ATTACHMENT D

COMMENTS RECEIVEDFrom: Law, Nicole

Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 3:33 PM

To: Matthew Baldwin

Cc: Steckel, Andrew
Subject: Comments on Yolo Solano AQMD Rules 2.21 and 2.22

Attachments: Corporate Fleet ltr 28Nov2007.pdf

Hi Matt,

Thank you for the phone conversation today. I am glad we got a chance to discuss the new timeline for

the rule revisions. As I mentioned, I reviewed the two draft rules you sent us on September 19, 2013

and have no comments on Rule 2.21 Organic Liquid Storage and Transfer. The two comments on Rule
2.22 Gasoline Dispensing Facilities are below.

 The exemption in section 11 3 exempts non

- retail gasoline dispensing facilities where 90% of the vehicles being refueled are equipped with ORVR. Please consider revising the exemption to require 95% of the vehicles be equipped with ORVR, as is done in the following California

distr ict rules and recommended in the 2007 EPA memo, “Removal of Stage II Vapor Recovery from Refueling of Corporate Fleets.” Placer APCD Rule 214, Sacramento AQMD Rule 449, and
San Diego APCD Rule 61.4.

 Section 309.6 refers to a section 309.4b, which is not i n the rule. Consider revising this to the

correct reference.

Also, attached to this email is the EPA memo. Please feel free to contact me if you have other questions.
Thank you!

Nicole Law Rules Office, Air Division U.S. EPA Region 9
75 Hawthorne Stree t San Francisco, 94105 Office: (415) 947

- 4126 Fax: (415) 947

- 3579

### From: Shears, James

Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2014 2:52 PM

To: Matthew Baldwin
Subject: FW: Yolo

- Solano Rule 2.22

From: Steckel, Andrew

Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2014 2:46 PM

To: mehrhard@ysaqmd.org ; Sutkus, Carol@ARB

Cc: Shears, James; Drake, Kerry; Law, Nicole Subject: Yolo

- Solano Rule 2.22



### United States Environmental Protection Agency Region IX

75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105

- 3901

September 04, 2014

Transmittal of EPA Rule Review Comments

To: Mat Ehrhard, Yolo

- Solano Air Quality Management District

mehrhard@ysaqmd.org

Carol Sutkus, California Air Resources Board csutkus@arb.ca.gov

From: Andrew Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief

steckel.andrew@epa.gov

Re: Draft Rule 2.22, Gasoline Dispensing Facilities, draft dated

August 22, 2014

Based on our preliminary review of the draft rule identified above, we have no comments at this time. We support Yolo

- Solano's efforts to comply with the Air Resources Board's regulatory advisory, dated February 28, 2014, concerning above ground storage tanks. Please direct any questions about our comments to me at (415) 947

- 4115 or to James Shears at (213) 244

- 1810.



### _________________From: Lewis, Monica@ARB

Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 9:52 AM

To: Matthew Baldwin

Cc: Benjamin, Michael@ARB; Sutkus, Carol@ARB
Subject: YSAQMD Rule 2.22

- ARB review

Attachments: YSAQMD Rule 2 22 ARB Staff Review 090914.docx

Good morning, Matt;

Thank you for allowing ARB the opportunity to review YSAQMD’s Rule 2.22. Our review comments a re attached, and we fully support the proposed rule. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact

me. Alex Krichevsky is no longer handling District rule review, which has been passed to me, my coworker Austin Hicks ( Austin.Hicks@arb.ca.gov ), and our supervisor Carol Sutkus ( Carol.Sutkus@arb.ca.gov ). Best of luck on your workshop tomorrow.

Monica

Monica C. Lewis South Coast Air Quality Planning

Air Quality Planning & Science Division

Air Resources Board

1001 I Street, P.O. Box 2815

Sacramento, CA 95812 916.324.2716 │Monica.Lewis@arb.ca.gov

From: Benjamin, Michael@ARB

Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2014 5:06 PM

To: Lewis, Monica@ARB

Cc: Sutkus, Carol@ARB; Lew, George@ARB Subject: RE: Review request for YSAQMD Rule 2.22

Monica,

Our comments are attached. Please forward to the District.

Thanks,

Michael

Dr. Michael T. Benjamin, Chief
Monitoring and Laboratory Division

California Air Resources Board
mbenjami@arb.ca.gov Office: (916) 323

- 2915 Cell: (916) 201

- 8968

From: Matthew Baldwin [ mailto:mbaldwin@ysaqmd.org ]

Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 3:39 PM

To: Kr ichevsky, Alex@ARB Subject: RE: ARB Review of YSAQMD Rules 2:21 and 2:22Alex

Based on the proposed amendments to the certification procedure for aboveground gasoline storage tanks (CP

- 206), the District has made changes to
Proposed Rule 2.22

– Gasoline Dispensing Facilities. Because of these changes,
we decided to make changes to the previously proposed rule and re

- workshop

it.

Please find attached a copy of the proposed rule and staff report and workshop
notice. We plan to workshop the rule on Septembe r 11.

If you have any questions, feel free to call me at (530) 757

- 3679.

Thanks,

Matt Baldwin
Associate Engineer

Yolo

- Solano AQMD (530) 757

- 3679

### Air Resources Board Monitoring and Laboratory Division Engineering and Certification Branch Vapor Recovery Certification Section

ARB Staff Comments on Yolo

- Solano AQMD Proposed Rule 2.22

INTRODUCTORY PARAGRAPH

Yolo

- Solano Air Quality Management District (YSAQMD) is proposing to amend Rule 2.22, relating to vapor recovery controls on gasoline storage tanks. The Air Resources Board (ARB) supports YSAQMD’s proposed rule, which is largely consistent with proposed regulations that ARB staff intends to present to the Board for consideration in November 2014. The proposed YSAQMD rule and ARB’s proposed r ule would both essentially codify the provisions set forth in the Aboveground Storage Tank (AST) Enhanced Vapor Recovery (EVR) Regulatory Advisory issued by ARB February 28,

2014. This a dvisory was developed in collaboration with local air districts throughout the state, including significant involvement from YSAQMD staff.

