between 2010-2014 and 2015-2023 Peak Construction VOC CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 CO2 CH4 CO2 C lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day lbs/day lbs/year lbs2010-2014 TOTAL for 1 unit in one day 0.46 2.70 2.69 0.00 0.13 0.07 379.20 0.031249 n/a Peak Daily TOTAL for 10 units installed in one day 4.65 27.02 26.90 0.04 1.33 0.67 3792.04 0.31249 n/a Peak TOTAL for 2,462 units installed in one year n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 933600.25 7SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD 75 550 100 150 150 55 n/a n/a n/a SIGNIFICANT? NO NO NO NO NO NO n/a n/a n/a 2015-2023 TOTAL for 1 unit in one day 0.32 1.88 1.78 0.00 0.09 0.78 387.90 0.0206375 n/a Peak Daily TOTAL for 10 units installed in one day 3.20 18.80 17.80 0.04 0.90 7.80 3879.00 0.206375 n/a Peak TOTAL for 2,462 units installed in one year n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 955009.80 5SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD 75 550 100 150 150 55 n/a n/a n/a SIGNIFICANT? NO NO NO NO NO NO n/a n/a n/a 
SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 

Final Socioeconomic Report For 

Proposed Rule 1147─NOx Reduction from Miscellaneous Sources

November 2008 

Deputy Executive Officer 

Planning, Rule Development and Area Sources 

Elaine Chang, DrPH 

Assistant Deputy Executive Officer 

Planning, Rule Development and Area Sources 

Laki T. Tisopulos, Ph.D., P.E. 

Director, Strategic Initiatives 

Planning, Rule Development and Area Sources 

Jill Whynot 

Author: Shah Dabirian, Air Quality Specialist 

Reviewed By: Sue Lieu, Program Supervisor 

 Gary Quinn, P.E, Program Supervisor 

 Linda Vogel, Senior Deputy District Counsel 
SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 

GOVERNING BOARD 

Chairman: WILLIAM A. BURKE, Ed.D. 

Speaker of the Assembly Appointee 

Vice Chairman: S. ROY WILSON, Ed.D. 

Supervisor, Fourth District 

Riverside County Representative 

MEMBERS:

MICHAEL D. ANTONOVICH 

Supervisor, Fifth District 

Los Angeles County Representative 

MICHAEL A. CACCIOTTI 

Councilmember, City of South Pasadena 

Cities of Los Angeles County, Eastern Region 

BILL CAMPBELL 

Supervisor, Third District 

Orange County Representative 

JANE W. CARNEY 

Senate Rules Committee Appointee 

RONALD O. LOVERIDGE 

Mayor, City of Riverside 

Cities Representative, Riverside County 

JOSEPH K. LYOU, Ph.D. 

Governor’s Appointee 

GARY OVITT 

Supervisor, Fourth District 

San Bernardino County Representative 

JAN PERRY 

Councilmember, Ninth District 

City of Los Angeles 

MIGUEL PULIDO 

Mayor, City of Santa Ana 

Cities Representative, Orange County 

TONIA REYES URANGA 

Councilmember, City of Long Beach 

Cities Representative, Los Angeles County, Western Region 

DENNIS YATES 

Mayor, City of Chino 

Cities of San Bernardino County Representative 

EXECUTIVE OFFICER:

BARRY R. WALLERSTEIN, D.Env. 
Proposed Rule 1147 Final Socioeconomic Report 

SCAQMD ES-1 November 2008 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Proposed Rule (PR) 1147 reduces NOx emissions from gaseous and liquid fueled 

combustion equipment including, but not limited to, ovens, dryers, dehydrators, heaters, 

kilns, calciners, furnaces, heated pots, cookers, roasters, fryers, closed and open heated 

tanks and evaporators, incinerators and distillation, degassing, and soil remediation units. 

A socioeconomic assessment was conducted for PR 1147 and a summary of the 

assessment and findings is presented below. 

