Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
December 17, 2013
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Air Quality Rule Changes and Updates
Overview |
Short summary
DEQ proposes changes to rules as a continuing effort to streamline, reorganize and update Oregon’s air quality permit programs to improve air quality with a more efficient and effective permitting program. Previous improvement efforts began with the Environmental Quality Commission’s adoption of Revisions to Point Source Air Management Rules in 2001 and Air Quality Permit Program Streamlining and Updates in 2007.
DEQ proposes changes to statewide particulate matter standards and the pre-construction permitting program that would align with EPA’s adoption of the ambient air quality standard for fine particulates, commonly called“PM2.5,” and respond to problems identified with Oregon’s permitting program that must be addressed to protect air quality. Along with these changes, DEQ proposes additional pre-construction permitting flexibility for smaller businesses.
To improve community outreach, DEQ proposes rules to allow the use of technological advances when holding public hearings and meetings.
DEQ proposes minor changes to the Heat Smart program and the gasoline dispensing facility program to improve implementation.
This notice organizes and describes the proposed rules under the following nine main categories:
1. Clarify and update air quality regulations
2. Update particulate matter emission standards
3. Change permitting requirements for emergency generators and small natural gas or oil-fired equipment
4. Establish two new state air quality area designations – “sustainment” and “reattainment” – to help areas avoid and more quickly end a federal nonattainment designation
5. Identify Lakeview as a state sustainment area while retaining its federal attainment designation
6. Change the pre-construction permitting program (also called the New Source Review)
7. Provide more flexibility for public hearings and meetings
8. Reestablish Heat Smart exemption for small commercial solid fuel boilers that are regulated by the permitting program
9. Remove annual reporting requirements for small gas stations
Brief history
Below is a brief history for each of the nine main categories of proposed rules.
1. Clarify and update air quality regulations
After years of rulemakings and updates, Oregon’s air quality rules need to be reorganized. Multiple definitions for the same term, missing details, obsolete or outdated rules and rules that do not align with EPA rules cause confusion and create an ongoing need to clarify and make corrections.
2. Update particulate matter emission standards
Like many other states, Oregon adopted statewide particulate matter standards in 1970 that included less protective standards for “grandfathered” businesses that were operating at that time. With changes in ambient air quality standards over the years, the statewide standards for grandfathered businesses no longer protect air quality. Therefore, DEQ proposes to phase-in a transition for the few remaining grandfathered businesses that have not already upgraded to the standard that applies to businesses built since 1970. The proposal includes flexible options and potential extensions to minimize costs, ensure that no biomass boilers would need to be converted to fossil fuel, and assist affected businesses with the transition. DEQ also proposes changes to the compliance demonstration method used for the visual standard.
3. Change permitting requirements for emergency generators and small natural gas or oil-fired equipment
EPA recently adopted National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines. That adoption added requirements for emergency generators that are currently exempt from permitting in Oregon because DEQ thought they had insignificant emissions. Similarly, small gas and oil-fired equipment are exempt from permitting, although the emissions from groups of this equipment can be significant in the aggregate. The proposal would require permits for these types of sources.
4. Establish two new state air quality area designations – “sustainment” and “reattainment” – to help areas avoid and more quickly end a federal nonattainment designation
Areas that violate federal air quality standards are designed by EPA as “nonattainment” areas, while all other areas are designated as “attainment” or “unclassifiable” areas. Under current Oregon law, former nonattainment areas that are reclassified by EPA to attainment are designated as “maintenance” areas under state law to ensure that they avoid future violations. DEQ proposes to add two new state-only classifications – “sustainment” and “reattainment” areas. Based on DEQ recommendations and public comment, EQC would designate specific areas of the state as sustainment or reattainment based on a local air quality analysis. DEQ would recommend a state sustainment area designation for a federal attainment area that is approaching or over federal air quality standards but is not yet designated as nonattainment by EPA. DEQ would recommend a state reattainment area designation for a federal nonattainment area that is meeting air quality standards but has not yet been redesignated to attainment by EPA. These designations would provide communities and businesses with additional tools and incentives to improve air quality.
5. Identify Lakeview as a state sustainment area while retaining its federal attainment designation
Air quality in Lakeview currently exceeds the ambient air quality standards for fine particulates. However, EPA has not yet designated Lakeview as a nonattainment area. This makes it nearly impossible for industrial business to build or expand in the Lakeview area because permitting provisions for areas that violate federal air quality standards are not available in attainment areas. However, designating Lakeview as a nonattainment area would preclude the community’s active voluntary efforts to meet federal air quality standards under the “PM Advance” program. Designating Lakeview as a state sustainment area would retain the benefits of a federal attainment designation while providing Lakeview with new tools to improve ambient air quality and more flexible permitting requirements.
6. Change the pre-construction permitting program (also called New Source Review)
DEQ proposes changes to the New Source Review program to improve air quality in all areas of the state, especially those that are close to or exceed ambient air quality standards. The proposed rules would clarify permitting requirements, provide more opportunities for businesses to reduce pollution and make it possible for construction projects to demonstrate air quality improvements attributable to the project. The proposal would separate NSR requirements for sources above and below the federal major source threshold and would establish NSR requirements for the proposed new sustainment and reattainment area designations.
7. Provide more flexibility for public hearings and meetings
DEQ is committed to public engagement and staying up-to-date with emerging and innovative ways to reach people and hold hearings. This proposal would make it easier and cheaper for people to participate. Current rules require DEQ to hold informational meetings on the most complex permit actions and public hearings when requested. The requirements are very prescriptive and in some cases, do not allow DEQ to use technology such as the internet to hold “virtual” meetings.
8. Reestablish Heat Smart exemption for small commercial solid fuel boilers that are regulated by the permitting program
DEQ proposes to revise rules for residential wood heating that inadvertently prevent small commercial biomass boilers from being sold in Oregon. DEQ’s Heat Smart program requires biomass and other solid fuel burning devices that have heat output less than 1 million Btu per hour to meet certification requirements. The existing rules exempt small biomass boilers from certification requirements if they are subject to federal national Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. However, EPA revised its rules in 2012 to exempt small biomass boilers from these standards. These proposed rules reestablish the Heat Smart exemption for small commercial biomass boilers that are regulated through the construction approval and permit programs.
9. Remove annual reporting requirements for small gas stations
DEQ proposes repealing the annual reporting requirement for small gasoline dispensing facilities after finding it unnecessary to ensure compliance with emission standards that prevent leaks and spills.
Regulated parties
The proposed rules affect all businesses, agencies, and local governments with air quality permits.
Statement of need |
Proposed Rule or Topic | Discussion |
1. Clarify and update air quality regulations | |
What problem is DEQ trying to solve?
| a. Air quality rules lack clarity because some important details are missing. This creates problems implementing the air quality program. An example of missing details is the identification of specific compliance methods for determining compliance with an emission standard. b. Procedures included in definitions rather than specific rules cause confusion. Examples of procedures included in definitions are those for determining a major modification, actual emissions and netting basis. c. Different definitions for the same term and definitions located in multiple divisions makes it difficult to find a definition or know which definition applies. d. Separate tables containing numbers are difficult to find. e. Some industries no longer operate in Oregon and there is no longer a need for rules specific to these industries. f. Some DEQ rules no longer align with more stringent EPA standards . g. DEQ last updated the Source Sampling Manual and Continuous Monitoring Manual in 1992. Portions of the manuals are no longer current. |
How would the proposed rule solve the problem? | a. The proposed rules would clarify and update the air quality rules. DEQ proposes to: a. Include missing compliance methods with all standards to make sure businesses know how to comply with the standards. b. Remove procedures from definitions and instead add the procedures to a procedural rule. For example, the procedure for how actual emissions are determined is contained in definitions. DEQ proposes to move this to a procedural rule. c. Move all common definitions to division 200, General Air Pollution Procedures and Definitions. Provide only one definition per term; and add definitions for undefined terms such as “control efficiency”, “internal combustion source” and “removal efficiency.” d. Move tables containing numbers into the text whenever possible to make the information easier to find, such as: significant emission rates, de minimis levels, generic Plant Site Emission Limits, significant impact levels and PSD increments. e. Repeal rules for the following specific types of businesses that no longer exist in Oregon: • Neutral Sulfite Semi-Chemical Pulp Mills • Sulfite Pulp Mills • Primary Aluminum Standards • Laterite Ore Production of Ferronickel • Charcoal Producing Plants If one of these types of businesses wants to build in Oregon, they would be permitted under the more stringent federal requirements for new sources already incorporated into Oregon’s rules.
f. The proposal would repeal the following rules made unnecessary by adoption of other federal or state standards: • EPA adopted national rules that apply to manufacturers of consumer spray paint. Therefore, DEQ proposes to repeal the incompatible state rules. The federal rules will continue to reduce ozone from consumer products. • DEQ worked with the western states on a general sulfur dioxide trading program to address regional haze. The trading program is no longer needed because Oregon subsequently adopted individual emission limits based on Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) requirements to directly reduce haze-causing emissions sources like the PGE Boardman plant. • EPA’s rules for commercial and industrial solid waste incineration require forced-air pit or air curtain incinerators to have Title V air quality permits. Therefore, open burning rules are no longer needed to regulate emissions from forced-air pit or air curtain incinerators.
g. DEQ’s Source Sampling Manual and Continuous Monitoring Manual were last adopted in 1992. The proposal would adopt updates to the manuals that incorporate revised EPA methods for fine particulate standards and other changes to sampling and monitoring methods made since 1992. |
2. Update particulate matter emission standards | |
What problem is DEQ trying to solve? | Emissions from grandfathered businesses that are subject to particulate matter standards for sources built before 1970 can harm public health and create barriers to economic development. Work on the Klamath Falls fine particulate attainment plan showed that impacts from a single grandfathered business could “consume” up to 70 percent of the available airshed when considering background concentrations. DEQ found similar results when analyzing emissions from a grandfathered business near Mill City and Lakeview. Routine exposure to air pollution at these levels can cause significant health impacts to sensitive individuals. In addition to the risk to public health, emissions from the grandfathered businesses can interfere with economic development. If a single business consumes the majority of the airshed that is available in an area, other businesses may not be able to expand and new businesses may not be able to come into the area.
