BOARD MEETING DATE: July 10, 2009
AGENDA NO. 32

REPORT:

Stationary Source Committee

SYNOPSIS:

The Stationary Source Committee met Friday, June 19, 2009.
Following is a summary of that meeting. The next meeting will be July 24, 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 10:00 a.m. Present were Dennis Yates, Dr. Joseph Lyou, Jane Carney, Josie Gonzales and Dr. Burke (attended by videoteconference). Absent were Ronald Loveridge and Michael Cacciotti.

ACTION ITEM

1. Approve Recommendation to Appoint Alternate to Home Rule Advisory Group

Dr. Elaine Chang, Deputy Executive Officer with Planning, Rule Development, and Area Sources, recommended the appointment of Dan McGivney as alternate to Lee Wallace, of the Home Rule Advisory Group, pursuant to the Board’s Advisory Council and Advisory Group’s Policy and Guidelines.

Moved (Lyou) seconded (Gonzales), and unanimously recommended for approval.

INFORMATIONAL ITEMS

2. Report on AERMOD Modeling Applications

Dr. Elaine Chang reported to the Committee about staff’s efforts to transition to U.S. EPA’s recommended dispersion model guideline, AERMOD. Meteorological data for AERMOD for the period 2005-2007 was developed by AQMD staff and their consultants and is now available on AQMD’s website. Staff has also evaluated the potential regulatory impacts of transitioning to AERMOD and using the 2005-2007 meteorological data. It was determined that there would be little to no effects to permitting in urban areas of the South Coast Air Basin; whereas, in the rural areas of the Basin, AERMOD tends to predict higher concentrations than the previous generation dispersion model, ISCST3. There were no public comments on this item.

As per Mayor Yates request, Agenda Items 3 and 4 were discussed out of order. Committee Member Jane Carney left the meeting for agenda item “2A” citing possible conflict of interest, as Loma Linda University and Creel Printing are sources of income for her.

3. Annual Status Report on Rule 1118 Flaring Events Implementation

Mohsen Nazemi, Deputy Executive Officer of Engineering & Compliance, reported that Rule 1118 was a two-phase rule with the first phase adopted in 1998 as a flare monitoring rule. Based on analysis of the data gathered in the first phase, the rule was amended in 2005 as the second phase to minimize the overall flaring, prohibit routine flaring and allow flare to operate only for emergency, startup, shutdown and other limited purposes. This report is part of the adopting resolution for Rule 1118 to provide an annual report to the Stationary Source Committee regarding overall industry performance and an update on the flare continuous monitoring implementation status.

An emission summary for the year 2008 was provided for the flares subject to this rule, including eight refineries and two hydrogen plants. Responding to Dr. Lyou’s question, Mr. Nazemi indicated that the vast majority of SOx emissions were due to unplanned flaring events, as demonstrated by the few examples in the presentation. Mr. Nazemi further reported that of the eight refineries, seven met their performance target for 2008, but one has been notified by AQMD that it has exceeded its 2008 target. AQMD staff was working with this refinery to resolve the issues. Four major flaring events were reviewed in details, including one at Chevron, two at Ultramar and one several-day long event at ExxonMobil.

An update was then given regarding the required continuous monitoring systems. Mr. Nazemi reported that the pilot projects conducted for total sulfur analyzers at BP and for higher heating value analyzers at Chevron were successfully completed in 2008. Based on the results and the compliance schedules established under variances approved by the Hearing Board, the refineries had placed purchase orders and some had started installation. According to the compliance schedules of the Variances, 70% of the flares (or 17 flares) would be in full compliance with the use of continuous monitors by the end of this year and the remaining 30% (7 flares) would be in compliance by the end of 2010. In response to a question from Committee Chair Mayor Yates, Mr. Nazemi indicated that although the three flares at ConocoPhillips Wilmington refinery could not comply with the rule in 2009, two of its flares would be in compliance during the first quarter of 2010. There were no public comments on this item.

