A	B	C	D	E	F	G
1	DEQ art glass permanent rulemaking 2016
2	Public comment points to respond to
4	Point ID	short summary	Summary of Comment	DEQ response	Notes	Assigned to	Response Status
5	1	flexibility	DEQ should give more compliance time and flexibility to CAGMs	DEQ is confident that the requirements and deadlines in the proposed rules are achievable by all affected facilities. DEQ is also committed to work with all affected companies to issue necessary emission control device approvals and test plan approvals as quickly as possible. We have revised the rule to reduce source testing costs and uncertainties by replacing the 99% capture efficiency standard with a standard at the baghouse outlet. In addition, DEQ added a pathway for facilities to apply for an extension of time to comply in 340-244-9005.			draft
6	2	don't shut down	DEQ should consider the economic effect on glass artists. DEQ should not shut down the glass industry.	The proposed permanent rules are intended to ensure that CAGMs operate in a way that is protective of human health and the environment. We are confident that facilities can meet these requirements while continuing to serve their customers.			draft
7	3	other facilities	This rule is only regulating CAGMs, but other facilities may be to blame for metals pollution in these areas.	ask Brian Boling
8	4	statewide	DEQ should apply this rule statewide instead of only in the Portland area.	Based on comments received, DEQ is proposing that the permanent rule apply statewide. While there are no known air quality problems related to CAGM operations outside the Portland area, applying the rule statewide gives all Oregonians protections from current and potential future CAGM emissions and helps provide a “level playing field” for CAGMs that install the controls necessary to comply.			draft
9	5	500 lb/year	DEQ should lower the applicability threshold of the rule so that all facilities making at least 500 lbs per year of HAP-containing glass are regulated.
10	6	all metals	The rule should regulate all heavy metals or all hazardous air pollutants (HAP), not just arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, manganese and nickel.		adding cobalt and selenium. Add uranium too?
11	7	99.9%	The temporary rule requires CAGMs to show that their baghouses capture 99.0% of incoming particulate matter. Baghouses can capture more than that, and DEQ should require them to demonstrate that they are capturing 99.9%.	DEQ agrees that baghouses are capable of capture efficiencies higher than the 99.0% standard in the temporary rule. DEQ has learned that there are practical problems with demonstrating capture efficiency with a source test, particularly for the smaller (Tier 1) facilities. To show 99.0% (or 99.9%) capture efficiency with a source test, a facility needs to test the inlet and the outlet of the baghouse. The inlet concentration would need to be at least 100x (or 1,000x) of the outlet concentration. Chemical tests are not accurate below a certain threshold (the method reporting limit, MRL) and if a reading is below the MRL then the sample concentration is assumed to be the MRL. To show 99.0% capture efficiency, the source test must be run until the inlet sample is at least 100x the MRL. Unfortunately that takes a very long time, especially at Tier 1 facilities (~ one week per test run), because their baghouse systems pull in a lot of air from the room and are very dilute. Long test runs are expensive and prone to error. One facility, Northstar, reported that they were quoted a cost of $350k for a source test, which may be more than the cost of buying and installing a baghouse. DEQ is proposing a rule revision so that facilities will have to meet an emissions standard of 0.005 gr/dscf (grains of particulate per dry standard cubic foot of air) rather than a baghouse capture efficiency standard. This is a standard type of emissions testing for other facility types and will reduce source testing costs.	If requiring baghouse leak detection, mention that here.		draft
12	8	health benchmarks	DEQ should modify the health benchmarks in the rule to make them more protective, especially the 36 ng/m3 daily average benchmark for hexavalent chromium.	DEQ has partnered with the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) to rely on their expertise in estimating environmental risks and setting health benchmarks. Because chronic exposure to pollutants can cause harm through different mechanisms than intense, acute exposures, OHA recommended that DEQ incorporate an annual and 24 hour limit on chromium emissions from Tier 2 facilities. Facilities are bound by both limits, so the most stringent is the one that matters. As you noted, exceeding the 36 ng/m3 acute (24 hour) limit for one day would also violate the chronic (annual) limit of 0.08 ng/m3. This is not an error, but it is true that the annual limit is more stringent and would be binding. DEQ is proposing to change the 36 ng/m3 limit based on new information submitted by OHA. OHA recommended that DEQ revise the 24 hour health benchmark for hexavalent chromium to 5 ng/m3. 5 ng/m3 is the intermediate minimal risk level (MRL) established by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). OHA is beginning a process to review and revise other health benchmarks. If OHA revises other benchmarks as part of that process, the updated data could be incorporated into the art glass rule in a future rulemaking.			draft