DEQ relies on two types of general standards to control emissions from permitted sources of particulate matter (e.g. dust or smoke). One type of standard sets concentration-based (mass per unit of volume) emission limits. A second type of standard is referred to as a visible emissions standard that limits the maximum visual density – or opacity – of a plume. The rules include different particulate concentration and opacity standards for units installed before or after 1970: • Pre-1970 unit: 0.2 grain/dry standard cubic foot (gr/dscf) and 40 percent opacity • Post 1970 unit: 0.1 gr/dscf and 20 percent opacity
These statewide particulate matter standards were adopted in the early 1970’s as part of Oregon’s initial State Implementation Plan. Since that time, health researchers have concluded that exposure to particulate pollution is more harmful than previously thought. As a result, EPA has lowered the ambient air quality standard for particulates and established separate standards for coarse and fine particulates. With the adoption of the fine particulate ambient air quality standard in 2011, Oregon now has two areas that are designated nonattainment for fine particulate (Klamath Falls and Oakridge), one additional area that violates the standard (Lakeview) and numerous areas that are just below the standard.
The proposed changes in the statewide particulate matter standards are intended to help prevent additional violations of the fine particulate standard in the future. Once an area is designated as nonattainment by EPA, DEQ and the local government are required to adopt an attainment plan. Attainment plans for fine particulate nonattainment areas typically includes stringent regulations to reduce emissions from existing and new industry as well as residences and commercial establishments. Reducing emissions from grandfathered businesses before areas exceed ambient air quality standards and are designated nonattainment helps avoid the costs of developing and implementing attainment plans, including severe restrictions for businesses that want to build or expand in these areas.
The proposal is also intended to ensure that Oregon’s particulate standards are consistent with current EPA policy for significant figures when determining compliance with standards. Oregon’s current standards have only one significant figure (e.g., 0.1 gr/dscf) whereas EPA expects all standards to have two significant figures (e.g., 0.10 gr/dscf) when comparing measured emissions data to the standards.
The proposal is further intended to ensure that Oregon businesses use a reliable method to measure compliance with the statewide opacity standard that is consistent with the method used by EPA and other states. When Oregon first adopted the opacity standard, it was based on an aggregate of three minutes in a 60-minute period. However, Oregon never developed a reference test method for the 3-minute aggregate limit. Not having a reference method for showing compliance makes a standard both difficult to comply with and difficult to enforce. As a workaround to show compliance with this standard, Oregon businesses have had to use a modified EPA Method 9 based on a 6-minute block average to read opacity.
In addition to addressing problems with the statewide opacity standard, the proposal is intended to address similar problems with a local opacity standard that applies in the Portland area. Current rules for the four-county area around Portland include a 20 percent opacity standard that is an aggregate of 30 seconds in a 60-minute period for non-fuel burning equipment such as material handling equipment. However, just like the statewide standard, Oregon never developed a reference method for the 30-second aggregate limit. As stated above, the lack of a compliance method makes it difficult to comply with or enforce emissions standards.
There is also a problem with trying to read opacity from fugitive emission sources. Fugitive particulate matter emissions are not emitted from a stack and typically originate from storage piles, material conveying systems, unpaved roads or other dusty activities. In many situations, it is possible to take opacity readings to determine if the emitting source exceeded the opacity standard and to then require action to abate the emissions. However, in other situations opacity readings are difficult to take or the emissions do not exceed the opacity standard but are nevertheless objectionable. Therefore, DEQ needs a different method for addressing opacity from fugitive emission sources. |
How would the proposed rule solve the problem? | The proposed changes to existing rules would improve and maintain air quality and facilitate economic development.
The proposed changes would: • Reduce the particulate matter emissions from pre-1970 grandfathered units. • Align the particulate matter standard with EPA policy on determining compliance. • Practically increase compliance and enforceability of the opacity standard by aligning it with the reference compliance method. • Require abatement of any visible fugitive emissions that leave a business's property, regardless of the actual opacity level
The proposed rulemaking changes would affect both the statewide particulate matter and opacity standards for grandfathered units built before June 1970 by phasing in a requirement for these businesses to meet the same standards as post-1970 units. The proposal would allow businesses a six year transition period with an opportunity for additional extensions if necessary. The proposal ensures that no business would be required to replace a boiler by providing an option to install or upgrade basic emission control equipment in lieu of meeting the revised standards.
To align the particulate matter standard with EPA’s policy that standards have 2 significant figures, DEQ is proposing to change the standard from 0.1 gr/dscf to 0.10 gr/dscf. This prevents rounding that currently allows compliance with emissions up to 150% of standard.
Businesses would have until April 1, 2019 to comply with both the lower opacity standard and the lower particulate matter standard. This six-year compliance schedule is intended to allow businesses time to design and implement the most cost-effective option for meeting the revised standards. As noted above, the proposal would also allow businesses to apply for an extension if needed.
The proposed rules would to change all opacity standards (both statewide and industry specific) to a 6-minute block average, consistent with other states in the region and EPA opacity standards. DEQ does not expect this to change the overall stringency of the standards.
The proposal would repeal the Portland-area four-county 20 percent opacity standard, so that non-fuel burning equipment in this area would be subject to the statewide opacity standard. This would solve the problems of limited applicability and unenforceability.
The proposal would require businesses to take reasonable precautions to prevent fugitive emissions and to develop and implement a fugitive emissions control plan upon request by DEQ to prevent visible emissions from leaving the property. This is a simpler, more comprehensive and more effective approach to controlling these emissions that the current approach, which requires DEQ to make a nuisance determination outside of special control areas. Compliance would be determined using EPA Method 22, Visual Determination of Fugitive Emissions from Material Sources and Smoke Emissions from Flares. Method 22 is specific for fugitive sources and would be a much better method for determining compliance than the method currently used (EPA Method 9). |
3. Change permitting for emergency generators and small natural gas or oil-fired equipment | |
What problem is DEQ trying to solve? | When Oregon established the Title V permitting program in 1993, DEQ developed a list of insignificant activities to account for all emissions in Title V permits as required by federal law. This list was called “categorically insignificant activities” and includes examples like: • Janitorial activities • Groundskeeping activities • Emergency generators
Businesses indicate they have the categorically insignificant activities onsite in their permit applications, but these activities are exempt from rigorous monitoring requirements.
EPA has since adopted new emission standards for emergency generators which should be specifically addressed in permits. DEQ also discovered that small fuel burning equipment, which is currently listed as categorically insignificant because each unit has low emissions, can have significant emissions in the aggregate if a business has multiple units. For example, DEQ identified one business that has about 8 small boilers that together have significant potential emissions of approximately 12 tons per year of nitrogen oxides. |
How would the proposed rule solve the problem? | The proposal would remove emergency generators and small natural gas or oil-fired equipment from the list of categorically insignificant activities if those units are above size thresholds that are subject to emission limits or if their emissions in the aggregate are greater than de minimis levels. For businesses with an existing permit, these activities would be added to the permit. In cases where emissions from these activities exceed permitting thresholds, a business could need a permit for these activities alone. If the aggregate emissions are less than permitting thresholds, the owner/operator may only need to obtain pre-construction approval from DEQ when installing new units. |
4. Establish two new state air quality area designations – “sustainment” and “reattainment” - to help areas avoid and more quickly end a federal nonattainment designation | |
What problem is DEQ trying to solve? | Areas that violate federal ambient air quality standards are designed by EPA as “nonattainment” areas, while all other areas are designated as “attainment” or “unclassifiable” areas. Under current Oregon law, former nonattainment areas that are reclassified by EPA to attainment are designated as “maintenance” areas under state law to ensure that they avoid future violations. However, there are gaps in this designation system that can create disincentives to improve air quality and unnecessary impediments to economic development.
One gap is for attainment areas in which the air quality is close to or above the federal ambient air quality standard. While air pollution in these areas can cause health effects, there is no process to implement prevention planning to avoid a federal nonattainment designation. The air pollution levels also make it difficult or impossible for new and expanding industrial facilities to demonstrate that their added emissions will not cause air quality violations, and the attainment area permitting rules do not include provisions for these businesses to offset their emission increases by reducing emissions from existing sources in the area. Designating these areas as nonattainment may be appropriate in some cases, but in other cases a nonattainment designation could interfere with more effective local efforts to improve air quality by imposing prescriptive federal requirements and timelines.
A second gap is for nonattainment areas that have met federal ambient air quality standards by implementing an approved attainment plan. For these areas to be designated as federal attainment areas and state maintenance areas, DEQ must develop and EPA must approve a long-term air quality maintenance plan. In developing the maintenance plan, DEQ may determine that some elements of the attainment plan are no longer required to maintain air quality. However, until the area is redesignated to attainment by EPA – a process that can take years – all of the elements of the attainment plan must continue to be implemented. |
How would the proposed rule solve the problem? | DEQ proposes to add two new state-only classifications to fill the gaps in the current classification system – “sustainment” and “reattainment” areas. These classifications would provide communities and businesses with additional tools and incentives to improve air quality.
Based on a local air quality analysis, DEQ recommendations and public comment, EQC would designate specific areas of the state as sustainment or reattainment. DEQ would recommend a state sustainment area designation for a federal attainment area that is approaching or over federal air quality standards but is not yet designated as nonattainment by EPA. DEQ would recommend a state reattainment area designation for a federal nonattainment area that is meeting air quality standards but has not yet been redesignated to attainment by EPA.