COMMENTS

ARB staff fully supports the proposed rule. We greatly appreciate YSAQMD’s willingness to delay taking action on previously proposed vapor recovery rules until ARB and local air districts had developed a cohesive statewide approach to AST EVR implementation. The proposed rule would improve cost effectiveness of AST EVR, provide clarity for regulated busine sses, and preserve the most necessary air quality
benefits of AST EVR.

While ARB would support adoption of the proposed rule as is, staff respectfully submits the following comments for YSAQMD’s consideration:

 Section 116: Exemption

- Phase II EVR

This s ection, when read in conjunction with section 305.1, appears to allow for the continued use of pre

- EVR Phase II on all ASTs indefinitely. ARB staff anticipates that a Phase II EVR system for ASTs will be certified in late 2014. New ASTs installed after

t he certification of a Phase II EVR system would be required to install a Phase II EVR system, so ARB staff suggests that the proposed YSAQMD rule could be amended to

reflect that.

###  Section 112 and 113: Exemption for E85 and Onboard Refueling Vapor

Recov ery ARB staff fully supports the proposed exemption for onboard refueling vapor recovery (ORVR) fleet fueling facilities, including E85 facilities. These exemptions will reduce operating costs for facility owners with no increase in emissions. ARB staff has proposed standards and specifications for Enhanced Conventional (ECO) Nozzles and low permeation hoses that would further reduce emissions from these facilities. ECO Nozzle standards will be presented to the Board for consideration in November 2014. With the likelihood of ECO Nozzle regulations passing in November, YSAQMD could consider revising their proposed language to require the use of ECO Nozzles and low permeation hoses at these exempted E85 and ORVR fleet facilities within four years of

the da te these components are certified by ARB.

 Staff Report : Section VI In the “Regulatory Findings” portion of the Staff Report, under the “Necessity” findings (Page 8), it is stated that the proposed rule would:

“Provide an exemption from implementation of Phase I and Phase II EVR for

non

- retail GDFs, and prevent unnecessary permitting and control costs for sources, potential sources, and the District.”

ARB staff did not find anywhere in the proposed rule that would specifically provide an exemption for all non

- retail facilities, so we request clarification of this statement. ARB would not support an exemption for all non

- retail fueling facilities, and w e do not believe that such an exemption is currently included within the proposed rule.

 Other Comments

In reviewing the rule, ARB staff offers the following comments to improve clarity and to update certain provisions.

1. Section 115.2

- This section exempts ASTs with a throughput of 60,000 gallons or less. For clarity, the sentence should read “....has a Permit to Operate with an annual throughput limit of 60,000 gallons or less, or is ...”

2. Section 214, Enhanced Vapor Recovery Definition

- The reference to CP

- 206 should be “...sections 3 through 10 ” rather than sections 3 through 11.” Section 11 contains no performance standards.

3. Section 304.7

– This section requires that all spill containers must have a drain valve. ARB vapor recovery regulatio ns require no drain valves for all vapor spill containers. Product spill container manufacturers have requested and are granted certification for spill containers without drain valves to avoid
gasoline and ethanol phase separation caused by water. ARB st aff is not

### recommending that this section be amended but wanted the district to be aware that ARB is certifying spill containers without drain valves.

4. Section 305.5

– This section requires owners/operators to check the system in the event of “drive off” (h ose separate from dispenser or hose separate from nozzle). Please note that CARB EOs include ARB Approved Installation, Operation, and Maintenance (IOM) Manual for the Assist (Healy) and Balance systems contain procedures for checking the hanging hardware
after a drive off. If the component fails the check, the component must be replaced. ARB staff recommends that this section include a reference to CARB Executive Order, as applicable.

5. Section 306 (Self Compliance Program), Section 307 (Daily Maintenanc e Inspection Program), and Section 308 (Periodic Inspection Protocol). ARB

staff recommends that these sections include a reference to “CARB Executive Order, as applicable.” CARB EVR Executive Orders include compliance
procedures and contain a list of da ily and periodic inspection procedures for each certified system.

6. Section 601, Static Pressure Decay

– ARB staff recommends amending this

section to include a reference to “TP

- 206.3, Determination of Static Pressure Performance of Vapor Recovery Systems a t Gasoline Dispensing Facilities with Aboveground Storage Tanks and CARB Executive Order, as applicable.”

TP

- 206.3 applies to ASTs and lists ullages that are representative of ASTs. The reason for referencing CARB Executive Order is that the certified As sist
and Balance Phase II systems include items that are necessary to conduct a
static pressure decay test.

7. Section 602, Dynamic Backpressure

- ARB staff recommends amending this section to include a reference to “CARB Executive Order, as applicable.” T he EVR Executive Orders specify which one of the six TP

- 201.4 methodologies to employ and also include special instructions for conducting TP

- 201.4.

8. Section 603, Air to Liquid Ratio

– ARB staff recommending amending this

section to include a reference to CARB Executive Order, which list specific equipment to conduct this test for EVR systems.

9. Section 604, Liquid Removal Rate, ARB staff recommends deleting reference

to TP

- 201.6 and adding TP

- 201.6C, Compliance Determination of Liquid

Removal Rate and CARB Executive Order, as applicable. The reason is that

TP

- 201.6 is used for certification testing and does not include a simplified approach for determining compliance with the liquid removal rate.