BOARD MEETING DATE: December 4, 2009
AGENDA NO. 31
REPORT:
Stationary Source Committee
SYNOPSIS:
The Stationary Source Committee met Friday, November 20, 2009. Following is a summary of that meeting. The next meeting will be January 22, at 10:30 a.m., in Conference Room CC8.
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:
Receive and file.
Dennis Yates, Chair
Stationary Source Committee
Attendance
The meeting began at 10:35 a.m. Present were Dennis Yates, Bill Campbell (attended by videoconference), Josie Gonzales and Jane Carney. Absent were Ronald Loveridge and Michael Cacciotti.
INFORMATIONAL ITEM
Status of Lead Attainment Designation
Susan Nakamura, Planning and Rules Manager, provided an update regarding status of the current designation for the Air Basin and AQMD's plan to meet the Revised National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for lead. She summarized the new requirements under the Revised NAAQs for lead. Supervisor Campbell asked if the lead concentration data for Quemetco for January through March 2006 represented their highest monitored concentration. Staff responded that it was their highest 3-month average measured between 2006 and 2008. Mayor Yates commented that lead emission from Exide, a battery recycling operation in Vernon, was a concern raised at the Maywood Town Hall meeting this week. He asked if there is any best available control technology that would make them able to meet the new lead standard without shutting them down. Staff responded that they were under an Order of Abatement which requires enclosure of processes that produce fugitive lead emissions and several other improvements because they had exceeded the current lead NAAQS. Mayor Yates commented that the capital improvements being required would cost money and asked if, after the requirements are met, Exide would be able to increase its throughput. Staff responded that after AQMD restricted Exide’s throughput due to exceedance of the Rule 1420 lead ambient levels, Exide was allowed to return to normal throughput since the lead levels dropped below 1.5 ug/m3 and they are currently allowed to operate at maximum permitted throughput. It is not certain that the proposed enclosure and housekeeping measures will bring them into compliance with the new standard. In addition to their process and fugitive emissions, lead has been deposited in the surrounding area over the years. When the deposited lead is disturbed, lead concentrations may increase. The District is working with the State Department of Toxic Substances Control which has a cleanup plan for the area that Exide must also follow to address the deposited lead. Staff also said that Exide has not seen a decrease in the number of batteries being recycled even with the current economic situation.
At the end of discussions for this item, Committee Member Jane Carney indicated that she did not participate in agenda item #1 due to a potential conflict as U.S. Battery is a source of income for her.
As per Mayor Yates request, agenda items # 3 and 4 were discussed out of order since Committee Member Jane Carney indicated that for agenda item #2 she has a possible conflict of interest,. Agenda item # 2 was then taken after item # 4 and after Ms. Carney left the meeting.
Regulation XX – RECLAIM (SOx)
Dr. Laki Tisopulos, Assistant Deputy Executive Officer with Planning, Rule Development and Area Sources, gave the staff presentation. The amendments being developed seek to establish Best Available Retrofit Control Technology (BARCT) standards to reduce SOx emissions from seven emission categories at facilities in the SOx RECLAIM universe by approximately 6.2 tons per day and help the Basin meet the federal annual and 24-hour PM2.5 standards by 2014 and 2020, respectively. SOx is one of the key building blocks contributing greatly to the formation of PM2.5. In addition to the cost, cost-effectiveness and other details of the staff proposal, Dr. Tisopulos informed the Committee that staff is analyzing several CEQA alternatives and outlined the key issues associated with this rule making, including BARCT determination, market viability and SOx shaving methodology. There were several questions and comments from the Committee Members and the public. In response to a question regarding the additional water demand, Dr. Tisopulos responded that the proposal may increase the water usage from the refineries by an estimated 1-2 % but that water purveyors are able to meet the additional demand and that access to recycled water and well water from some facilities may help offset the additional demand. Although the estimated additional water demand is below the CEQA significance threshold, staff will be using abundance of caution in analyzing such impacts.
