Prepared by: Matthew Baldwin

Air Quality Engineer

Approved by: David A. Valler, Jr.

Air Pollution Control Officer

FEATHER RIVER AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT

STAFF REPORT

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS:

REGULATION X RULE 10.1 NEW SOURCE REVIEW
i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents.........................................................................................................................i

1.0 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 1

2.0 Background........................................................................................................................ 1

3.0 Legal Mandates.................................................................................................................. 1

4.0 Proposed Rule Summary ................................................................................................... 3

5.0 Impacts of the New Rule .................................................................................................... 4

6.0 Environmental Review and Compliance ............................................................................. 4

7.0 Required Findings .............................................................................................................. 5

8.0 Comparison with Other Applicable Regulations and Requirements .................................... 5

9.0 Public Notice ...................................................................................................................... 6

ATTACHEMENT A:

Proposed Lineout/Strikeout of Regulation X: Rule 10.1: New Source Review
Staff Report Page 1 of 6

Regulation X; Rule 10.1 New Source Review

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Feather River Air Quality Management District’s (District) New Source Review (NSR) 

program was established in February 1993 to ensure that construction and operation of new 

and modified sources does not interfere with progress towards attainment of the National and 

State Ambient Air Quality Standards. Because portions of the District have been designated as 

nonattainment for failure to meet the federal 8-hour ground-level ozone standard, the United 

States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) requires the District to implement measures 

to reduce sources of ozone and its precursors. The District makes its commitment to reduce 

pollution through the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP is federally enforceable through 

USEPA and the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA). A New Source Review, or Preconstruction 

Review, is required as part of the State Implementation Plan (SIP).

The purpose of the proposed amendments to Rule 10.1 are to address concerns brought up by 

a review by the California Air Resources Board, to differentiate different state and federal 

requirements, and to submit only those federally enforceable portions to be approved by 

USEPA for inclusion in the SIP.

2.0 BACKGROUND

From May through August 2005, the California Air Resources Board (ARB) conducted a review 

of the District’s air quality program. The ARB reviewed the District’s New Source Review Rule 

(Rule 10.1) and made recommendations for improvement to improve clarity and address 

inconsistencies. The findings were summarized in their report “Feather River Air Quality 

Management District Program Review” prepared by the ARB Stationary Source Division 

October 2007.

A summary of their recommendations can be found in Appendix B of the above referenced 

report.

3.0 LEGAL MANDATES

FEDERAL MANDATE

The District has multiple designations regarding attainment of the air quality standards set forth 

by the USEPA. The southern portion of Sutter County has been designated as a serious 

nonattainment area for the federal 8-hour ozone standard, and is proposed to be designated 

severe-15 by the USEPA. This portion of Sutter County, along with Sacramento, Yolo, and 

portions of Placer, El Dorado and Solano Counties are incorporated into the Sacramento 

Federal Nonattainment Area (SFNA). In addition a portion of the Sutter Buttes (portions above 

2000 feet elevation) in Sutter County is designated as a basic nonattainment for the federal 

ozone standard. Section 173 of Title I of the Federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 

requires permitting authorities to establish a permitting program for reviewing applications for 

construction of new sources or modification of existing sources of air pollutants. A New Source 

Review, or Preconstruction Review, is required as part of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

under 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 51 Subpart 1 to ensure that the construction 

or modification of a source will not cause violations of the State’s control strategy or interfere 

with attainment or maintenance of ambient air quality standards. 40 CFR Part 51 also requires 

the District to adopt a permitting program that requires the application of BACT for any net 

increase in emissions at a major stationary source, and Lowest Achievable Emission Rate 
Staff Report Page 2 of 6

Regulation X; Rule 10.1 New Source Review

(LAER) for a new stationary source or modification to an existing stationary source that results 

in a significant emission increase.

STATE MANDATES

California Health and Safety (CH&S) Code §§ 40918 and 40919, require that the District’s 

permitting program be designed to achieve no net increase in emissions of nonattainment 

pollutants from stationary sources with emissions exceeding specified thresholds. Furthermore, 

Title 17, § 70600 requires ozone non-attainment Districts in the Broader Sacramento Area to 

adopt more stringent thresholds. The Broader Sacramento Area is Defined in Title 17 CCR § 

70500. This area is equal to the area designated as the SFNA portion of FRAQMD. The 

thresholds applicable to the District are outlined in Table 3.1. CH&S Code §§ 40918 and 40919

also require the District’s permitting program to require the use of BACT for any new or modified 

stationary source which has a potential to emit greater than or equal to the thresholds listed in 

Table 3.2 for nonattainment pollutants. District rule 10.1 New Source Review as amended on 

June 7, 2004 complies with these requirements.