Elements of the 

Proposed Rule 

PR 1147 reduces NOx emissions from gas and liquid fueled 

combustion equipment. These types of equipment are required 

to meet NOx emission limits in the range of 20 ppm to 60 ppm, 

depending upon the process and process temperature, with an 

upgrade to low-NOx burners. It is projected that 3.5 and 3.8 

tons per day of NOx emissions would be reduced, as a result, by 

2014 and 2023, respectively. 

Affected Facilities PR 1147 would affect 2,162 facilities with a total of 4,924 units 

in the district. Of these 2,162 facilities, 1,307 are located in Los 

Angeles County, 478 in Orange County, 174 in Riverside 

County, and the remaining 203 facilities are in San Bernardino 

County. Sixty percent of total affected facilities belong to the 

manufacturing sector. The second largest affected sectors, retail 

and wholesale trade make up about 14 percent of the total 

affected facilities. The repair and maintenances services sector 

makes up about seven percent of the total affected facilities. The 

remaining 19 percent of the affected facilities are spread among 

a number of sectors in the economy. 

Assumptions of 

Analysis 

It is assumed that affected facilities would use low-NOx burners 

to comply with the proposed rule. The average capital cost of 

retrofitting a boiler with a low-NOx burner is estimated at 

$16,000 for units with permitted emissions of greater than one 

pound per day and $10,000 for units permitted emissions of less 

than or equal to one pound per day. Each retrofit is assumed to 

last 10 years. The affected units are also required to install fuel 

and time meters to assure compliance with the permitted 

emission limits. The capital cost of a fuel and time meter is 

estimated at $500 and the meters are expected to last 10 years. 

Source testing is required every five years. The cost of a source 

test is $1,200 per unit. No additional operating and maintenance 

costs are assumed for these units beyond their current 

operations. A retrofit burner will also be subject to a permit 

modification fee of $3,245 if its permitted emissions are greater 

than one pound a day, and $2,052 if its permitted emissions are 

less than one pound per day, respectively. 

Compliance Costs The average annual cost of the proposed rule is estimated at 

$9.12 million between 2010 and 2025. The sectors of fabricated 
Proposed Rule 1147 Final Socioeconomic Report 

SCAQMD ES-2 November 2008 

metal, primary metal, and printing and related support activities 

are expected to incur higher shares of the total cost ($1.53, 

$0.78, and $0.7 million, respectively). 

Employment 

Impacts 

Based on the above assumptions, the compliance cost of PR 

1147, and the application of the Regional Economic Models, 

Inc. (REMI) model, it is projected that an average of 102 jobs 

could be forgone annually between 2010 and 2025. Some 

sectors would see job creation. The sectors of fabricated metal 

products and professional and technical services would create 

most of these jobs. Projected jobs forgone are spread among 

many sectors of the economy. 

Competitiveness Affected sectors would experience minor increases in the 

relative cost of production and relative delivered price with 

respect to their counterparts in the rest of the U.S. 
Proposed Rule 1147 Final Socioeconomic Report 

SCAQMD 1 November 2008 

INTRODUCTION

Proposed Rule (PR) 1147 reduces NOx emissions from gaseous and liquid fueled 

combustion equipment including, but not limited to, ovens, dryers, dehydrators, heaters, 

kilns, calciners, furnaces, heated pots, cookers, roasters, fryers, closed and open heated 

tanks and evaporators, incinerators and distillation, degassing, and soil remediation units. 

These types of equipment are required to meet NOx emission limits in the range of 20 

ppm to 60 ppm, depending upon the process and process temperature, with an upgrade to 

low-NOx burners. It is projected that 3.5 and 3.8 tons per day of NOx emissions would 

be reduced, as a result, by 2014 and 2023, respectively. 

LEGISLATIVE MANDATES 

The socioeconomic assessments at the South Coast Air Quality Management District 

(AQMD) have evolved over time to reflect the benefits and costs of regulations. The 

legal mandates directly related to the assessment of the proposed rules and amendments 

include the AQMD Governing Board resolutions and various sections of the California 

Health & Safety Code (H&SC). 