Sustainment areas:
DEQ would work with the local community to determine if a state sustainment designation would be the best approach to improve air quality and prevent a nonattainment designation. DEQ would identify potential sustainment areas based on an air quality analysis that may include monitoring, development of an emission inventory, and air quality modeling. The analysis would identify the air pollution sources that primarily contribute to public health concerns, and a boundary for the potential sustainment area. DEQ would then propose the sustainment designation for public comment through the rulemaking process.
An area designated as sustainment by the EQC would remain a federal attainment area. DEQ, working closely with the local community, would develop and implement a sustainment plan to improve air quality and prevent a nonattainment designation. Within a sustainment area, new and modified facilities would receive incentives to obtain emission offsets from the existing air pollution sources identified as part of the sustainment area designation as the primary cause of degraded air quality (see section 6 below).
Reattainment areas:
DEQ would propose a state reattainment designation for a federal nonattainment area with an approved attainment plan in which air quality is reliably meeting the federal ambient air quality standard. The potential for a reattainment area designation would create an incentive for a community to improve air quality as quickly as possible. The boundary for the reattainment area would be the same as the nonattainment area boundary.
An area designated as reattainment by the EQC would remain a federal nonattainment area, and all elements of its attainment plan would continue to apply until EPA approves a maintenance plan and redesignates the area to attainment. However, within the reattainment area, new and modified facilities that fall below the federal major source threshold would be subject to less stringent requirements provided they were not identified as a primary cause of air quality violations in the attainment plan (see section 6 below). |
5. Identify Lakeview as a state sustainment area while retaining its federal attainment designation | |
What problem is DEQ trying to solve? | The air quality in Lakeview is currently violating the PM2.5 ambient air quality standard although the area has not yet been designated by EPA as nonattainment. This is because DEQ did not have the required three years of monitoring data to determine if the area was violating the federal standards at the time designations were last required. The community is voluntarily participating in EPA’s “PM Advance” program to develop an air quality improvement and prevention plan. Local officials hope to quickly bring the area back into attainment with the standard to avoid a federal nonattainment designation and the resulting impacts on costs for businesses seeking to locate there. DEQ is assisting the community with technical analysis and administrative support for the PM Advance planning process.
However, Lakeview’s status as violating the federal air quality standard without a nonattainment designation has created problems in permitting new and modified facilities. The construction approval process for attainment and unclassified areas includes an analysis that a new or expanding major source will not cause or contribute to a violation of air quality standards. However, this test is not possible to meet for an area that already violates the standards. This, in effect, prevents DEQ from approving construction permits for new and expanding facilities in Lakeview. |
How would the proposed rule solve the problem? | The proposed rules would designate Lakeview as a state sustainment area, which is a new area classification proposed to be created as part of this rulemaking (see section 4 above). While Lakeview would retain its federal designation as an attainment area, a state designation of sustainment would help the community in its efforts to improve air quality and avoid a federal nonattainment designation.
The PM Advance plan currently being developed would serve as the prevention plan required by the sustainment area designation. New and expanding businesses that fall below the federal major source threshold of 250 tons/year of particulate matter would be able to be permitted by obtaining offsets (see section 6 below). The offset requirement would be lowered for businesses that obtain offsets from residential wood heating, which is the primary cause of air quality violations in Lakeview.
DEQ’s technical analysis to identify the boundary and primary sources of air pollution in the proposed sustainment area are included in Attachment X. |
6. Change the pre-construction permitting program (New Source Review) | |
What problem is DEQ trying to solve? | New Source Review is a federally-required preconstruction program that ensures new or modified facilities install the latest control technologies and do not have adverse impacts on ambient air quality standards. The Prevention of Significant Deterioration portion of the New Source Review program is designed to prevent degradation of air quality in areas that meet federal air quality standards. The nonattainment New Source Review Program is designed to improve the air quality in designated nonattainment areas that violate air quality standards.
One problem with the current NSR program is that that the rules do not distinguish between requirements for facilities that emit more than the federal major source threshold and those that emit less. Federal law requires states to have both a major NSR program and a minor NSR program. The requirements for the major NSR program are very prescriptive, but states have more flexibility in designing the minor NSR program so long as the state demonstrates that it will protect air quality. In Oregon, the requirements for minor and major NSR are the same, which limits DEQ’s ability to use the minor NSR program in the most effective way to protect air quality while enabling economic development.
A second problem with the current NSR program has to do with the test DEQ uses to determine if a major new or modified facility will improve air quality in or near a nonattainment or maintenance area. These businesses are required to reduce emissions from other existing businesses, and demonstrate that the emission increases and reductions together result in a net air quality benefit. The current criteria for determining if the project results in a net air quality benefit are impossible to meet unless the increasing and offsetting businesses are co-located. This prevents other potentially more beneficial local air pollution reduction projects from occurring and creates an unnecessary construction ban.
A third problem with the current NSR program is that there are no criteria for approving or denying extensions of a construction permit if construction is delayed. In some cases, construction may be delayed for good cause, but air quality requirements may have changed since the original construction permit was approved. |
How would the proposed rule solve the problem? | The proposed rules would distinguish requirements for new and proposed facilities that are above the federal major source threshold from requirements for those facilities below the federal major source threshold. To do this, the amendments would change the definition of a major source to match EPA’s definition and establish a minor NSR program for smaller businesses called ‘State New Source Review.’ The NSR requirements for smaller businesses would be tailored to the air quality needs of an area in ways that cannot be applied to larger businesses because of EPA requirements.
The proposal would update major NSR requirements and establish minor NSR requirements for attainment, nonattainment and maintenance areas. The proposal would also establish NSR requirements for the two new proposed area classifications, sustainment and reattainment areas.
The rule amendments would establish a new process for companies proposing a new or modified facility in or near a nonattainment, sustainment or maintenance area to demonstrate that the proposal together with offsetting emission reductions would create a net air quality benefit. The current process, based solely on air quality modeling, would be replaced by a system that requires emissions offsets to be greater than emissions increases together with a simplified modeling demonstration. The ratio of emission reductions to emission increases would depend on the area classification and whether the proposed emission increase is above or below the federal major source threshold.
The proposed rules would provide incentives for new or modified businesses to help address ambient air quality problems. The incentive would reduce the emission offset ratio if the reductions were obtained from priority sources – the sources that primarily cause the air quality problem in the local area. Finally, the proposal would clarify how a business may get an extension for their New Source Review permit if construction is delayed. Current rules allow extensions if there is simply good cause. The rules do not specify the criteria for approving extensions or the number of extensions allowed. Potential projects delayed without additional review could tie up their designated portion of the airshed indefinitely, cause significant impacts on air quality and result in the installation of less effective control technology. The proposed rules provide for two 18-month extensions, as well as procedures for requesting extensions and approving extensions. |
7. Provide more flexibility for public hearings and meetings | |
What problem is DEQ trying to solve? | The existing rules are very prescriptive regarding how public hearings and meetings must be held. The rules were first adopted in 1974, long before the technological advances that are currently available. Traveling to hearings and meetings around the state can be resource intensive and wasteful if no one shows up for the hearing or meeting. |
How would the proposed rule solve the problem? | The proposed rules would make it easier and cheaper for people to participate in public hearings and meetings by removing the prescriptive language from the rules. DEQ is committed to public engagement and is looking for new and innovative ways to reach people and hold hearings, including teleconferences, video conferences and webinars. |
8. Reestablish Heat Smart exemption for small commercial solid fuel boilers that are regulated by the permitting program | |
What problem is DEQ trying to solve? | DEQ’s existing rules exempt small biomass boilers from the Heat Smart program if they are subject to national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants. The Heat Smart Program is intended to ensure that commercial and residential wood stoves and other wood heating devices meet certification standards, which were not designed to apply to biomass boilers. However, EPA recently exempted small biomass boilers from the national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants, which inadvertently subjected these devices to the Heat Smart rules. This, in effect, prevents small commercial biomass boilers with heat output less than 1 million Btu per hour from being sold in Oregon. |
How would the proposed rule solve the problem? | The proposed rule changes would provide a pathway for small scale commercial biomass boilers to be sold in Oregon again, while ensuring they are still subject to existing state limits on particulate matter and opacity. This proposal would eliminate the reference to the federal regulations and allow these boilers (those with a heat output less than 1 million Btu per hour) to be sold in Oregon. |
9. Remove annual reporting requirements for small gas stations | |
What problem is DEQ trying to solve? | A gasoline dispensing facility with a monthly throughput of less than 10,000 gallons of gasoline is currently required to: • Meet work practice standards • Have a submerged fill tube installed on the facility’s tank(s) • Submit a one-time initial notification and notification of compliance status and submit annual reports of throughput These facilities are not required to have an air quality permit. DEQ collected one time data on throughput data from these facilities and may request additional information if needed. Therefore, DEQ determined the annual reporting requirement for these small gasoline dispensing facilities is unnecessary. |
How would the proposed rule solve the problem? | The proposed rules address this by removing the annual reporting requirement for facilities with monthly throughput less than 10,000 gallons. As mentioned above, DEQ would still have the authority to request throughput information from these facilities. DEQ will request this information as needed for businesses close to the 10,000 gallon permitting threshold. |
How will DEQ know the problem has been solved?
For all of nine categories in the table above, DEQ would submit the rules to EPA to update Oregon’s State Implementation Plan if adopted by the EQC after consideration of public comments. DEQ would know the goals of this rulemaking have been addressed when EPA reviews and approves the State Implementation Plan revision.
Request for other options
During the public comment period, DEQ requests public comment on whether to consider other options for achieving the substantive goals of the proposed rules while reducing any negative economic impact of the rules on business.
