BOARD MEETING DATE: June 4, 2010 AGENDA NO. 28

BOARD MEETING DATE: June 4, 2010
AGENDA NO. 28

REPORT:

Stationary Source Committee

SYNOPSIS:

The Stationary Source Committee met Friday, May 21, 2010. Following is a summary of that meeting. The next meeting will be June 18, at 10:30 a.m., in Conference Room CC8.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Receive and file.

Dennis Yates, Chair,
Stationary Source Committee

Attendance

The meeting began at 10:35 a.m. Present were Dennis Yates, Ronald Loveridge (left at 11:00), Josie Gonzales and Bill Campbell (attended by VT, left at 11:30, returned at 12:00, left at 12:05). Absent were Jane Carney and Judith Mitchell.

INFORMATIONAL ITEMS

Rule 1420.1 – Emissions Standards for Lead from Lead-Acid Battery Recycling Facilities

Susan Nakamura, Planning and Rules Manager, gave a presentation on Proposed Rule 1420.1 (PR 1420.1). AQMD staff provided a summary of the background, proposed requirements, and schedule. Board Member Campbell asked if the new standard is achievable. Staff responded that of the two facilities affected by the proposed rule, one facility is close to achieving the new standard and it will be more difficult for the other facility. Mayor Yates asked about NOVs Exide had received and staff responded that Exide had received six NOVs in the past three years for exceedances. Mayor Yates asked where Exide was located (Vernon) and expressed concern for surrounding areas such as Maywood where residents are concerned about lead-contaminated water from the facility.

Angelo Logan, East Yard Communities, stated that they have had issues with Exide for over 10 years and said the rule should also deal with health effects to community members. Mr. Logan requested that the rulemaking schedule be delayed to allow additional time for community members to suggest mitigation measures for the proposed rule. Father John of Resurrection Church in Boyle Heights commented on the importance of the location of monitors. Mike Buckantz, RSR Corporation (Quemetco parent company), proposed that PR 1420.1 include a provision requiring affected facilities to fund installation and operation of four AQMD-operated monitors in the surrounding neighborhoods. In addition, RSR commented that the vehicle wet wash requirement is not needed because other housekeeping provisions will minimize track out of lead dust and vehicle wet washing will require a large amount of water. Mr. Buckantz also asked for additional time to review the proposed rule.

Boyle Heights community members requested notification of residents when facilities do major maintenance and lead cleanup to ensure that the public is notified and elderly and children can curtail outdoor activities. Jocelyn Vivar of East Yard Communities asked if PR1420.1 and the new lead standard applies to other lead-emitting facilities and staff responded they would be addressed by an amendment to Rule 1420. Board Member Gonzales is concerned lead dust may be blown and affects communities further away and the potential need for monitors farther away. Staff stated this is unlikely because lead particles are very dense and do not travel a long distance away from the source. Board Member Campbell asked about mass emissions versus control efficiency and staff answered that this was resolved by adding a mass emission alternative. He was concerned about being too prescriptive in the rule and asked why not just set the standard and let facilities submit a Compliance Plan showing how they will comply. Staff responded that a more prescriptive approach was taken to be more health protective. Lead accumulates in the body and is a neurotoxin with a variety of serious health effects. There is no safe level of lead. In addition, Rule 1420 relied on the compliance plan as the primary implementation tool. Both facilities had compliance issues under compliance plan approach. Mayor Yates asked staff to consider how to provide notifications and alerts to the community and to get data for the Board on health effects from lead near facilities.

Rule 1144 – Vanishing Oils and Rust Inhibitors

Naveen Berry, Planning & Rules Manager, presented a summary of the staff proposal. The status of the test method to determine VOC content was discussed. Mr. Berry indicated that, in response to industry’s request for a one-month delay to allow the completion of the ASTM International approval process, staff recommends delaying the hearing until July 9, 2010. Laki Tisopulos reiterated that this item was already delayed once from April to June in response to an industry request and that this is the second request for delay received from industry and the last one that staff will be supporting. Mike Pearce of W.S. Dodge Oil commented that industry supports delay of the rule because they were unaware of the 30 days review required by ASTM, however the method and rule would be better if approved by ASTM International. Dr. Katy Wolf of the Institute for Research and Technical Assistance supports the rule and commends staff for including evaluation of worker safety impacts. She would like the District to continue considering worker and consumer safety exposures in future regulations. Sam Wong of Nelson Nameplate said that his company has converted all of their products to non-VOCs, except for one machine, therefore, the exemption of DMC at his facility is necessary for just that one machine and they plan to install exhaust equipment to protect their workers. Mr. Berry addressed all the comments presented including affirmatively responding to Mayor Yates and Supervisor Gonzales that all parties now agree on the proposed test method.

Rule 1143 – Consumer Products & Multi-Purpose Solvents

Naveen Berry presented a summary on Proposed Amended Rule (PAR) 1143, summarizing that on April 1, 2010, the Los Angeles County Superior Court kept Rule 1143 in effect with the exception of the final VOC limit of 25 g/L for consumer paint thinners and multi-purpose solvents. Staff is proposing to rescind the 25 g/L VOC limit at the June 4, 2010 Governing Board meeting to comply with the judgment and readopt the 25 g/L VOC limit subsequent to addressing the CEQA-related issues raised by the Court at the July 9, 2010 Board meeting. The proposal also includes additional labeling and public outreach requirements to address the fire safety concerns, as well as other clarifications. Mike Hickock, the attorney representing W.M. Barr, commented on the need to minimize inconsistencies in PAR 1143 with the Consumer Products Regulation, and emphasized the need for a low vapor pressure exemption to comply with the final VOC limits without the use of acetone. Chairman Yates inquired about the specific low vapor pressure solvent under consideration. Mr. Hickock was not able to provide an example and, therefore, the Committee directed staff to consult with the California Air Resources Board staff and W.M. Barr on the specific low vapor pressure solvent(s) under consideration.

Rule 1110.2 – Emissions from Gaseous- and Liquid-Fueled Internal Combustion Engines

Joe Cassmassi, Planning & Rules Manager, briefly summarized the proposed amendment to Rule 1110.2 that would provide an exemption for the County of Riverside to install two diesel generators to power their communications center on Santa Rosa Peak at an elevation greater than 7,400 feet. There were no comments by Board Members or public on this item.