Table 3.1 – No Net Increase (offset) Threshold

Pollutant SFNA portion of FRAQMD North FRAQMD

Ozone Precursors (NOx & ROG) 10 tons/year 25 tons/year

PM-10 25 tons/year 25 tons/year

Table 3.2 – BACT Thresholds

Pollutant SFNA portion of FRAQMD North FRAQMD

Ozone Precursors (NOx & ROG) 10 pounds/day 25 pounds/day

PM-10 25 pounds/day 25 pounds/day

Chapter 4.5, Protect California Air Act of 2003 Requirements: In an effort to minimize the 

potential impact of federal NSR reform, the state legislature passed the Protect California Air 

Act of 2003 (SB288). The Act (CH&S Code § 42500 through 42507) is intended to minimize the 

impact of the relaxation of the federal new source review program on air quality in California. 

The Act prohibits districts from making revisions to their SIP approved NSR rules in existence 

on December 30, 2002 that would result in weakening their rules. These revisions include but 

are not limited to, revisions to rule applicability, changing the definition of modification so that 

NSR is not triggered or triggered at a higher level of emission increases, or relaxing BACT, air 

quality analysis, and public participation requirements. The Act does permit districts to deviate 

from these requirements under specified conditions.

The proposed amendments to Rule 10.1 meet this mandate. Rule 10.1 does not relax the 

requirements to obtain a permit and undergo NSR analysis; does not relax the requirement to 

apply BACT to a new or modified emission unit; does not relax the requirements or thresholds 

for performing an air quality impact analysis as required by Rule 10.1 G; does not relax the 
Staff Report Page 3 of 6

Regulation X; Rule 10.1 New Source Review

requirements for monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting; does not relax the requirement for 

regulating any air pollutant; and does not relax any requirement for public participation.

4.0 PROPOSED RULE SUMMARY

Table 4.1 summarizes the proposed rulemaking by section:

Table 4.1 – Summary of Proposed Amendments

SECTION NUMBER PROPOSED LANGUAGE

10.1 A Added recommended language in A.1 to incorporate review of 

applicable District rules into the purpose of the rule.

10.1 B

Include EPA recommended language that allows for federal

requirements not yet incorporated into the rule to be applicable to a 

source when an application is deemed complete.

10.1 D The definitions for Best Available Control Technology and Emissions 

Unit have been modified as recommended by ARB to improve clarity. 

Additionally, the definition for Halogenated Hydrocarbon has been 

deleted and incorporated into the definition of Reactive Organic Gases. 

The definition for Reactive Organic Gases has been modified to be 

consistent with the ARB definition and includes additional pollutants 

listed in 40 CFR 51.100(s). The definition for Offset has been clarified 

as recommended by ARB.

The definitions for Actual Emissions, Actual Emission Reductions, 

Effected Pollutants, Complete Application, Control Efficiency, Cost 

Effecitve, Daily Emission Limitation, Historic Actual Emissions, Historic 

Potential Emission, Impact Analysis, Major Stationary Source, Major 

Modification, Non-Attainment Pollutant, Non-Permitted Emissions, 

Potential To Emit, Precursor, Proposed Emissions, Shutdown, and 

Stationary Source have been modified as suggested by EPA.

The definition for Real, Surplus, Permanent, Quantifiable, and 

Enforceable, has been separated into five definitions. Each definition 

has been modified as suggested by EPA.

10.1 E The sections describing requirements and thresholds for Best Available 

Control Technology and Offsets have been modified as suggested by 

EPA and CARB to improve clarity between the different attainment 

portions of the District, differentiate state and federal requirements, and 

add a provision for alternative siting.

10.1 F This section has been modified as suggested by EPA to include actual 

to potential provisions for determining a major modification, while 

retaining the potential to potential provisions for determining an 

emissions change in regards to offsets. Additionally, these sections 

have been modified such that sources cannot net out of BACT for new 

or modified emissions units.

10.1 G This section has been modified to update rule references and 

incorporate federal requirements as suggested by EPA.

10.1 H This section has been modified as suggested by EPA to improve clarity 

and to address approval issues into the SIP.
Staff Report Page 4 of 6

Regulation X; Rule 10.1 New Source Review

SECTION NUMBER PROPOSED LANGUAGE

10.1 A Added recommended language in A.1 to incorporate review of 

applicable District rules into the purpose of the rule.

10.1 B

Include EPA recommended language that allows for federal

requirements not yet incorporated into the rule to be applicable to a 

source when an application is deemed complete.

10.1 I This section has been modified for consistency. The term “Permit to 

Construct” has been replaced with “Authority to Construct”.

5.0 IMPACTS OF THE NEW RULE

EMISSION IMPACTS

These proposed amendments do not implement additional measures for new or existing 

stationary sources. The District does not anticipate any emission impacts from the proposed 

rule.

SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACT

California Health and Safety Code § 40728.5 requires, in part, that:

“Whenever a district intends to propose the adoption, amendment or repeal of a 

rule or regulation that will significantly affect air quality or emissions limitations, 

that agency shall, to the extent that data are available, perform an assessment of 

the socioeconomic impacts of the adoption, amendment, or repeal of the rule or 

regulation.”

However, districts with a population of less than 500,000 persons are exempt from the 

provisions of CH&S § 40728.5 (a). The District’s population is estimated to be approximately 

155,679, below the 500,000 person threshold. Therefore, a socioeconomic analysis for this 

rulemaking is not required.