Rules affected, authorities, supporting documents |
Adopt OAR:
340-200-0035, 340-202-0225, 340-204-0300, 340-204-0310, 340-204-0320, 340-222-0046, 340-222-0048, 340-222-0051, 340-224-0025, 340-224-0045, 340-224-0055, 340-224-0200, 340-224-0210, 340-224-0245, 340-224-0250, 340-224-0255, 340-224-0260, 340-224-0270, 340-224-0500, 340-224-0510, 340-224-0540, 340-224-0550, 340-234-0540, 340-240-0050
Amend OAR:
340-200-0010, 340-200-0020, 340-200-0025, 340-200-0030, 340-200-0040, 340-202-0010, 340-202-0050, 340-202-0110, 340-202-0200, 340-202-0210, 340-204-0010, 340-204-0020, 340-204-0030, 340-204-0060, 340-204-0090, 340-206-0010, 340-206-0020, 340-206-0030, 340-206-0040, 340-206-0050, 340-206-0060, 340-206-0070, 340-208-0010, 340-208-0110, 340-208-0210, 340-208-0300, 340-208-0310, 340-208-0320, 340-208-0450, 340-208-0610, 340-209-0010, 340-209-0020, 340-209-0030, 340-209-0040, 340-209-0050, 340-209-0060, 340-209-0070, 340-209-0080, 340-210-0010, 340-210-0020, 340-210-0100, 340-210-0110, 340-210-0120, 340-210-0205, 340-210-0215, 340-210-0225, 340-210-0230, 340-210-0240, 340-210-0250, 340-212-0010, 340-212-0120, 340-212-0130, 340-212-0140, 340-212-0150, 340-212-0200, 340-212-0210, 340-212-0220, 340-212-0230, 340-212-0240, 340-212-0250, 340-212-0260, 340-212-0270, 340-212-0280, 340-214-0010, 340-214-0110, 340-214-0114, 340-214-0130, 340-214-0200, 340-214-0210, 340-214-0220, 340-214-0300, 340-214-0310, 340-214-0320, 340-214-0330, 340-214-0340, 340-214-0350, 340-214-0360, 340-216-0020, 340-216-0025, 340-216-0030, 340-216-0040, 340-216-0052, 340-216-0054, 340-216-0056, 340-216-0060, 340-216-0062, 340-216-0064, 340-216-0066, 340-216-0068, 340-216-0070, 340-216-0082, 340-216-0084, 340-216-0090, 340-216-0094, 340-218-0010, 340-218-0020, 340-218-0030, 340-218-0040, 340-218-0050, 340-218-0060, 340-218-0070, 340-218-0080, 340-218-0090, 340-218-0100, 340-218-0110, 340-218-0120, 340-218-0140, 340-218-0150, 340-218-0160, 340-218-0170, 340-218-0190, 340-218-0200, 340-218-0210, 340-218-0220, 340-218-0230, 340-218-0240, 340-218-0250, 340-220-0010, 340-220-0020, 340-220-0030, 340-220-0040, 340-220-0050, 340-220-0060, 340-220-0070, 340-220-0080, 340-220-0090, 340-220-0100, 340-220-0110, 340-220-0120, 340-220-0130, 340-220-0170, 340-220-0180, 340-220-0190, 340-222-0010, 340-222-0020, 340-222-0030, 340-222-0040, 340-222-0041, 340-222-0042, 340-222-0060, 340-222-0080, 340-222-0090, 340-224-0010, 340-224-0020, 340-224-0030, 340-224-0040, 340-224-0050, 340-224-0060, 340-224-0070, 340-225-0010, 340-225-0020, 340-225-0030, 340-225-0040, 340-225-0045, 340-225-0050, 340-225-0060, 340-225-0070, 340-226-0010, 340-226-0100, 340-226-0120, 340-226-0130, 340-226-0140, 340-226-0210, 340-226-0310, 340-226-0320, 340-226-0400, 340-228-0020, 340-228-0120, 340-228-0130, 340-228-0200, 340-228-0210, 340-228-0300, 340-232-0010, 340-232-0020, 340-232-0030, 340-232-0040, 340-232-0060, 340-232-0080, 340-232-0085, 340-232-0090, 340-232-0100, 340-232-0110, 340-232-0140, 340-232-0150, 340-232-0160, 340-232-0170, 340-232-0180, 340-232-0190, 340-232-0200, 340-232-0220, 340-232-0230, 340-234-0010, 340-234-0200, 340-234-0210, 340-234-0220, 340-234-0240, 340-234-0250, 340-234-0270, 340-234-0500, 340-234-0510, 340-234-0520, 340-234-0530, 340-236-0010, 340-236-0310, 340-236-0320, 340-236-0330, 340-236-0410, 340-236-0420, 340-236-0440, 340-236-0500, 340-240-0030, 340-240-0110, 340-240-0120, 340-240-0130, 340-240-0140, 340-240-0160, 340-240-0180, 340-240-0210, 340-240-0220, 340-240-0250, 340-240-0320, 340-240-0330, 340-240-0350, 340-240-0360, 340-240-0410, 340-240-0420, 340-240-0430, 340-240-0510, 340-240-0550, 340-240-0560, 340-240-0610, 340-242-0400, 340-242-0410, 340-242-0420, 340-242-0430, 340-242-0440, 340-242-0510, 340-242-0520, 340-242-0610, 340-242-0620, 340-242-0630, 340-244-0232, 340-244-0234, 340-244-0236, 340-244-0238, 340-244-0239, 340-244-0240, 340-244-0242, 340-244-0244, 340-244-0246, 340-244-0248, 340-244-0250, 340-244-0252, 340-262-0450, 340-264-0010, 340-264-0030, 340-264-0040, 340-264-0050, 340-264-0060, 340-264-0070, 340-264-0075, 340-264-0078, 340-264-0110, 340-264-0120, 340-264-0130, 340-264-0140, 340-264-0160, 340-264-0170, 340-264-0180, 340-268-0030
Renumber OAR:
Current OAR 340-222-0070 renumbered to 340-222-0035(5) and (6)
Amend and renumber OAR:
current OAR 340-216-0020 Table 1 amended and renumbered to 340-216-8005;
current OAR 340-216-0020 Table 2 amended and renumbered to 340-216-8010;
current OAR 340-222-0043 amended and renumbered to 340-222-0035;
current OAR 340-222-0045 amended and renumbered to 340-222-0055;
current OAR 340-224-0080 amended and renumbered to 340-224-0034;
current OAR 340-224-0100 amended and renumbered to 340-224-0038;
current OAR 340-225-0090 amended and renumbered to 340-224-0060, 340-224-0510,
340-224-0520, 340-224-0540, 340-224-0550;
current OAR 340-226-0310 Table 1 amended and renumbered to 340-226-8005;
Repeal OAR:
340-208-0100, 340-208-0200, 340-208-0600, 340-209-0070, 340-214-0400, 340-214-0410, 340-214-0420, 340-214-0430, 340-228-0400, 340-228-0410, 340-228-0420, 340-228-0430, 340-228-0440, 340-228-0450, 340-228-0460, 340-228-0470, 340-228-0480, 340-228-0490, 340-228-0500, 340-228-0510, 340-228-0520, 340-228-0530, 340-234-0300, 340-234-0310, 340-234-0320, 340-234-0330, 340-234-0340, 340-234-0350, 340-234-0360, 340-234-0400, 340-234-0410, 340-234-0420, 340-234-0430, 340-236-0100, 340-236-0110, 340-236-0120, 340-236-0130, 340-236-0140, 340-236-0150, 340-236-0200, 340-236-0210, 340-236-0220, 340-236-0230, 340-236-0430, 340-240-0170, 340-240-0230, 340-240-0310, 340-242-0700, 340-242-0710, 340-242-0720, 340-242-0730, 340-242-0740, 340-242-0750, 340-242-0760, 340-242-0770, 340-242-0780, 340-242-0790, 340-264-0190
Divisions 210, 216 and 218 include rules, programs or activities considered land use programs under the DEQ State Agency Coordination Program.
Statutory authority
ORS 468 and 468A
Statutes implemented
ORS 468, 468A, 468A.025, 468A.035, 468A.040, 468A.050, 468A.055, 468A.070, 468A.135, 468A.155, 468A.310, 468A.327, 468A.460 through 468A.515
Documents relied on for rulemaking ORS 183.335(2)(b)(C)
Document title | Document location | ||||
06/06/90 EPA guidance titled “Performance Test Calculation”
| |||||
Standards of Performance for Stationary Compression Ignition Internal Combustion Engines | http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2011-title40-vol6/pdf/CFR-2011-title40-vol6-part60-subpartIIII.pdf
| ||||
Standards of Performance for Stationary Spark Ignition Internal Combustion Engines | http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2011-title40-vol6/pdf/CFR-2011-title40-vol6-part60-subpartJJJJ.pdf
| ||||
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines; New Source Performance Standards for Stationary Internal Combustion Engines
| http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-01-30/pdf/2013-01288.pdf
| ||||
Standards of Performance for Stationary Spark Ignition Internal Combustion Engines and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines; Final Rule | http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/area/fr18ja08.pdf
| ||||
Regulations Pertaining to NPDES and WPCF Permits (OAR 340-45) | http://arcweb.sos.state.or.us/pages/rules/oars_300/oar_340/340_045.html
| ||||
2011 Oregon Air Quality Data Summaries
| http://www.deq.state.or.us/aq/forms/2011AirQualityAnnualReport.pdf
|
Regulations Pertaining to NPDES and WPCF Permits (OAR 340-45)
| http://arcweb.sos.state.or.us/pages/rules/oars_300/oar_340/340_045.html
|
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Area Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers; Final Rule | http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-02-01/pdf/2012-31645.pdf
|
Stationary Source Reporting Requirements - OAR 340-214-0110 | http://arcweb.sos.state.or.us/pages/rules/oars_300/oar_340/340_214.html
|
40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D — Network Design Criteria for Ambient Air Quality Monitoring
|
|
A crosswalk of all rules changes, including the rules in the State Implementation Plan, with more detail is available as part of the rulemaking package.
Fee Analysis |
This rulemaking does not involve any change in fees.