AQMD Governing Board Resolutions 

On March 17, 1989 the AQMD Governing Board adopted a resolution that calls for 

preparing an economic analysis of each proposed rule or amendment for the following 

elements: 

• Affected Industries 

• Range of Control Costs 

• Cost Effectiveness 

• Public Health Benefits 

On October 14, 1994, the Board passed a resolution which directed staff to address 

whether the proposed rules or amendments brought to the Board for adoption are in the 

order of cost effectiveness as defined in the AQMP. The intent was to bring forth those 

rules that are cost-effective first. 

Health & Safety Code Requirements 

The state legislature adopted legislation that reinforces and expands the Governing Board 

resolutions for socioeconomic assessments. H&SC Sections 40440.8(a) and (b), which 

became effective on January 1, 1991, require that a socioeconomic analysis be prepared 

for any proposed rule or rule amendment that "will significantly affect air quality or 

emissions limitations." Specifically, the scope of the analysis should include: 

• Type of Affected Industries 

• Impact on Employment and the Economy of the Basin 

• Range of Probable Costs, Including Those to Industries 

• Emission Reduction Potential 
Proposed Rule 1147 Final Socioeconomic Report 

SCAQMD 2 November 2008 

• Necessity of Adopting, Amending or Repealing the Rule in Order to Attain 

State and Federal Ambient Air Quality Standards 

• Availability and Cost Effectiveness of Alternatives to the Rule 

For the items 1, 4, 5, and 6 above, please refer to Staff Report of Proposed Rule 1147. 

Additionally, the AQMD is required to actively consider the socioeconomic impacts of 

regulations and make a good faith effort to minimize adverse socioeconomic impacts. 

H&SC Section 40728.5, which became effective on January 1, 1992, requires the AQMD 

to: 

• Examine Business and Small Business Impacts; and 

• Consider Socioeconomic Impacts in Rule Adoption 

H&SC Section 40920.6, which became effective on January 1, 1996, requires that 

incremental cost effectiveness be performed for a proposed rule or amendment relating to 

ozone, carbon monoxide (CO), oxides of sulfur (SOx), oxides of nitrogen (NOx), and their 

precursors. Incremental cost effectiveness is defined as the difference in costs divided by 

the difference in emission reductions between one level of control and the next more 

stringent control. 

AFFECTED FACILITIES 

PR 1147 would affect 2,162 facilities with a total of 4,924 units in the district. Of these 

2,162 facilities, 1,307 are located in Los Angeles County, 478 in Orange County, 174 in 

Riverside County, and the remaining 203 facilities are in San Bernardino County. Sixty 

percent of total affected facilities belong to the manufacturing sector. The second largest 

affected sectors, retail and wholesale trade make up about 14 percent of the total affected 

facilities. The repair and maintenances services sector makes up about seven percent of 

the total affected facilities. The remaining 19 percent of the affected facilities are spread 

among a number of sectors in the economy. 

 Small Businesses 

The AQMD defines a "small business" in Rule 102 as one which employs 10 or fewer 

persons and which earns less than $500,000 in gross annual receipts. In addition to the 

AQMD's definition of a small business, the federal Small Business Administration 

(SBA), the federal Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990, and the California 

Department of Health Services (DHS) also provide their own definitions of a small 

business. 

The SBA's definition of a small business uses the criterion of either gross annual receipts 

(ranging from $0.75 million to $35.5 million), number of employees (ranging from 50 to 

1,500), megawatt hours generated (4 million), or assets ($175 million), depending on the 

industry type (US SBA, 2008). The SBA definitions of small businesses vary by 6-digit 

North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code. For instance, the sector 

of commercial screen printing (NAICS 323113) has 500 employees as the threshold 

below which a business is considered small. For the sector of plastic materials and basic 
Proposed Rule 1147 Final Socioeconomic Report 

SCAQMD 3 November 2008 

forms and shapes merchant wholesalers (NAICS 424610), fewer than 100 employees is 

the criterion below which a business is considered small. 

The CAAA classifies a facility as a "small business stationary source" if it: (1) employs 

100 or fewer employees, (2) does not emit more than 10 tons per year of either VOC or 

NOx, and (3) is a small business as defined by SBA. 

Based on the 2008 Dun and Bradstreet financial information on individual facilities, 

revenue and employees data were available for 1,337 out of 2,162 facilities. Under the 

AQMD definition of a small business, there are 194 small businesses. Using the SBA 

definition of a small business, there are 1,225 small businesses. Under the CAAA 

definition of a small business, 978 are small businesses. 