13	9	all glass factories	This rule should be changed to regulate all glass factories (such as Owens Brockaway and General Glass), not just CAGMs	Large scale bottle manufacturers are already subject to regulations that require control devices and reductions of emissions through technology based standards. This proposed rule is applicable to a different industry with different emissions and impacts. Additional health risk impacts from large bottle manufacturers may also be addressed as part of the permanent rulemaking mentioned in other comment responses.			draft
14	10	health-based	This rule's requirements are technology-based, but the rule restrictions should be health-based	DEQ has begun the Cleaner Air Oregon rulemaking process to develop a statewide risk-based air toxics permitting program that will cover many industry types. There will be many opportunities for public input and participation in that process. The approach proposed in the art glass rule is a combination of risk and technology based approaches. It requires emission control devices to reduce the rate at which CAGMs emit metals, which is a technology-based requirement. It also incorporates elements of a risk-based program by establishing health based acceptable source impact levels for chrome usage at Tier 2 facilities. The proposed rules also contain elements of a risk-based program in allowing Tier 1 CAGMs to demonstrate that their emissions of metals are not above the acceptable levels.	Remove reference to health-based pathway for Tier 1s if we remove that from the rule.		draft
15	11	translate	DEQ should provide translation for non-English speakers and specific outreach to communities of color and low-income communities.	DEQ can provide language translation for meetings or written materials upon request. Please contact DEQ and let us know if there is a specific community or language group that wants to request this.			draft
16	12	air permits on website	DEQ should make air emissions permits publicly available through its database	Making air permit records accessible to the public via DEQ’s website is a good suggestion but outside the scope of this rulemaking process.			draft
17	13	NESHAP 6S	This rule is less stringent than NESHAP 6S in some ways, so it should not apply to furnaces that are subject to NESHAP 6S.	The proposed rules are designed to apply even at furnaces that are subject to NESHAP 6S. At furnaces subject to both regulations, the restrictions of both regulations would apply and not just one or the other.			draft
18	14	can't operate until permit issued	Facilities should not be able to operate until the public has had a chance to comment on the proposed permit and DEQ has issued it.	Because the process of issuing a permit is long, it is DEQ’s policy that when a new rule is put in place, existing facilities can continue to operate during the period between submitting an application and when DEQ issues the permit. Facilities do not have to wait until the permit is issued to begin operating.			draft
19	15	more public comment	The public should be able to comment at more steps in the process, including commenting on source test plans and pollutant dispersion modeling.	Opportunities for public participation are a required and valuable part of DEQ’s rulemaking process. For this rulemaking DEQ convened a fiscal advisory committee, held a public hearing, and accepted public comment via our website as well as email. The proposed rule requires all Tier 1 and Tier 2 CAGMs to obtain air permits. As part of DEQ’s process for issuing air permits the public has an opportunity to comment on whether DEQ has correctly applied the rules and statutes to the proposed permit. The public can also request a public hearing. Soliciting and responding to public comment takes significant time and effort, and DEQ is not able to do that at all steps in the process.			draft
20	16	health-based applicability	DEQ should base the applicability threshold on the amount of metals used (lbs/year) and their relative health risks, rather than on the amount of glass. Some glass contains concentrated HAP and other recipes are very dilute. Also, some HAP like hexavalent chromium are more dangerous than others.		Al Hooton
21	17	don't apply to glass users	Because of the way that 'melt' and 'furnace' are used in the rule, it may apply to some art glass users that are remelting glass rather than making it from powdered raw materials.		Chris Mini
22	18	EJ	DEQ is required by to do demographic analysis to make sure that it does not have disproportionate adverse impacts on communities of color.		CRAG	Paul
23	19
24	20
25	21
26	22
27	23
28	24
29	25