Statement of fiscal and economic impact ORS 183.335 (2)(b)(E) |
Fiscal and economic impacts
The proposed rules would have fiscal and economic impacts on the public, businesses, state agencies and units of local governments. DEQ proposes:
• Streamlining, reorganizing and updating Oregon’s air quality permit programs to improve air quality with a more efficient and effective permitting program
• Amending statewide particulate matter standards and the pre-construction permitting program that would align with EPA’s adoption of the ambient air quality standard for fine particulate (PM2.5) and respond to problems identified with Oregon’s permitting program that must be addressed to protect air quality.
• Adding pre-construction permitting flexibility for smaller businesses
• Improving community outreach
• Making minor changes to the Heat Smart program and the gasoline dispensing facility program to improve implementation.
Statement of Cost of Compliance
Impacts state agencies, units of local government and the public
1. Clarify and update air quality regulations
State agencies: The proposed rules in this category would not have fiscal or economic impacts on other state agencies. DEQ workload would increase until staff becomes familiar with the proposed rules and then would decrease due to reorganization and added clarity.
Units of local governments: Proposed rules in this category would not have fiscal or economic impacts on local governments.
Public: This category does not affect the stringency of the rules; therefore, DEQ does not anticipate any direct fiscal or economic impacts on the public.
2. Update particulate matter emission standards
General Impacts: By proactively updating the particulate matter standards, DEQ hopes to avoid additional nonattainment area designations in Oregon. If EPA designates an area as nonattainment, DEQ is responsible for collaborating with communities that violate federal air pollution health standards to develop a plan that must decrease the pollution to safe levels. Recent work with the Klamath Falls Air Quality Advisory Committee and other community members took two years.
During the development of an attainment plan, DEQ extensively considers impacts on local businesses and the economy. Plan elements try to minimize local economic impacts as much as possible. When EPA designates an area as nonattainment, federal requirements automatically apply for industrial sources, such as requiring the most stringent control equipment for new or expanding sources or reasonable control measures, such as opacity standards, operation and maintenance plans, and fugitive plans, for existing sources. While DEQ recognizes that these restrictions may prevent some industries from expanding or moving to the nonattainment area, they are designed to help clean up the air and ensure the health of all residents.
In addition, if DEQ does not adopt a plan, the federal restrictions become more stringent, such as a higher offset ratio requirement for industry, and the area could even risk losing federal highway funds, both of which could have negative economic impacts.
State agencies: DEQ anticipates the 26 state (6 federal government) agencies currently subject to air permitting regulations could experience negative impacts described under the fiscal and economic impact section above. DEQ workload would initially increase and eventually decrease as staff becomes familiar with the proposed rules. Preventing areas from becoming nonattainment would avoid future increases in DEQ workload.
Units of local governments: DEQ anticipates the 55 county and local governments currently subject to air permitting regulations could experience impacts described under the fiscal and economic impact section above.
Public: DEQ does not anticipate the proposed rules would have any direct fiscal or economic impacts on the public due to the lower particulate matter standards. However, indirect impacts could occur if the costs of additional control or process equipment installed to meet lower particulate matter standards increase the costs for services or products. DEQ expects any such price increases to be small but lacks available information to estimate potential increases accurately.
Particulate matter causes serious health problems ranging from increased respiratory and pulmonary symptoms, hospital admissions and emergency room visits to premature death for people with heart and lung disease. These health problems have negative economic impacts. The proposed rules could create positive economic benefits and improvements in public health and welfare by reducing particulate matter emissions statewide.
3. Change permitting requirements for emergency generators and small natural gas or oil-fired equipment
General Impacts: The proposed rules may have a negative fiscal and economic impact on state agencies and units of local governments that own emergency generators or multiple small natural gas or oil-fired equipment if these units are required to get permits. The cost of that permit is approximately $1,300. For permitted facilities that have this equipment, DEQ would add them to existing permits at the time of renewal. There may be costs associated with additional recordkeeping depending on current environmental managements systems in place but DEQ lacks available information to estimate this cost accurately.
State agencies: DEQ anticipates the 26 state (6 federal government) agencies currently subject to air permitting regulations could experience negative impacts described above. DEQ workload would increase but could level off or decrease depending on the number of new facilities that require permits.
Units of local governments: DEQ anticipates the 55 county and local governments currently subject to air permitting regulations could experience impacts described above.
Public: DEQ does not anticipate any direct fiscal or economic impacts from the proposed rules on the public because of the requirement to get a new permit or modify an existing permit to add emergency generators or small natural gas or oil-fired equipment. However, the cost of the new permits could increase the cost of services or products creating an indirect fiscal or economic impact to the public. DEQ expects such price increases to be small but lacks available information to estimate potential increases accurately.
4. Establish two new state air quality area designations – “sustainment” and “reattainment” - to help areas avoid and more quickly end a federal nonattainment designation.
State agencies: Proposed rules under this category would have no fiscal or economic impacts for other agencies. DEQ workload would initially increase as staff becomes familiar with the proposed rules. Designating sustainment areas would avoid future DEQ workload increases if nonattainment area designation is prevented. Designating reattainment areas would require approximately the same work as designating a maintenance area but would happen sooner and the work would be used for maintenance area designation.
Units of local governments: The proposed rules would have a positive fiscal and economic impact in sustainment areas by allowing businesses to build or expand in the area as long as businesses protect air quality. The proposed rules would have a positive fiscal and economic impact in reattainment areas because new and modified facilities that fall below the federal major source threshold would be subject to less stringent requirements provided they were not identified as a primary cause of air quality violations in the attainment plan.
Public: DEQ does not anticipate the proposed rules would have any direct fiscal or economic impacts on the public because of the sustainment or reattainment area designation. However, positive indirect fiscal or economic impacts to the public could occur as more businesses locate in the sustainment or reattainment areas.
5. Identify Lakeview as a state sustainment area while retaining its federal attainment designation
State agencies: Proposed rules under this category would have no fiscal or economic impacts for other agencies. DEQ workload would initially increase as staff becomes familiar with the proposed rules. Preventing areas from becoming nonattainment would avoid future DEQ workload increases.
Units of local governments: The proposed rules would have a positive fiscal and economic impact in Lakeview by allowing businesses to build or expand in the area as long as businesses protect air quality.
Public: DEQ does not anticipate the proposed rules would have any direct fiscal or economic impacts on the public because of the Lakeview sustainment area designation. However, positive indirect fiscal or economic impacts to the public could occur as more businesses locate in Lakeview. In addition, if a new business locates in Lakeview and buys woodstove offsets, some members of the public may benefit from woodstove replacements. DEQ expects any monetary benefits price decreases to be small and lacks available information to estimate potential decreases accurately.
6. Change the pre-construction permitting program (New Source Review)
State agencies: DEQ anticipates the 26 state (6 federal government) agencies currently subject to air permitting regulations could, though not likely, experience negative impacts described under the fiscal and economic impact section above. DEQ workload would increase, but would eventually decrease, as staff becomes familiar with the proposed rules. Preventing areas from becoming nonattainment would avoid future increases in DEQ workload.
Units of local governments: DEQ anticipates the 55 county and local governments currently subject to air permitting regulations could experience impacts described under the fiscal and economic impact section above though not likely because these facilities would probably never trigger the this program.
Public: DEQ does not anticipate any direct fiscal or economic impacts from the proposed rules on the public because of the requirement to get a New Source Review permit based on the amount of emissions or the location of the new or modified business. However, the cost of the new permits could increase the cost of services or products creating an indirect fiscal or economic impact to the public. Designating areas as sustainment or reattainment would have positive indirect fiscal or economic impacts by moving away from the nonattainment designation with its associated major negative fiscal or economic impacts. The sustainment or reattainment designations would help prevent an area from becoming a nonattainment area and transition back into attainment more quickly. DEQ expects any such price increases for goods or services to be small and lacks available information upon which it could accurately estimate potential increases. Some members of the public may benefit from woodstove replacements.
7. Provide more flexibility for public hearings and meetings
General Impacts: The proposed rules would have a positive fiscal and economic impact on hearing/meeting attendees because they would be able to call in from around the state rather than travel. Cost savings depend on the physical location of the hearing/meeting. DEQ lacks available information to estimate costs to attendees because the travel distance is unknown.
State agencies: The proposed rule could decrease travel and associated staff expenses for state agencies. The proposed rules would have a positive fiscal and economic impact on DEQ because DEQ would have the flexibility to hold virtual hearings with people calling in from around the state. This would reduce the amount of travel expenses. Currently, DEQ staff travels to hearings/meetings, not knowing whether there will be any attendees. DEQ tries to hold hearings/meetings in offices that are free of charge. The cost of using a state car is $0.565/mile and accommodation rates are approximately $77 to $113 per night. The average hourly rate of a permit writer, including benefits, is $70 to $85/hour. The cost of the hearing/meeting depends on how far staff must travel. If the physical location is 2 hours away, the cost could be approximately $2000. At least $800 of that cost is due to transportation. DEQ workload may increase or decrease depending on implementation.
Units of local governments: The proposed rule could decrease travel and associated staff expenses for local governments.
Public: The proposed rules could decrease travel expenses for the public because it has more flexibility in attending public hearings and meetings. The public may experience positive indirect fiscal or economic impacts due to efficient use of resources and the ease of attending meetings anywhere in the state. DEQ expects costs to be small per individual but lacks available information to estimate potential decreases accurately.
8. Reestablish Heat Smart exemption for small commercial solid fuel boilers that are regulated by the permitting program
State agencies: The proposed rules in this category would not have fiscal or economic impacts on other state agencies. DEQ workload would not change because these rules reestablish a pathway for small-scale industrial, commercial and institutional boilers to be sold in Oregon again.
Units of local governments: Units of local governments would not have a fiscal and economic impact under this category.
Public: DEQ does not anticipate any direct, negative fiscal or economic impacts from the proposed rules on the public.