COMPLIANCE COST 

The average annual cost of the proposed rule is estimated to be $9.12 million between 

2010 and 2025, as shown in Table 1. The sectors of fabricated metal, primary metal, and 

printing and related support activities are expected to incur higher share of the total cost 

($1.53 and $0.78, and $0.7 million, respectively). 

The overall cost-effectiveness of PR 1147 is estimated between at $5,000 and $8,000 per 

ton of NOx reduced based on burner size and annual capacity factor of 20 percent.1

 

 

1

Based on the input from manufacturers of equipment affected by PAR 1147, staff has estimated a capacity 

factor range of 20 percent. The capacity factor is used to represent the annual heat output and emissions of 

a burner relative to the theoretical annual maximum. A 20 percent capacity is conservative and most pieces 

of equipment subject to PR 1147 are expected to have significantly higher usage. 
Proposed Rule 1147 Final Socioeconomic Report 

SCAQMD 4 November 2008 

Table 3

Average Annual Compliance Costs by Industry (in million of dollars)

Industry Title NAICS Code 2010 2015 2025 

 Average 

Annual 

(2010-2025) 

Oil and gas extraction and Mining 211-212 0.005 0.002 0.002 0.002 

Utilities 22 0.181 0.101 0.087 0.091 

Construction 23 0.691 0.781 0.502 0.478 

Wood Product manufacturing. 321 0.088 0.102 0.065 0.062 

Nonmetallic Mineral Product manufacturing 327 0.296 0.240 0.174 0.173 

Primary Metal manufacturing. 331 1.431 0.976 0.763 0.777 

Fabricated Metal Product manufacturing 332 2.500 2.209 1.550 1.525 

Machinery manufacturing 333 0.208 0.149 0.114 0.115 

Computer and electronic product manufacturing 334 0.461 0.562 0.353 0.333 

Electrical equipment, appliance manufacturing 335 0.779 0.457 0.383 0.398 

Motor vehicle manufacturing 3361-3363 0.258 0.170 0.135 0.138 

Transportation equip. excl. motor vehicles 3364-3369 0.236 0.348 0.207 0.190 

Furniture and related product manufacturing 337 0.510 0.778 0.458 0.420 

Miscellaneous manufacturing 339 0.225 0.156 0.121 0.123 

Food manufacturing 311 0.866 0.851 0.574 0.557 

Beverage and tobacco product manufacturing 312 0.005 0.010 0.005 0.005 

Textile mills 313-314 0.132 0.236 0.133 0.120 

Apparel manufacturing 315 0.000 0.065 0.028 0.022 

Leather and allied product manufacturing 316 0.005 0.028 0.013 0.011 

Paper manufacturing 322 0.115 0.088 0.065 0.066 

Printing and related support activities 323 1.058 1.102 0.728 0.701 

Petroleum and coal products manufacturing 324 0.439 0.480 0.312 0.298 

Chemical manufacturing 325 0.466 0.550 0.349 0.330 

Plastics and rubber products manufacturing 326 0.356 0.283 0.207 0.207 

Wholesale trade 42 0.208 0.655 0.333 0.284 

Retail trade 44-45 0.203 0.797 0.393 0.329 

Transportation and Warehousing 482,484-486,488,493 0.170 0.129 0.096 0.097 

Information 511-512,516,518,519 0.060 0.069 0.044 0.042 

Monetary Authorities 521,522,525 0.005 0.002 0.002 0.002 

Real estate 531 0.022 0.013 0.011 0.011 

Rental and leasing services 532-533 0.038 0.016 0.016 0.017 

Professional and technical services 54 0.230 0.657 0.339 0.291 

Management of companies and enterprises 55 0.000 0.004 0.002 0.001 

Administrative and support services 561 0.005 0.067 0.030 0.024 

Waste management and remediation services 562 0.000 0.018 0.008 0.006 

Educational services 61 0.027 0.022 0.016 0.016 

Ambulatory health care services 621 0.016 0.029 0.016 0.015 

Museums, historical sites, zoos, and parks 712 0.011 0.005 0.005 0.005 

Amusement, gambling, and recreation 713 0.011 0.008 0.006 0.006 

Accommodation and food services 721-722 0.022 0.107 0.051 0.042 

Other Services 811-813 1.047 0.967 0.667 0.653 

Government 92 0.115 0.280 0.148 0.129 

 

