## Response to Comments from Arizona Rock Products Association and The Arizona Chapter Associated General Coi~tractors

GRIC Public Comment Period July 1,2006thru July 31,2006

The comments received from the Arizona Rock Products Association (ARPA) indicate that GRIC DEQ continueto include ARPA in the TIP development process and any future stakeholder meetings. The GRIC Air Programis committed to working with all affected entities includingTribal entities such as Gila River Sand and Gravel (GRSG). Air Qualitypersonnel have worked with Gila River Sand and Gravel and their tenants from the very beginning ofthe TIP development process. GRIC Air Quality personnel met with GRSG on several occasions and revised the Non-metallic Mineral Mining Ordinance in responseto comments received from GRSG and their tenants. GRIC personnel met with the GRSGboard and operationspersonnel on March 17,2003to discuss the proposed TIP ordinances that apply to Gila River Sand and Gravel. GRIC air quality personnel participated in a tour ofthe plant on Hwy 587 on July 29, 2003. GRIC Air Quality staff alsomet with GRSG, Rinker, Hansen and personnel from other affected entities in May 2005 to walk through each requirement in the ordinances and offeredto walk through the plant to explainhow each requirement applied to each piece of equipment or operation. GRSG personnel and their tenants indicated that this was not necessary because they understood the requirements. The GRIC DEQ will continueto keep all entities affected by the GRIC ordinancesinformed and has committed to assisting Tribal entities and other affected industrialfacilities through the permitting
process.

ARPA comments request that the DEQ conduct an Economic, Small Business and Consumer Impact Statement including a comprehensiveeconomic and technical review ofthe candidate controlmeasures necessary for compliance. However, in developingthis ordinance DEQ agrees that economic impact analyses are appropriate when regulations impose stringent or unusual new requirements. The Air Program conducted and extensive review of rules and regulations currently being implemented by numerous jurisdictions throughout the United Statesprior to developingthe draft GRIC ordinances. The Technical Support Document (TSD) that was provided to ARPA includes an extensive technical analysis and a detailed explanationofhow the emission limitations and operating requirements contained in the GRIC non-metallic mineral mining ordinance were derived. The requirements contained in the non-metallic mineral mining ordinance reflect current federal emission limits and record keeping requirements as well

as the requirements in a number of states and localities. 

### In addition,the Fugitive Dust Producing Activities ordinance contains standard Reasonable Available Control Measures (RACMs)that have been approved in a number of State ImplementationsPlans and air quality controlplans from neighboring jurisdictions. 

### In many cases the neighboring jurisdictions arerequiringthe much more restrictiveBest Available ControlMeasures (BACMs)to be implemented. These programs have been approvedby the U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA) and have undergone extensive Economic, Small Business and Consumer Impact Analysis as required under the Clean Air Act and analogous state and local economic impact analysis requirements. Since the requirements contained in the GFUC ordinances have already undergone an extensive economic impact analysis by the federal government and other jurisdictions, EPA has determinedthat an additional analysis is unnecessary.

ARPA also submitted comments specific to the GRIC ordinances which are addressed below:

PART 

### V. Area Source Emission Limits



### Comment: Section 4.0, Unpaved Parking Lots - Is there a list of dust palliatives approved by the Department, and can ARPA get a copy ofthose recommendations?



### Response: The GRIC Department ofEnvironmental Quality will approve dust palliatives on a case by case basis, so it is impossible to devise a list that applies under all circumstances. Any facility proposing to use a dust palliative as a control

measure must provide all information concerning the effectiveness of the palliative being proposed and the Department will approve or disapprove the specificpalliative.



### Comment: Section 5.0, Unpaved Haul Access Road - ARPA requests that "apply water" be the primary dust control option in section 5.1.



### Response: The GRICAir Program will add the following language for clarification
purposes: "Apply water in sufficient quantities to ensure that particulate matter emissions do not exceed twenty (20) percent opacity (at a minimum, applications of
water must be confirmed utilizing log books on water trucks); or"



### Comment: Section 10.2 (C), Bulk Material Hauling On-Site Within the Boundaries ofthe Work Site Trackout control device - ARPA is unable to locate Table 1 (Trackout

### - 1 J, 25, 35) of this section.



### Response: The last page of the Fugitive Dust Producing Activities ordinance did not print when staff were copying the documents for the mass mailing. The electronic version of the ordinancesthat were provided to ARPA and GFUC Sand and Gravel Staff contain all of the Table 1 Control Measures including the trackout control measures in 1 J through 35.



### Comment: 10.5 

### Open Storage Piles 10.5(B)l. 

### - Stockpiles are active and routinely change shape or position. They cannot be covered. ARPA requests to see a qualifier placed in this language that this option

was intended for "smallpiles" as stated in a meeting with GFUC DEQ, ratherthan large working stockpilesthat are representative of our industry.

### Response: There are five (5) options under 10.5 

### (B) for controlling fugitive dust fiom open storage piles that are not actively undergoing stacking, loading or unloading operations. This includes option 10.5 

### (B) (3) which requires reasonable precautions be taken to ensure fugitive dust emissions don't exceed 20% opacity. This is commonly achieved by employing a spraybar on the end of the stacker belt. The use of tarps to control dust from stockpiles is one of the five control measures that can be employed and tarps are used on occasion at construction sites on relatively small stock piles.



### Comment: 10.5(B)2. Apply water to maintain a soil moisture content at a minimum of twelve (12)percent is unnecessary. Accordingto the revised AP-42 Emission Factors > 1.5% moisture
content is considered "controlled" material. ARPA requests the addition of maintaining a visible crust meets stabilizationrequirements in this section.