9. Remove annual reporting requirement for small gasoline dispensing facilities
General Impacts: DEQ anticipates a positive fiscal and economic impact from proposed rules that remove the annual reporting requirement for gasoline dispensing facilities with monthly throughput of less than 10,000 gallons of gasoline. The estimated number of gasoline dispensing facilities with monthly throughput of less than 10,000 gallons of gasoline is 540. Removing the annual reporting requirement for small gasoline dispensing facilities would reduce the impact of reporting, recordkeeping and other administrative activities on small businesses.
State agencies: DEQ anticipates the 26 state (6 federal government) agencies currently subject to air permitting regulations could experience the impacts described above. The proposed rules would decrease DEQ workload because there would be fewer reports to process and review.
Units of local governments: DEQ anticipates the 55 county and local governments currently subject to air permitting regulations could experience the impacts described above.
Public: DEQ anticipates that there would be a positive fiscal and economic impact on the public as a result of EQC removing the annual reporting requirement for gasoline dispensing facilities with monthly throughput of less than 10,000 gallons of gasoline. DEQ estimates that this impact would be very small and would probably not be passed on to the public or customers.
Impact on businesses – general (see specific impacts on small businesses below)
DEQ anticipates the following fiscal and economic impact on approximately 1130 large businesses and 1550 small businesses.
1. Clarify and update air quality regulations
The proposed rules under this category would not have fiscal or economic impacts on businesses.
2. Update particulate matter emission standards
DEQ identified 11 businesses (3 small businesses) that may not be able to comply with proposed lower particulate standards without process changes or upgrade or installation of control equipment. Eight of these businesses are wood products facilities with wood-fired boilers and three are asphalt plants.
Wood-fired Boilers: Some businesses may need to optimize their boiler operations to comply with the particulate matter standards. Close monitoring of fuel quality may help some boilers comply while others may need tune-ups. One vendor estimated a typical boiler tune-up that requires no replacement parts would cost between $5,500 and $11,000. A tune-up may include:
• A visual inspection of the system while operating, looking for obvious things that need repair
• Review of past performance checks & expected performance data
• Gathering performance data (O2 & CO2 readings, stack temperature, feed water temperature, fuel moisture, steam flow)
• Making adjustments to furnace air delivery settings
A more comprehensive boiler tune-up costs from $33,000 to $65,000. A boiler tune-up may or may not allow sources to comply with the new standards over time but could provide other benefits such as reduced fuel costs.
If optimizing operations does not achieve compliance with the lower grain loading and opacity standards, businesses may need to upgrade or install pollution control equipment. Wood fueled boilers have traditionally been controlled via multiclones and more recently via electrostatic precipitators. Baghouses have been avoided in the forest products industry behind boilers due to the potential for spark carry over which would burn holes in the bags (including fiberglass bags) or potentially lead to fires or possibly explosions should unburned particulate accumulate.
Vendors state that compliance with a 0.1 gr/dscf particulate matter standard is possible with multiclones, especially ceramic high efficiency cones but is not guaranteed. The table below shows the range of costs for regular and ceramic high efficiency multiple cyclones. Installation costs are very configuration specific and some vendors would not estimate those costs without seeing the wood fired boiler.
Vendor | Control Equipment Type | Control Equipment Cost | Installation Cost | Total Cost | Boiler Size |
A | multiple cyclone | $70,000 | $30,000 | $100,000 | large |
multiple cyclone | $40,000 | $20,000 | $60,000 | small | |
B | multiple cyclones | $12,000-$15,000 | ? | small | |
multiple cyclones | $55,000 - $60,000 | ? | large | ||
C | ceramic multiclones | $110,000 | $17,000 | $117,000 | large |
D | ceramic multiclones | $108,000 – $120,000 | ?? | ||
E | ceramic multiclones | $150,000 | ? | large |
Multiple cyclones last approximately 12 to 15 years before needing replacement.
Information from vendors indicates a new ESP costs approximately $1.8 to $2.2 million. One vendor stated that the cost could vary by plus or minus 40 percent, and another vendor indicated a smaller electrostatic precipitator could be used if the goal were simply to comply with the 0.10 gr/dscf standard.
Costs for the addition of wet scrubbers are not included because many wood products businesses do not have wastewater treatment facilities onsite, making wet scrubber technology cost prohibitive.
Asphalt Plants: The three asphalt plants that may not meet the lower standards are older plants that utilize wet scrubber controls. In general, asphalt plants with old wet scrubbers that have not been well maintained are the businesses that cannot meet lower particulate matter standards. Most asphalt plants have upgraded their control equipment to baghouses, especially portable asphalt plants since sources of water can be difficult to find. An asphalt plant consultant recommends changing to a baghouse rather than upgrading old wet scrubbers to meet lower standards.
Installing a used baghouse costs approximately $50,000 to $250,000 and the cost of a new baghouse is approximately $550,000 to $600,000. Bags should be replaced every 5 years for a pulse jet baghouse to 8 or 9 years for a rotary baghouse. Bags cost about $35 each. A baghouse can have 850 to 1,300 bags for bag replacement costs of $30,000 to $45,500.
A major tune-up of an asphalt plant costs approximately $3,000 and a source test is $12,000. Asphalt plant tune-ups can also save money by reducing fuel usage.
The New Source Performance Standard for asphalt plants constructed or modified after June 11, 1973 is 0.04 grains/dry standard cubic foot, much lower than DEQ’s proposal of 0.10 grain/dry standard cubic foot. XXX of 73 permitted asphalt plants in Oregon must meet this lower standard.
DEQ has source test data from old asphalt plants with inefficient scrubbers that comply with the lower particulate matter standard so new equipment or additional control equipment may not be necessary.
3. Change permitting requirements for emergency generators and small natural gas or oil-fired equipment
The proposed rules may have a negative fiscal and economic impact on businesses that own emergency generators or multiple small natural gas or oil-fired equipment if these units are required to get permits. The cost of that permit is approximately $1,300. DEQ has not identified any business that would be required to get a permit under the proposed rule. Most of these units would be added to existing permits at the time of renewal. There may be costs associated with additional recordkeeping depending on current environmental managements systems in place. DEQ lacks available information to estimate those costs accurately.
4. Establish two new state air quality area designations – “sustainment” and “reattainment” - to help areas avoid and more quickly end a federal nonattainment designation
New Source Review permitting is a case-by-case analysis and the type of pollution controls and computer modeling varies for each case; therefore, DEQ lacks available information to estimate costs to business accurately.
5. Identify Lakeview as a state sustainment area while retaining its federal attainment designation
New Source Review permitting is a case-by-case analysis and the type of pollution controls and computer modeling varies for each case; therefore, DEQ lacks available information to estimate costs to business accurately.
6. Change the pre-construction permitting program (New Source Review)
The proposed rules may have a negative or positive fiscal and economic impact on businesses that trigger the New Source Review program, depending on the situation. The proposed rules would raise the amount of offsets a business may be required to get. If the business chooses to get the offsets from the sources causing the problem in areas where air quality is close to an ambient air quality standard, the proposed rules allow reduced offsets. The cost of industrial offsets varies from $2,500 per ton to $100,000 per ton, depending on the pollutant and the demand for offsets.
Currently, in areas where New Source Review would be triggered, the pollutant of concern is PM2.5. If the business chooses to obtain offsets from sources causing the problem, based on current information, the proposed rules would offer the opportunity to obtain offsets from woodstoves. The cost to replace an uncertified woodstove is approximately $3,000. A certified woodstove would reduce emissions about 0.03 tons per woodstove. The cost of one ton of offsets from woodstoves is approximately $100,000 per ton.
In areas where DEQ wants to transition back to attainment quicker than EPA could redesignate the area, the proposed rules would allow businesses to meet the maintenance area requirements rather than the more stringent nonattainment area requirements. This would have a positive fiscal and economic impact on businesses. The control technology in a maintenance area may be less expensive but if it results in lower emission reductions than could be achieved with more expensive technology required in a nonattainment area, more offsets would be required. As a result, there may be higher emission offset costs if the less expensive control technology allows higher emissions.
For businesses not allowed to build or modify under the existing rules, there would be a positive fiscal and economic impact since that construction would probably be allowed as long as air quality is protected.
New Source Review permitting requires a case-by-case analysis, and the type of pollution controls and computer modeling varies for each case; therefore, DEQ is unable to estimate costs in this category accurately.
7. Provide more flexibility for public hearings and meetings
The proposed rules would also have a positive fiscal and economic impact on hearing/meeting attendees because they would be able to call in from around the state rather than travel. Cost savings depend on the physical location of the hearing/meeting.
8. Reestablish Heat Smart exemption for small commercial solid fuel boilers that are regulated by the permitting program
DEQ anticipates there would be a positive economic benefit for businesses that wish to manufacture or use small biomass heating systems in commercial, industrial and institutional applications. The proposed rules would re-establish a pathway for small biomass boilers to be sold for commercial, industrial and institutional uses in Oregon.
9. Remove annual reporting requirement for small gasoline dispensing facilities
DEQ anticipates a positive fiscal and economic impact from proposed rules that remove the annual reporting requirement for gasoline dispensing facilities with monthly throughput of less than 10,000 gallons of gasoline. The estimated number of gasoline dispensing facilities with monthly throughput of less than 10,000 gallons of gasoline is 540. Removing the annual reporting requirement for small gasoline dispensing facilities would reduce the impact of reporting, recordkeeping and other administrative activities on small businesses.
Impact on small businesses (those with 50 or fewer employees) ORS 183.336
In addition to the fiscal and economic impact described under Impact on business – general above, the proposed rules could have the following impacts on small business.
a) Estimated number of small businesses and types of businesses and industries with small businesses subject to proposed rule.
| The proposed rules would require the approximate 1550 small businesses to comply with lower grain loading and opacity standards, many of which already have the lower standards in their permits. Current compliance information indicates that most small businesses already comply with the proposed standards. Approximately 3 businesses may have to optimize operations or upgrade existing controls. |
b) Projected reporting, recordkeeping and other administrative activities, including costs of professional services, required for small businesses to comply with the proposed rule.
|
Fewer costs for reporting, recordkeeping or other administrative activities are expected if the amendments are adopted because approximately 540 gasoline dispensing facilities with monthly throughput of less than 10,000 gallons of gasoline would not be required to report.