In response to questions relative to the alternative SOx shaving methodologies considered, he responded that, in an effort to alleviate potential gaming of the market, any alternative shaving proposal will likely have to apply to independent investors as well and be pegged to a specific reference point in time. In response to a discussion regarding prior investments made by the refineries in dry-ESP technology, he responded that the staff proposal will not invalidate such investments. He indicated that while most of the refineries subject to Rule 1105.1 opted to install the dry-ESP technology, the rule did not dictate any technology but rather a performance standard. He also stated that, while the emphasis during the rule development process for Rule 1105.1 may have been on dry-ESP technology because most refiners felt more comfortable with that technology, the staff report acknowledged the scrubber and wet-ESP technologies as potential alternatives and that, ultimately, one company did opt to install the scrubber technology. This company is now in compliance with both the Rule 1105.1 and proposed SOx performance standards.
He further recommended that, in an effort to alleviate similar complications with the SOx RECLAIM program and in recognition that additional reductions will be needed to meet the federal 24-hour PM2.5 standard by 2020, it would be of paramount importance to take a long-term view in setting the emission reduction target for the SOx RECLAIM universe and not be limited to the minimum reductions committed in the 2007 AQMP.
Supervisor Campbell left the meeting following agenda item #3.
Rule 314 – Fees for Architectural Coatings
Naveen Berry, Planning & Rules Manager, gave the presentation detailing the costs to the AQMD and revenue from coating manufacturers for the 2008 sales and emissions. The presentation also included the latest compliance data, as well as the continued efforts for incorporating third-party distributors, as well as evaluating a retail fee in the future. Responding to a question from Committee Chairman Mayor Yates, staff provided additional details on the overhead and emission fair share calculations. The public did not have any comments.
Ms. Carney left the meeting after agenda item # 4.
Proposed Rule 1155 – Particulate Matter (PM) Control Devices
Jill Whynot, Director of Strategic Initiatives, gave a briefing on Proposed Rule 1155 – Particulate Matter (PM) Control Devices, which will go to the Board for consideration on December 4, 2009. This rule would cover approximately 5,000 pieces of equipment at approximately 1,500 facilities, in a variety of industries, although the majority of these would have minimal requirements. PM control equipment includes baghouses, cyclones, electrostatic precipitators and wet scrubbers.
The proposed rule has requirements for all equipment and some requirements specific to baghouses. All equipment would not be allowed to have visible emissions, must have controlled material discharge and shall follow proper operation and maintenance requirements. Visible emission checks would be done once a week for five minutes, which is the primary requirement for more than 80% of the equipment subject to the rule.
Baghouses are separated in the rule depending on size. The very largest about 240 units would have to install Bag Leak Detection Systems (BLDS) to monitor the bag’s conditions. An emission limit is proposed for these baghouses and 17 Title V facilities would have to do source tests (a total of 32 units) initially and every 5 years. Additionally, older manual shaker systems would be upgraded to automatic systems.
The costs of various requirements and the socioeconomic impacts were discussed. No reductions can be quantified for this rule, but emission benefits are expected due to equipment and bag upgrades, and better monitoring, which will lead to early detection and prevention of problems. Staff indicated that most issues have been resolved. Staff will work with the asphalt industry on testing of BLDS in their operations.
Three people, representing different industries, commented that a number of their concerns had been addressed. One representative asked that staff work with them to investigate additional opportunities and incentives for generating emission reduction credits. A suggestion was made that the New Source Review working group meet to discuss how to make changes that would enable more particulate credit generation.
Ms. Gonzales reported that California Portland Cement, a cement facility in Colton is curtailing operations and laying off ninety employees. She is concerned about the economic down turn and the impact it is having on facilities in the Basin.
WRITTEN REPORTS
All written reports were acknowledged by the Committee.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Mayor Yates announced that the next Stationary Source Committee meeting will be on January 22, 2009.
The meeting was adjourned at 12:00 p.m.
Attachments (DOC, 61k)
Attendance Roster