TOTAL $13.505 $14.566 $9.512 $9.116 

The affected facilities were divided by equipment category and by county. Based on the 

AQMD permit database, it was assumed that 50 percent of units in each equipment 

category and in each county have permitted emissions of more than one pound per day 

and would comply with the proposed rule in 2010. The remaining 50 percent were 

assumed to have permitted emissions of less than or equal to one pound per day and 

would comply with the proposed rule in 2015. The total annual costs of PR 1147 are 

higher in 2010 and 2015 than the rest of years from 2010 to 2025 due to the one-time 
Proposed Rule 1147 Final Socioeconomic Report 

SCAQMD 5 November 2008 

permit modification fee on equipment. Other costs included are the capital cost of lowNOx burner and the fue1 and time meter, and the cost of source tests required every five 

years. 

Units with Permitted Emissions Greater than One Pound per Day 

It was assumed that the affected units in this category have, on average, a rated heat input 

capacity of five million Btu/hr. According to the vendors’ cost data, the average capital 

cost of retrofitting a unit with a low-NOx is estimated at $16,000 per unit. Each retrofit 

is assumed to last 10 years. These units are also required to install a fuel and time meter 

to assure compliance with the permitted emission limits. The capital cost of a fuel and 

time meter is estimated at $500 and the meter is expected to last 10 years. Source testing 

is required every five years. The cost of a source test is $1,200 per unit. No additional 

operating and maintenance costs are assumed for these retrofit boilers beyond their 

current operations. 

Owners of the affected units would be required to apply for permit modifications and pay 

a one-time permit application fee of $3,245 for each unit. The total one-time cost of this 

requirement is estimated at $8 million. The average annual equipment cost (including 

fuel and time meters) to retrofit 2,462 units is estimated at $5 million. 

Units with Permitted Emissions Less than or Equal to One Pound per Day 

It was assumed that the affected units in this category to have, on average, a rated heat 

input capacity of two million Btu/hr. According to the vendors’ cost data, the average 

capital cost of retrofitting a unit with a low-NOx or is estimated at $10,000 per unit. 

Each retrofit is assumed to last 10 years. These units are also required to install a fuel 

and time meter to assure compliance with the permitted emission limits. The capital cost 

of a fuel and time meter is estimated at $500 and the meter is expected to last 10 years. 

Source testing is required every five years. The cost of a source test is $1,200 per unit. 

No additional operating and maintenance costs are assumed for these retrofit boilers 

beyond their current operations. 

Owners of the affected units would be required to apply for permit modifications and pay 

a one-time permit application fee of $2,052 for each unit. The total one-time cost of this 

requirement is estimated at $5.05 million. The average annual equipment cost (including 

fuel and time meters) to retrofit 2,462 units is estimated at $3.18 million. 

JOBS AND OTHER SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS 

The REMI model (version 9.5.26) is used to assess the total socioeconomic impacts of a 

policy change. The model links the economic activities in the counties of Los Angeles, 

Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino. The REMI model for each county is comprised 

of a five block structure that includes (1) output and demand, (2) labor and capital, (3) 

population and labor force, (4) wages, prices and costs, and (5) market shares. These five 

blocks are interrelated. Within each county, producers are made up of 165 private nonfarm industries, three government sectors, and a farm sector. Trade flows are captured 

between sectors and borders as well as across counties and the rest of U.S. Market shares 

of industries are dependent upon their product prices, access to production inputs, and 
Proposed Rule 1147 Final Socioeconomic Report 

SCAQMD 6 November 2008 

local infrastructure. The demographic/migration component has 160 

ages/gender/race/ethnicity cohorts and captures population changes in births, deaths, and 

migration. 