There would be more recordkeeping and reporting for emergency generators and small natural gas or oil-fired equipment. |
c) Projected equipment, supplies, labor and increased administration required for small businesses to comply with the proposed rule. |
DEQ does not expect additional costs for equipment, supplies, labor or administration if the EQC adopts the proposed rules. |
d) Describe how DEQ involved small businesses in developing this proposed rule.
|
DEQ informed small businesses by announcements on the DEQ website, through direct mailings and email lists, stakeholder meetings, a fiscal advisoty committee meeting, notices in the Secretary of State Bulletin, and ads in local papers. DEQ requests comments during the public comment period and at public hearings held in January. DEQ staff will participate in the December Northwest Environmental Conference in Portland informing people about the rulemaking. Attendees at this conference include representatives from large and small businesses. |
Documents relied on for fiscal and economic impact
For Air Contaminant Discharge Permits – Table 1, DEQ relied on OAR 340-216-0020
http://arcweb.sos.state.or.us/pages/rules/oars_300/oar_340/_340_tables/340-216-0020_3-27.pdf
EPA Air Pollution Control Cost Manual, Report No. 452/B-02-001, January 2002, Section 6, Chapter 1, Baghouses and Filters. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/catc/dir1/cost_toc.pdf
Consumer Price Index Conversion Factors 1774 to estimated 2021 to Convert to Dollars of 1998. 2013 Robert C. Sahr, Political Science, Oregon State University, Rev 05/08/2013. http://oregonstate.edu/cla/polisci/sites/default/files/faculty-research/sahr/inflation-conversion/excel/cv1998.xls
Advisory committee for fiscal and economic impact statement
DEQ appointed a fiscal and economic impact advisory committee for this rulemaking. Members of the fiscal advisory committee included representatives from affected businesses, environmental groups and the general public. The fiscal advisory committee met in November and _________________. DEQ will accept comment on the fiscal and economic impact statement during the public notice period.
Housing cost
1. Clarify and update air quality regulations
DEQ determined the proposed rules would have no effect on the development cost of a 6,000-square-foot parcel and construction of a 1,200-square-foot detached, single-family dwelling on that parcel. The proposed rule only affects the ease of use of DEQ’s rules.
2. Update particulate matter emission standards
DEQ determined the proposed rules may have an effect on the development cost of a 6,000-square-foot parcel and construction of a 1,200-square-foot detached, single-family dwelling on that parcel if the costs for additional control or process equipment are passed through by businesses providing products and services for such development and construction. The possible impact appears to be minimal. DEQ cannot quantify the impact at this time because the information available to it does not indicate whether the costs would be passed on to consumers and any such estimate would be speculative.
3. Change permitting requirements for emergency generators and small natural gas or oil-fired equipment
DEQ determined the proposed rules may have an effect on the development cost of a 6,000-square-foot parcel and construction of a 1,200-square-foot detached, single-family dwelling on that parcel if the costs for additional permits are passed through by businesses providing products and services for such development and construction. The possible impact appears to be minimal. DEQ cannot quantify the impact at this time because the information available to it does not indicate whether the costs would be passed on to consumers and any such estimate would be speculative.
4. Establish two new state air quality area designations – “sustainment” and “reattainment” - to help areas avoid and more quickly end a federal nonattainment designation
DEQ determined the proposed rules would have no effect on the development cost of a 6,000-square-foot parcel and construction of a 1,200-square-foot detached, single-family dwelling on that parcel. The proposed rule only affects whether businesses can construct or modify in sustainment or reattainment areas.
5. Identify Lakeview as a state sustainment area while retaining its federal attainment designation
DEQ determined the proposed rules would have no effect on the development cost of a 6,000-square-foot parcel and construction of a 1,200-square-foot detached, single-family dwelling on that parcel. The proposed rule only affects whether businesses can construct or modify in the Lakeview area.
6. Change the pre-construction permitting program (New Source Review)
DEQ determined the proposed rules may have an effect on the development cost of a 6,000-square-foot parcel and construction of a 1,200-square-foot detached, single-family dwelling on that parcel if the costs for additional permits, control or process equipment are passed through by businesses providing products and services for such development and construction. The possible impact appears to be minimal. DEQ cannot quantify the impact at this time because the information available to it does not indicate whether the costs would be passed on to consumers and any such estimate would be speculative.
7. Provide more flexibility for public hearings and meetings
DEQ determined the proposed rules would have no effect on the development cost of a 6,000-square-foot parcel and construction of a 1,200-square-foot detached, single-family dwelling on that parcel. The proposed rule only affects how DEQ can hold public hearings and informational meetings.
8. Reestablish Heat Smart exemption for small commercial solid fuel boilers that are regulated by the permitting program
DEQ determined the proposed rules would have no effect on the development cost of a 6,000-square-foot parcel and construction of a 1,200-square-foot detached, single-family dwelling on that parcel. These proposed rules re-establish a pathway for small biomass boilers to be sold for commercial, industrial, and institutional uses in Oregon.
9. Remove annual reporting requirement for small gasoline dispensing facilities
DEQ determined the proposed rules would have no effect on the development cost of a 6,000-square-foot parcel and construction of a 1,200-square-foot detached, single-family dwelling on that parcel. The proposed rule only affects gasoline dispensing facilities with a monthly throughput of less than 10,000 gallons of gasoline.
Federal relationship http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/468a.html |
"It is the policy of this state that agencies shall seek to retain and promote the unique identity of Oregon by considering local conditions when an agency adopts policies and rules. However, since there are many federal laws and regulations that apply to activities that are also regulated by the state, it is also the policy of this state that agencies attempt to adopt rules that correspond with equivalent federal laws and rules..."
Relationship to federal requirements
1. Clarify and update air quality regulations
DEQ determined this rule proposal is “in addition to federal requirements” to address administrative issues. DEQ’s rules are different from EPA rules so clarifying and updating these rules may be considered to be “in addition to federal requirements” because EPA does not have identical rules.
What alternatives did DEQ consider, if any?
DEQ considered leaving the rules as they are but wanted to clarify as much as possible and update all rules. DEQ did not pursue this alternative because there would still be confusion, possible misinterpretations and errors in the rules.
2. Update particulate matter standards
The proposed rules are “in addition to federal requirements” to protect public health and the environment. DEQ has statewide opacity limits for new and existing sources, including fugitive emission sources. There is no equivalent opacity standard for all businesses in EPA regulations. Some New Source Performance Standard (NSPS) have opacity and particulate matter limits for the specific industry being regulated but nothing that applies across the board.
DEQ identified two NSPS that have opacity limits for fugitive emissions. The New Source Performance Standard (NSPS) for Metallic Mineral Processing Plants (Subpart LL) requires fugitive emissions to meet 10 percent opacity using Method 9 for compliance. Subpart OOO, Standards of Performance for Nonmetallic Mineral Processing Plants, contains a limit of 7 percent opacity and allows an affected facility to rely on water carryover from upstream water sprays to control fugitive emissions. EPA Method 9 is used when determining compliance with the fugitive emissions standard. Even though the proposed rule changes for fugitive emission sources are different than the two applicable federal requirements, they are just as, if not more stringent than the two NSPS standards because DEQ is requiring any fugitive emissions that leave the property to be abated.
The proposed changes to the current statewide visible emission standards that apply to non-fugitive sources would put DEQ’s standards on the same basis as EPA’s visible emissions standards. DEQ proposes changing the standards from an aggregate period to a six-minute average in order to use EPA Method 9 for determining compliance. The proposed change to add a significant figure to the particulate matter standard (0.1 gr/dscf to 0.10 gr/dscf) would also align DEQ rules with applicable federal requirements and policies.
What alternatives did DEQ consider, if any?
DEQ considered leaving the particulate matter standards the same but felt that protecting air quality and the potential for economic development is more important. Most businesses that were constructed before 1970 have already updated their facilities and now meet the lower particulate matter standards. This proposed rule change levels the playing field for pre-1970 and post-1970 businesses.
DEQ considered leaving the averaging time for opacity standards at the aggregate 3 minutes in 60 minutes and the 30 seconds in 60 minutes but without a reference test method for compliance, enforceability of the standards is questionable.
DEQ considered leaving the opacity limits for fugitive emission sources as is but determined that this approach would perpetuate difficulty in implementation of the standard. DEQ did not pursue this alternative because abating fugitive emissions leaving the property boundary reduces emissions more than trying to determine compliance with 20 percent opacity.
3. Change permitting requirements for emergency generators and small natural gas or oil-fired equipment
The proposed rules are “in addition to federal requirements” and protect public health and the environment. The proposed rules would require construction approvals or permits for units whose emissions are significant but were previously treated as insignificant activities. EPA requires states to have permitting programs for smaller units but does not specify the details of a minor New Source Review program. Because of the Plant Site Emission Limit rules, DEQ permits regulate smaller units than EPA requires.
What alternatives did DEQ consider, if any?
DEQ did not consider any alternatives because leaving the permitting requirements for small sources as is would cause potential violations of the internal combustion engine standards and DEQ rules for operating without a permit.
4. Establish two new state air quality area designations – “sustainment” and “reattainment” - to help areas avoid and more quickly end a federal nonattainment designation
The proposed rules are “in addition to federal requirements” and protect public health and the environment while addressing economic concerns. EPA only designates nonattainment areas. The proposed rules would designate other areas, sustainment and reattainment, would improve Oregon’s New Source Review program by improving air quality in areas where needed and providing permitting flexibility for smaller businesses.
What alternatives did DEQ consider, if any?
DEQ considered not designating sustainment and reattainment areas because the possibility of EPA approval was unknown at the time. DEQ did not pursue this alternative because meetings with EPA indicated support of the designations.
