North Carolina Administrative Code › Title 15A - Environmental Quality › Chapter 02 - Environmental Management › Subchapter D - AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REQUIREMENTS › Section .1800 - CONTROL OF ODORS › Section 02D .1807 - DETERMINATION OF MAXIMUM FEASIBLE CONTROLS FOR ODOROUS EMISSIONS

Current through Register Vol. 39, No. 2, July 15, 2024
(a) Scope. This Rule sets out procedures for
				  determining maximum feasible controls for odorous emissions. The owner or
				  operator of the facility shall be responsible for providing the maximum
				  feasible control determination.
(b)
				  Process for maximum feasible control determinations. The following sequential
				  process shall be used on a case-by-case basis to determine maximum feasible
				  controls:
(1) Identify all available control
				  technologies. In the first step, all available options for the control of
				  odorous emissions shall be listed. Available options include all possible
				  control technologies or techniques with a potential to control, reduce, or
				  minimize odorous emissions. For the purposes of this document, a comprehensive
				  and effective odor control plan may be listed among the possible odor control
				  technologies as a viable and satisfactory maximum feasible control technology
				  option. All available control technologies shall be included on this list
				  regardless of their technical feasibility or potential energy, human health,
				  economic, or environmental impacts.
(2) Eliminate technically infeasible options.
				  In the second step, the technical feasibility of all the control options
				  identified pursuant to Subparagraph (b)(1) of this Rule shall be evaluated with
				  respect to source specific factors. A demonstration of technical infeasibility
				  shall be documented and shall show, based on physical, chemical, or engineering
				  principles, that technical difficulties preclude the successful use of the
				  control option under review. Technically infeasible control options shall then
				  be eliminated from further consideration as maximum feasible
				  controls.
(3) Rank remaining
				  control technologies by control effectiveness. All the remaining control
				  technologies, which have not been eliminated pursuant to Subparagraph (b)(2) of
				  this Rule, shall be ranked and then listed in order of their ability to control
				  odorous emissions, with the most effective control option at the top of the
				  list. The list shall present all the control technologies that have not been
				  previously eliminated and shall include the following information:
(A) control effectiveness;
(B) economic impacts, including cost
				  effectiveness;
(C) environmental
				  impacts: this shall include any media impacts (for example, water or solid
				  waste), at a minimum the impact of each control alternative on emissions of
				  toxic or hazardous air pollutants;
(D) human health impacts; and
(E) energy impacts.
However, an owner or operator proposing to implement the
					 most stringent alternative, in terms of control effectiveness, need not provide
					 detailed information concerning the other control options. In such cases, the
					 owner or operator shall provide documentation to the Director the proposed
					 control option is the most efficient, in terms of control effectiveness, and
					 provide a review of collateral environmental impacts.
(4) Evaluate most effective
				  controls and document results. Following the delineation of all available and
				  technically feasible control technology options pursuant to Subparagraph (b)(3)
				  of this Rule, the energy, human health, environmental, and economic impacts
				  shall be considered in order to arrive at the maximum feasible controls. An
				  analysis of the predicted and associated impacts for each option shall be
				  conducted. The owner or operator shall present an objective evaluation of the
				  impacts of each alternative. Beneficial and adverse impacts shall be analyzed
				  and, if possible, quantified. If the owner or operator proposed to select the
				  most stringent alternative, in terms of control effectiveness, as maximum
				  feasible controls, he or she shall evaluate whether impacts of unregulated air
				  pollutants or environmental impacts in other media would justify selection of
				  an alternative control technology. If there are no concerns regarding
				  collateral environmental impacts, the analysis is ended and this proposed
				  option is selected as maximum feasible controls. In the event the most
				  stringent alternative is inappropriate, due to energy, human health,
				  environmental, or economic impacts, the justification for this conclusion shall
				  be documented. The next most stringent option, in terms of control
				  effectiveness, shall become the primary alternative and be similarly evaluated.
				  This process shall continue until the control technology evaluated cannot be
				  eliminated due to source-specific environmental, human health, energy, or
				  economic impacts.
(5) Select
				  maximum feasible controls. The most stringent option, in terms of control
				  effectiveness, that is not eliminated pursuant to Subparagraph (b)(4) of this
				  Rule shall be selected as maximum feasible controls.