The assessment herein is performed relative to a baseline without PR 1147. Direct 

effects of the policy change (Proposed Rule) have to be estimated and used as inputs to 

the REMI model in order for the model to assess secondary and induced impacts for all 

the actors in the four-county economy on an annual basis and across a user-defined 

horizon (2010-2025). Direct effects of the proposed rule include additional costs of 

proposed requirements to affected industries and additional goods and services provided 

by local vendors at the county (or finer) level and by industry. 

The proposed rule would create an additional demand for low-NOx burners in the 

fabricated metal products (NAICS 332) industry, for time and fuel meters in the computer 

and electronic product sector (NAICS 334), for installation of these meters by local 

contractors in the construction sector (NAICS 23), and for services rendered by the sector 

of miscellaneous professional services (NAICS 54) for source testing services. 

Additional revenue from permit fees on burners would help finance the AQMD 

expenditure. 

Additional costs of doing business to the affected facilities include the annualized cost of 

low NOx burners and time and fuel meters, annual cost of source testing, and one-time 

permit modification fees. Affected government agencies would reduce expenditures 

elsewhere in order to compensate for the compliance cost due to the proposed rule. 

Employment 

The total employment impact of the proposed rule across industries in key years is shown 

in Table 2. It is projected that an average of 102 jobs could be forgone annually from 

2010 to 2025 in the local economy. This represents about 0.0009 percent of the average 

annual jobs forecasted in the four-county area from 2010 to 2025. 

In 2010, 311 additional jobs could be created in the overall economy. This is mainly due 

to additional spending on goods and services provided by the industries of fabricated 

metal products, and professional and technical services, computer and electronic product 

sector, construction, and local government. Despite having a large share of the total 

compliance cost, the fabricated metal products sector is projected to create jobs in some 

years due to the fact that this sector is expected to provide the low-NOx burners required 

by PR 1147. As the cost of doing business kicks in and is maintained, and the positive 

impact of spending gradually subsides, jobs forgone are expected to begin. The reduction 

in disposable income from the overall jobs forgone dampens the demand for goods and 

services in the local economy, thus resulting in a small number of overall jobs forgone 

projected in sectors such as rest of manufacturing, retail trade, wholesale, and 

accommodation and food services. Jobs forgone in 2025 are fewer due to expenditure on 

replacing control equipment as their end of life approaches. 
Proposed Rule 1147 Final Socioeconomic Report 

SCAQMD 7 November 2008 

Table 2 

Job Impacts by Industry by Year 

 Year Average Annual 

Industry (NAICS) 2010 2015 2018 2025 (2010-2025) 

Construction (23) 16 1 -16 -3 -8

Primary metal manufacturing (331) 2 -1 -3 -2 -2

Fabricated Metal Products (332) 123 63 -8 48 15

Computer and electronic product Mfg. (334) 0 -1 -2 -1 -1

Electrical equip, appliance Manufacturing (335) -1 -2 -2 -2 -2

Furniture, related product Manufacturing (337) -1 -3 -4 -4 -3

Rest of Manufacturing -2 -13 -18 -16 -15

Wholesale Trade (42) 6 -1 -8 -3 -5

Retail Trade (44-45) 6 -8 -21 -9 -15

Real Estate and Rental and Leasing (53) 3 -4 -11 -4 -8

Professional and Technical Services (54) 28 30 -15 19 -3

Management of companies and enterprises(55) 3 0 -3 -1 -1

Administrative, Support and Waste Services (56) 11 1 -14 -4 -9

Educational Services (61) 2 -1 -5 -2 -4

Health Care and Social Assistance (62) 5 -3 -14 -9 -10

Accommodation and Food Services (72) 5 -10 -15 -5 -10

Repair and maintenance (811) 2 0 -3 -2 -2

Other Industries 15 16 -29 -12 -20

Government 88 46 -11 -13 1

 

Total 311 92 -202 -25 -102

The job impacts include all the companies (affected and unaffected by PR1147) in the respective 

industries. 

 Competitiveness

The additional cost brought on by the proposed rule would increase the cost of production 

of the affected industries relative to their national counterparts. Changes in relative 

production costs would thus be a good indicator of changes in relative competitiveness. 