5. Identify Lakeview as a state sustainment area while retaining its federal attainment designation
The proposed rules are “in addition to federal requirements” and protect public health and the environment while addressing economic concerns. EPA only designates nonattainment areas. The proposed rules would designate other areas, sustainment and reattainment, would improve Oregon’s New Source Review program by improving air quality in areas where needed and providing permitting flexibility for smaller businesses.
What alternatives did DEQ consider, if any?
DEQ considered not designating Lakeview a sustainment area because the desire of the local community was unknown at the time. DEQ did not pursue this alternative because the Lakeview community supports the designation and construction should be allowed as long as air quality is protected
6. Change the pre-construction permitting program (New Source Review)
The proposed rules are “in addition to federal requirements” and protect public health and the environment while addressing economic concerns. The proposed rules modify Oregon’s existing permitting rules which are different than federal rules. Oregon’s permitting program has been structured in a different way than the federal program since it originated in 1982, but is considered equivalent by EPA. The proposed rulemaking also aligns some aspects of Oregon’s program with EPA’s federal program.
DEQ proposes changing the definition of a major source to match EPA’s definition. There would be different requirements for small and large businesses. The program for smaller businesses would be called State New Source Review. This change, along with the designation of sustainment and reattainment areas would allow more flexibility in permitting smaller sources but still protect the ambient air quality.
The proposed rules create new differences between the Oregon and EPA New Source Review preconstruction programs by defining two new area designations, sustainment and reattainment. These two new areas would have an important role in avoiding exceedances of the ambient air quality standard and also encouraging economic development when air quality has been improved in a nonattainment area.
DEQ’s program, although substantially different from EPA’s regulations, provides a workable program that is equivalent to EPA’s and accomplishes the same Clean Air Act goal of preventing significant deterioration of air quality.
What alternatives did DEQ consider, if any?
DEQ considered not changing the New Source Review rules but determined the proposed changes would improve air quality and provide flexibility for smaller businesses. DEQ did not pursue this alternative because there is essentially a construction ban in areas that are over the standard but still designated as attainment. Current rules for demonstrating net air quality benefit in nonattainment areas are overly prescriptive and do not meet the goals of the program.
7. Provide more flexibility for public hearings and meetings
The proposed rules are not “different from or in addition to federal requirements” and impose stringency equivalent to federal requirements.
What alternatives did DEQ consider, if any?
DEQ considered leaving the requirements for public hearings and meetings as is but the economic benefits and improved effectiveness of outreach using recent technology supported the proposed change. DEQ did not pursue this alternative because technology would only improve, making access to public hearings and meetings easier and cheaper for the public.
8. Reestablish Heat Smart exemption for small commercial solid fuel boilers that are regulated by the permitting program
DEQ’s rules are different from EPA rules so clarifying and updating these rules may be considered to be “in addition to federal requirements” because EPA does not have identical rules.
What alternatives did DEQ consider, if any?
DEQ did not consider any other alternatives because this rulemaking is to fix the rules to return it to its previous state, before EPA amended the NESHAP rules.
9. Remove annual reporting requirement for small gasoline dispensing facilities
The proposed rules remove the annual reporting requirement for gasoline dispensing facilities with monthly throughput of less than 10,000 gallons of gasoline. This change would be consistent with the federal requirements because the federal gasoline dispensing facility NESHAP does not require gasoline dispensing facilities with monthly throughput of less than 10,000 gallons of gasoline to submit annual reports.
What alternatives did DEQ consider, if any?
DEQ considered keeping the annual reporting requirement for gasoline dispensing facilities with monthly throughput of less than 10,000 gallons of gasoline. DEQ rejected this alternative because it determined that the annual reporting requirement for these small gasoline dispensing facilities is unnecessary. DEQ would still have the authority to request throughput information from these facilities, and may do so, for businesses close to the 10,000 gallon permitting threshold.
Land use |
“It is the Commission's policy to coordinate the Department's programs, rules and actions that affect land use with local acknowledged plans to the fullest degree possible.”
Land-use considerations
To determine whether the proposed rules involve programs or actions that are considered a land-use action, DEQ considered:
• Statewide planning goals for specific references. Section III, subsection 2 of the DEQ State Agency Coordination Program document identifies the following statewide goal relating to DEQ's authority:
Goal Title
5 Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources
6 Air, Water and Land Resources Quality
11 Public Facilities and Services
16 Estuarial resources
19 Ocean Resources
• OAR 340-018-0030 for EQC rules on land-use coordination. Division 18 requires DEQ to determine whether proposed rules would significantly affect land use. If yes, how will DEQ:
◦ Comply with statewide land-use goals, and
◦ Ensure compatibility with acknowledged comprehensive plans, which DEQ most commonly achieves by requiring a Land Use Compatibility Statement.
• DEQ’s mandate to protect public health and safety and the environment.
• Whether DEQ is the primary authority that is responsible for land-use programs or actions in the proposed rules.
• Present or future land uses identified in acknowledged comprehensive plans.
Determination
DEQ determined that the following proposed rules listed under the Chapter 340 Action section above are existing rules that affect programs or activities that the DEQ State Agency Coordination Program considers a land-use program:
ORS 340-210 Source Notification Requirements
ORS 340-216 Air Contaminant Discharge Permits
ORS 340-218 Oregon Title V Operating Permits
The air quality permit programs require that a new business provide a Land Use Compatibility Statement (LUCS) from local government when applying for a permit. This assures that the business is an approved use for the property where it is located. Existing permittees have provided a LUCS, which are on file with DEQ. No change in the land use procedures in the air quality permitting program is proposed.
DEQ’s statewide goal compliance and local plan compatibility procedures adequately cover the proposed rules.
• 340-018-0040(1) - compliance with statewide planning goals achieved by ensuring compatibility with acknowledged comprehensive plans
• 340-018-0050(2)(a) - ensuring compatibility with acknowledged comprehensive plans may be accomplished through a Land Use Compatibility Statement.
Stakeholder and public involvement |
Advisory committee
Stakeholder meetings allowed input on the preliminary rules. DEQ sent an announcement of the meetings to all permitted facilities and people who expressed interest in air quality rulemakings. DEQ sent the announcement by postcards, email using Oregon’s GovDelivery system, a free e-mail subscription service that provides subscribers with automatic notices of updates to the Oregon DEQ Web page on topics they select, and posted the announcement on the DEQ website. EPA was involved throughout the rule development process.
DEQ did not use an Advisory Committee but held several meetings throughout the state (Portland, Pendleton, Eugene and Medford) with stakeholders to discuss preliminary rules. DEQ also called all the businesses identified as being affected by the more stringent particulate standards and offered to meet with them individually.
EQC prior involvement
DEQ shares general rulemaking information with EQC through the annual DEQ Rulemaking Plan review and monthly status report. DEQ shared information about this rulemaking with the EQC through a Director’s dialog at the December 11, 2013 EQC meeting and an information item on the March XX, 2014 EQC agenda.
Public notice
The January 2014 Oregon Bulletin will publish the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking with Hearing for this rulemaking. DEQ also:
• Posted notice on DEQ’s webpage http://www.oregon.gov/deq/RulesandRegulations/Pages/2013/aqperm.aspx on December 17, 2013.
• E-mailed notice on December 17, 2013 to:
• Approximately 6,500 interested parties through GovDelivery.
• 1,562 stakeholders, including representatives of facilities holding Title V and Air Contaminant Discharge Permits, through GovDelivery.
• The following key legislators required under ORS 183.335:
◦ Senator Lee Beyer, Chair, Senate Business and Transportation
◦ Jackie Dingfelder, Chair, Senate Environment and Natural Resources
◦ Jules Bailey, Chair, House Energy and Environment
• Mailed the notice by U.S. Postal Service to 449 stakeholders on December 17, 2013, including representatives of facilities holding Title V and Air Contaminant Discharge Permits.
• Legal ad in the Oregonian and Daily Journal of Commerce on December 17, 2013
• Sent notice to EPA on December 17, 2013.
Public hearings
DEQ plans to hold one statewide public hearing that will be accessible throughout the state from the regional offices. The table below includes information about how to participate in the public hearings.
Before taking public comment and according to Oregon Administrative Rule 137-001-0030, the staff presenter will summarize the content of the notice given under Oregon Revised Statute 183.335 and respond to any questions about the rulemaking.
DEQ will add the names, addresses and affiliations of all hearing attendees to the interested parties list for this rule if provided on a registration form or the attendee list. DEQ will consider all oral and written comments received at the hearings listed below before finalizing the proposed rules. All comments will be summarized and DEQ will respond to comments in the Environmental Quality Commission staff report.
Close of public comment period
The comment period will close on January 31, 2014 at 5:00 p.m.
aginsbu, 2013-10-22T18:18:00Z
Update this section to match current thinking and plan.
aginsbu, 2013-10-22T13:37:00Z
Revise this to match any additional flexibility added as a result of the pre-notice period.
aginsbu, 2013-10-22T13:37:00Z
Expand on explanation of any additional flexibility or off ramp here.
Mark, 2013-10-30T15:26:00Z
This is not in the rules
aginsbu, 2013-10-22T13:37:00Z
I have in mind a credible analysis of the area, including a summary of emission sources, justification for the boundary, justification for identifying residential wood heating as the primary source of air pollution that non-federal PSD sources could use to get a discount in the offset ratio, a description of the PM Advance program that will serve as the prevention plan, a description of the community advisory committee process, expected timelines, etc.
aginsbu, 2013-10-22T17:59:00Z
unclear
Mark, 2013-10-30T17:16:00Z
should this say below like for businesses?
Mark, 2013-10-30T17:08:00Z
talk about NSR extensions, new state NSR program? Don’t repeat sustainment and reattainment impacts?
Mark, 2013-10-30T12:06:00Z
cost of smaller ESP?
aginsbu, 2013-10-22T18:04:00Z
Use the same titles and order for the 8 items as above.
Mark, 2013-10-30T17:41:00Z
Add the others??