COST IMPACTS

California Health and Safety Code Section 40703 requires that all air quality districts consider 

and make public findings relating to the cost effectiveness of implementing an emission control 

measure.

The proposed rule does not implement an emission control measure and therefore is not subject 

to the cost effectiveness mandate. Also, staff does not anticipate an additional need for staff 

resources upon adoption of the rule.

6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND COMPLIANCE

The proposed amendments for Rule 10.1 New Source Review consist of clarifying existing 

District, state and federal requirements. As the District has not exercised discretion by 

modifying federal requirements, it is ministerial in nature and the proposed amendments to Rule 

10.1 New Source Review are statutorily exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15268 of the 

state CEQA Guidelines.
Staff Report Page 5 of 6

Regulation X; Rule 10.1 New Source Review

7.0 REQUIRED FINDINGS

California Health and Safety Code Section 40727 (a) requires that prior to adopting or amending 

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

consistency, non-duplication and reference. The findings must be based on the following:

1. Information presented in the District’s written analysis, prepared pursuant to CH&S §

40727.2;

2. Information contained in the rulemaking records pursuant to CH&S § 40728; and

3. Relevant information presented at the Board’s hearing for the rule.

The table below describes the finding and the basis for making the finding.

Table 7.1

FINDING FINDING DETERMINATION

Necessity: The District must find that the 

rulemaking demonstrates a need exists for 

the rule or for its amendment or repeal. 

(CH&S § 40727 (b)(1))

Rule 10.1

It is necessary for the District to adopt the proposed 

amendments in order to receive approval from the 

EPA and for submittal into the ozone non-attainment 

SIP.

Authority: The District must find that a 

provision of law or of a state or federal 

regulation permits or requires the District to 

adopt, amend, or repeal the rule. (CH&S §

47027(b)(2))

Rule 10.1

The District is authorized to adopt rules and 

regulations by CH&S § 40001, 40702, 40919, 41010, 

and 42300.

Clarity: The District must find that the rule is 

written or displayed so that its meaning can 

be easily understood by the persons directly 

affected by it. (CH&S § 40727(b)(3))

Rule 10.1

The District has reviewed the proposed amendments

and determined that they can be easily understood by 

the affected industry. In addition, the record contains 

no evidence that the persons directly affected by the 

rule cannot understand the rule.

Consistency: The rule is in harmony with, 

and not in conflict with or contradictory to, 

existing statutes, court decisions, or state or 

federal regulations. (CH&S § 40727(b)(4))

Rule 10.1

The proposed rule does not conflict with and are not 

contradictory to existing statutes, court decisions, or 

state or federal regulations.

Non-Duplication: The District must find that 

either: 1) The rule does not impose the same 

requirements as an existing site or federal 

regulation; or 2) that the duplicative 

requirements are necessary or proper to 

execute the powers and duties granted to, 

and imposed upon the District. (CH&S §

40727(b)(5)

Rule 10.1

The proposed rule duplicates federal rules or 

regulations for permitting programs. The duplicative 

requirements are necessary in order to execute the 

powers and duties imposed upon the District.

Reference: The District must refer to any 

statute, court decision, or other provision of 

law that the District implements, interprets, or 

makes specific by adopting, amending or 

repealing the rule. (CH&S § 40727(b)(6))

Rule 10.1

The proposed amendments are intended to clarify 

existing law. References to statutes are noted where 

applicable.

8.0 COMPARISON WITH OTHER APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS

California Health and Safety Code Section 40727.2 requires districts to prepare a written 

analysis (may be in the form of a matrix) that identifies all existing federal air pollution control 
Staff Report Page 6 of 6

Regulation X; Rule 10.1 New Source Review

requirements, including, but not limited to, emission control standards constituting BACT, that 

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

modification by the District. In addition, the analysis shall identify any other District rule or 

regulation that applies to the same equipment or source type. 

Under CH&S § 40727.2(g), the District finds that the proposed amendments do not strengthen 

or impose new emission limits or impose more stringent monitoring, reporting, or recordkeeping 

requirements; therefore complies with CH&S Code § 40727.2.

9.0 PUBLIC NOTICE

The notice for this rule adoption was mailed to all permitted sources and a notice of the hearing 

was published in the Appeal Democrat on February 27, 2009. Subsequently, a second notice 

was mailed to all permitted sources and published on August 28, 2009 to allow for public 

comment. To date, no comments have been received from the general public.

A public workshop to discuss the proposed amendments was conducted on February 20, 2009. 

A notice of the workshop was mailed to all permitted sources and interested parties. Two 

members of the public attended the workshop. No significant comments were received during 

the workshop.

The proposed amendments were sent to the Air Resources Board and the Environmental 

Protection Agency on February 12, 2009. Significant Comments were received. The hearing 

scheduled for April 6, 2009 was continued to June 1, 2009. Additional significant comments 

from EPA and verbal comments from CARB were received which included approvability issues. 

The hearing was subsequently continued to August 3, 2009, and to October 5, 2009 to address

those comments.
ATTACHEMENT A:

PROPOSED LINEOUT/STRIKEOUT OF REGULATION X: RULE 10.1: NEW SOURCE REVIEW