### Response: The option for maintaining 12%moisture content will remain in section 10.5 (B) but the ordinance will be revised to include the following fifth option in 10.5 (B)2 : "Maintain a visible crust that complies with the test method in subsection 12.2 (B) of this section 2.0".



### Comment: 12.1(A) ARPA has concerns with the adoption of Maricopa County Appendix C which would include test methods that are not currently necessary for compliance with the TIP. (i.e. stabilization for open areas other than construction sites). Further, modified Method 

### 9 is under litigation and should not be consideredin the TIP.



### Response: GRIC received numerous comments from EPA concerning test methods for stabilization for open areas and construction sites and has adopted portions of Maricopa CountyAppendix C to address the comments from EPA. The GRIC Air Program did not adopt portions of the stabilization requirements in Appendix C that were unnecessary and specifically did not adopt the Modified Method 

### 9 procedures.



### Comment: PART VII 

### SourceICategorySpecific 

### Emission Limits for Existing and New Sources, Subsection3.1 Do the opacity standards for specificpieces of equipment in this section only apply to new facilities since the numbers come from the New Source Performance Standards? Are applicable facilities in operation before 1983exempt?



### Response: No, in accordance with Section 1.0of PART

### VII Source/Category Specific Emission Limits forExisting and New Sources, Nonmetallic Mineral Mining and Processing Ordinance, the provisions ofthis section apply to any commercial andlor industrial nonmetallic mineral mining andorrock product plant, concrete batch plant, hot mix asphalt plant and vermiculite andorperlite processing plant operation. Compliance with the provisions of this Section do not relieve any person subject to the requirements ofthis Section from complying with any other standardsincluding the New Source Performance Standards in Part 

### I1 (Permit Requirements). In such case, the more stringent standard apply.



### Comment: Subsection7.2 ARPA members are concerned aboutthe amount of recordkeeping required in this section and are not certain of the environmental benefits. 

### Inthe meeting with GRIC DEQ, ARPA members requested GRIC DEQ to consider the idea of "visual surveys" with daily checklists and quarterly Method 9's. ARPA is also concerned with the amount Smoke Schoolis currently being offered and who will be conducting the training in the future. Can GRIC DEQ assist with this? ARPA also has concernswith the current compliance schedule, but understands that it is the intention of the GRIC DEQ to work with companies to raise awareness regarding TIP requirements and compliance assistance.ARPA requests further flexibility, due to control device availability, associated costs, administrative and implementation challenges, be exercised.



### Response: Operational recordkeeping requirements in the ordinance are designed to provide the Department access to data for the purposes of emissions inventory and verification ofplant capacity and modification. Section 7.2 of the Nonmetallic Mineral Mining and Processing Ordinance states that the frequency and locationsof opacity readings shallbe determined on a case by case basis and included in each facility permit. The frequency of opacity readings shall be no less that onceper month and each facility shall provide for a certified opacity observer to conduct visible emissionsreadings. The DEQ feels that monthly opacity readings are reasonable and not overburdensome since many neighboring jurisdictions require daily visible emissions readings. GRIC does not provide smoke school training. However, smoke school training canbe acquired through Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and through private training companies.



### Comment: AGC would like to request consideration of alternative emission controls. This approach will provide benefits to all because it would foster control technology innovation by allowing regulated conipaniesto develop and implement improved control measures that address the specific and unique conditions they face. Thsprovision was implementedin Pima County and has been found to be an effective way to control emissions. By including a provision in Section 

### V ofthe TIP for alternativemeasures that achieve equivalent or better emissions control,
contractors are provided the opportunity to demonstratewhy a control measure is not possible, applicableor effectivein a specific situation and to make a showing of an equivalent or better alternative that would meet the requirements of the rule.



### Response: We are not sure why the AGC is req~~esting additional provisions for alternative emissions controls. Subsection 7.3 (B), Part 

### V already contains provisions for requesting alternative control measures that provide the opportunity to demonstrate equivalent or better emission controls.

### Comment: AGC also suggests that normal farmingpractices should have a section which states this does not include certain farm practices that create fugitive dust emissions greater than 20% opacity.



### Response: Subsection7.4(C) exempts normal farming operations from the requirement to submit a Dust Control Plan. 

### In addition, subsection 2.1 (C) 

### (3) of Part I1 (Permit Requirements) exempts normal farming operationsfrom the requirementto obtain a permit. However, agricultural operations currently implement Best ~ana~ekent Practices (BMPs) such as low tillage operations and planting cover crops which are considered sound farmingpractices that reduce fugitive dust. However, contractors conducting initial land clearing operations for new agricultural fields are required to obtain an earth moving permit and submit a dust controlplan for approval by the Department.



### Comment: AGC requests that the GRIC DEQ require only a primary control measure be identified for each fugitive dust source in the dust control plan. Requiring contingency measures have no effect on emission reduction. If the primary control measure is not working, contractors should cease operations until the primary control measure becomes the effective means of controlling emissions.



### Response: It is much more practical to have a primary control measure and a contingency measure that will allow the permittee flexibility. If a contingency

measure is not available and the primary control measure fails to control dust (e.g., water truck breaks down) all earth moving operations at the site would have to be terminated. It is not the intention of the GRIC DEQ to terminate earth moving operations every time a water truck breaks down or some other situation arises causing the primary control measure to be ineffective.



### Comment: AGC also requests the addition of maintaining a visible crust meets stabilization requirements in this section.



### Response: The GRIC DEQ will add the following language at subsection 10.5(B) (2) "Maintain a visible crust that complieswit11 the test method in subsection 12.2

### (B) ofthis Part 

### V"

The GRIC DEQ is committed to working with industry to assist with compliance issues.