4. Proposed SOx RECLAIM Amendments

Dr. Laki Tisopulos, Assistant Deputy Executive Office in Planning & Rules, updated the Committee on staff’s efforts to amend the SOx RECLAIM program. The focus of the presentation and discussion was on the technology assessment conducted by its consultants and their recommendations. On July 11, 2008, the Board approved a release of Request for Proposal (RFP) to obtain proposals from qualified contractors to conduct an engineering study. The study was intended to focus on existing commercially viable control technologies to further reduce SOx emissions from RECLAIM facilities to assist staff in identifying Best Available Retrofit Control Technologies (BARCT) to be implemented within the 2011-2014 time frame. The implementation of BARCT for SOx reductions would help the Basin attain the PM2.5 ambient air quality standards by the 2015 deadline. The consultants focused their studies on the 11 top facilities and 7 top categories of sources, including: fluidized catalytic cracking units, sulfur recovery units/tail gas, refinery boilers/heaters, sulfuric acid plants, coke calciner, glass melting furnace, and cement kilns & coal-fired boiler. The consultants recommended a total SOx emission reduction of 6.5 tons per day (2005 emissions), resulting in an RTC shave of about 70 percent. The weighted average cost effectiveness ranged from $15,000 to $17,000 per ton of SOx reduced with a control cost total present worth of $1.03 billion dollars.

A number of the Committee Members expressed concerns with regards to the total cost to reduce the total SOx emissions from this proposed amended rule. There were also concerns on the amount of time companies would need to secure the necessary capital for the various control equipment. During the public comment period on this item, other concerns were raised by Cal Portland Cement, WSPA and other refinery representatives (Gary Thornberry-Cal Portland Cement, Jodie Muller-WSPA, Stan Holm-Exxon Mobil, Miles Heller-BP, Rod Spackman-Chevron, Michael McDonough,-Bingham McCutchen) with regards to the consultants’ report including possible underestimated costs, vendor guarantees on some of the sources with no previous experience on the subject sources, and lack of information on other environmental impacts (e.g., increased water demand). Committee Members directed staff to closely examine the costs associated with this proposed amended rule. Staff did point out that this was just the start of the rulemaking process and that staff will be completing additional cost effectiveness and socioeconomic analysis for each part of the rule. However, it was also pointed out that the SOx reductions have a great value in meeting the PM2.5 ambient air quality standards and that meeting future standards may require even more reduction from all sectors.

Ms. Carney left the meeting at 11:50 a.m.

2A.     Rule 317 – Clean Air Act Non-Attainment Fees Status Report

Dr. Laki Tisopulos gave the staff presentation on this item. The item was added to the agenda per Dr. Lyou’s request, who is considering an alternative compliance option, in addition to the two options prepared by staff reflecting the Board’s direction in April 2009. The first of the two compliance options prepared by staff utilizes the attainment year emissions to determine a facility’s baseline emissions, while the second option mirrors the 2008 U.S. EPA guidance and would allow a facility to use the average emissions of its two consecutive highest years over the ten-year period prior to attainment year as its baseline emissions. Dr. Lyou alerted the Committee that he was considering an alternative similar to the second option drafted by staff that relied on the median rather than the highest average emissions from two consecutive years over the same ten-year period to establish a facility’s baseline. Staff presented the analysis requested by Dr. Lyou to compare his alternative to the two options prepared by staff, including a GIS map that depicted the distribution of the impacted facilities geographically. The GIS analysis revealed that 54 percent of the impacted facilities are located in EJ areas. Dr. Lyou asked for the population and area distribution between EJ and non-EJ areas of the Basin and staff committed to provide that information. During the public comment period, Mr. Bill LaMarr, Small Business Alliance, commented on the need for additional time to digest the proposal and asked staff to hold an additional stakeholders meeting prior to the public hearing in July.

WRITTEN REPORTS

All written reports were acknowledged by the Committee.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

There were no public comments.

Mayor Yates announced that the next Stationary Source Committee meeting will be on July 24, 2009.

The meeting was adjourned at 12:00 p.m.

Attachment (DOC, 72kb)

Attendance Roster