The magnitude of the impact depends on the size and diversification of, and infrastructure 

in a local economy as well as interactions among industries. A large, diversified, and 

resourceful economy would absorb the impact with relative ease. Implementation of PR 

1147 increases the cost of doing business for affected industries. 

An index of 0 indicates that there is no change in the cost of production relative to the 

rest of the United States. An index of above or below 0 means that the cost of production 

in the four-county areas resulting from the proposed rule is higher or lower, respectively, 

than that in the rest of the U.S. 

Table 3 shows the impact of the proposed rule on the cost of production by industry and 

for selected years. The sector of manufacturing would experience the largest increase in 

the relative cost of production (e.g., 0.004% in 2015). In 2025, the relative cost of 

production in this sector would decrease to 0.002%. 

Changes in production costs will affect prices of goods produced locally. The relative 

delivered price of a good is based on its production cost and the transportation cost of 
Proposed Rule 1147 Final Socioeconomic Report 

SCAQMD 8 November 2008 

delivering the good to where it is consumed or used. The average price of a good at the 

place of use reflects prices of the good produced locally and imported elsewhere. 

Based on the measurement of relative delivered prices in the REMI model, the proposed 

rule is projected to result in higher delivered prices. These impacts are similar to those 

on the relative cost of production. For example, the manufacturing sector would 

experience an increase in relative delivered prices in 2015 (Table 3), while other 

industries will experience minimal increase in relative delivered prices after 2015. 

Table 3 

Impacts on Relative Cost of Production and Delivered Prices 

(Relative to the U.S.) 

Relative Cost of Production Relative Delivered Price Industry 2010 2015 2025 2010 2015 2025 

Utilities 0.002% 0.001% 0.001% 0.001% 0.001% 0.000% 

Construction 0.002% 0.002% 0.001% 0.002% 0.002% 0.001% 

Manufacturing 0.005% 0.004% 0.002% 0.003% 0.003% 0.001% 

Wholesale 0.001% 0.001% 0.000% 0.001% 0.001% 0.000% 

Retail 0.001% 0.001% 0.000% 0.001% 0.001% 0.000% 

Other Services 0.004% 0.003% 0.001% 0.003% 0.002% 0.001% 

RULE ADOPTION RELATIVE TO THE COST-EFFECTIVENESS 

On October 14, 1994, the Governing Board adopted a resolution that requires staff to 

address whether rules being proposed for adoption are considered in the order of costeffectiveness. The 2007 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) ranked, in the order of 

cost-effectiveness, all of the proposed control measures for which costs were quantified. 

It is generally recommended that the most cost-effective actions be taken first. 

Proposed Rule 1147 implements two control measures from the 2007 AQMP: Control 

Measure CMB-01 (NOx Reduction from Non-RECLAIM Ovens, Dryers, and Furnaces) 

and Control Measure MSC-01 (Facility Modernizations). Control Measure CMB-01 was 

ranked 6th with cost-effectiveness from $4,000 to $13,000 per ton of NOx reduced and 

Control measure MSC-01 was ranked 9th with cost-effectiveness from $10,600 to 

$17,000 per ton of NOx reduced. Cost-effectiveness of the Proposed Rule 1147 is 

estimated at $5,000 to $8,000 per ton of NOx reduced and is within the ranking order of 

cost-effectiveness in the 2007 AQMP. 
Proposed Rule 1147 Final Socioeconomic Report 

SCAQMD 9 November 2008 

REFERENCES 

Regional Economic Modeling Inc. (REMI). Policy Insight for the South Coast Region 

(169 sector model). Version 9.5.26. 

South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD). Proposed Rule 1147)─NOx 

Reduction from Miscellaneous Sources. September 2008a. 

______(AQMD). Draft Staff Report for Proposed Amended Rule 1147)─NOx 

Reduction from Miscellaneous Sources. September 2008b. 

AQMD. 2007 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). June 2007. 

U.S. Small Business Administration (US SBA). “Table of Small Business Size 

Standards.” Downloaded October 29, 2008, from 

http://www.sba.gov/idc/groups/public/documents/sba_homepage/serv_sstd_tablepdf.pdf.