Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApproved September 2023 AQC Meeting Minutes_with correction1 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION AIR QUALITY COMMITTEE MEETING SUMMARY September 13, 2023 Wayne West Building at Carteret Community College 9:00 – 10:00 A.M. AQC MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE Ms. Marion Deerhake, AQC Chair Ms. Donna Davis Mr. Charlie S. Carter Ms. Elizabeth (Jill) Weese OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE Ms. Robin Smith, EMC Chair Mr. Mike Abraczinskas, DAQ Director Mr. Tim Baumgartner, EMC DEQ Staff Ms. Pat Harris, EMC Members of the public Mr. Phillip Reynolds, EMC Counsel PRELIMINARY MATTERS Agenda Item I-1, Call to Order and the State Government Ethics Act, N.C.G.S. §138A-15 AQC Chair Deerhake called the meeting to order and inquired, per General Statute §138A-15, as to whether any member knows of any known conflict of interest or appearance of conflict with respect to matters before the EMC’s AQC. None were stated. MEETING BRIEF During the September 13, 2023, meeting, the Air Quality Committee (AQC) of the Environmental Management Commission (EMC) heard: • Agenda Item III-1: Request to Seek EMC Approval to Proceed to Public Hearing on Proposed Revisions to 15A NCAC 02Q .0802, Gasoline Service Stations and Dispensing Facilities 2 Agenda Item I-2, Review and Approval of the July 12, 2023, Meeting Minutes Chair Deerhake requested approval of the July 12, 2023, Meeting Minutes. Commissioner Davis made the motion to approve, and Commissioner Weese seconded the motion. The minutes were approved without objection. RULEMAKING CONCEPTS None. ACTION ITEMS Agenda Item III-1, Request for Approval of Proposed Rule Revisions to Proceed to EMC for Approval to Proceed to Public Hearing on Revisions to 15A NCAC 02Q .0802, Gasoline Service Stations and Dispensing Facilities Division of Air Quality (DAQ) Rule Development Branch Supervisor Katherine Quinlan presented the draft proposed revisions to the rule. Rule 02Q .0802 currently provides that Gasoline Service Stations and Dispensing Facilities are exempt from Title V permitting if annual throughput remains below 15 million gallons, calculated on a calendar month rolling average basis. Once the throughput exceeds 15 million gallons, the facility must submit a Title V permit application. DAQ requested the AQC approve carrying to the full EMC a proposed increase to the annual throughput limit in 15A NCAC 02Q .0802. The proposed increase accounts for the presence of onboard refueling vapor recovery (ORVR) technology now in the vehicle fleet and current U.S. Environmental Protection Agency AP-42 emission factors (AP-42 - Compilation of Air Pollutant Emissions Factors). Ms. Quinlan reported that DAQ’s application of the phased-in EPA requirements to the recent vehicle registration inventory in North Carolina indicates approximately 85% of the State’s light duty vehicles (LDVs) and light duty trucks (LDTs) would be equipped with ORVR technology. Based on this finding, DAQ’s preliminary analysis indicates a recalculated threshold of 52 million gallons per year would limit emissions to the level previously achieved by the 15 million gallon per year threshold. DAQ’s draft proposed rule revision would also revise annual and semiannual reporting threshold requirements to 45 million gallons and 50 million gallons throughput, respectively. Details were given regarding the threshold calculations, potentially impacted facilities, and the regulatory impact analysis (RIA) results. The annual net present value (NPV) of costs and savings over the 8-year analysis period (2024-2031) was calculated to be a net savings of $83,548 when using a discount rate of 7%. Ms. Quinlan presented the anticipated rule revision timeline with a tentative effective date occurring summer of 2024. Discussion: Chair Deerhake noted that the ratios of reporting thresholds to Title V permit applicability threshold changed in the draft proposed rule. She asked for DAQ’s rationale for the change. Ms. Quinlan responded that the thresholds in the draft rule do not reflect the exact same ratios as the current rule. The ratios are similar to the same increments, being 2 million gallons between semi-annual reporting and maximum throughput. Previously, the increment was 5 million gallons between semi-annual and maximum throughput, and the draft proposed rule reflects an increment of 7 million gallons between semi-annual reporting and maximum throughput. Th e latter increment was determined to be enough capacity to give warning to the facility and to DAQ if the facility is getting close to the threshold. Chair Deerhake also asked if only the five facilities listed in the presentation package are subject to this rule, or if owners of the five facilities requested this rule change. Ms. Quinlan said those are the five facilities that have synthetic minor permits. There are no facilities that have Title V permits, and there are no other facilities that DAQ is aware of that have the capacity to place their throughput close to the current 15-million-gallon threshold. Chair Deerhake asked if any facilities are getting close to this threshold. Ms. Quinlan responded that there 3 is one facility that is around 13 million gallons, and its owner is looking to get a permit soon. Chair Deerhake also asked about the effect of this rule change on new facilities. Ms. Quinlan responded that a facility exceeding the proposed 52-million-gallons per year threshold would need to get a Title V permit, and all facilities below that threshold must have documentation that they are in compliance with the throughput limit. Chair Deerhake asked if the state’s three local air quality programs, such as the Charlotte Metropolitan Area, have any facilities that would be affected by this change. Ms. Quinlan confirmed that DAQ checked and there are not any facilities permitted by the local air quality programs with synthetic minor permits, so the fiscal note does not estimate any impact on local programs that adopt this rule change. Chair Deerhake asked about the policy regarding what year is used for the dollar values that are presented in an RIA. Ms. Quinlan responded that DAQ works with the Office of State Budget and Management (OSBM) to determine the most appropriate year, looking at a few different factors, such as the original dollar value of the various costs and savings. If modeling were involved, the most appropriate method may be to keep the same dollar value of the model outputs. In this case, some costs and savings were obtained as nominal values, while others were already in 2023 dollars. Since all costs, savings, and benefits must be converted to a consistent dollar value in order to determine the net present value (NPV), 2023 dollars were chosen for this analysis, such that only the nominal dollar values required conversion. Chair Deerhake asked about air toxics emissions from subject facilities and how those emissions are being considered in this context. Ms. Quinlan responded that there are toxic air pollutant permit procedures in 02Q .0700, which specify emission rate thresholds and a list of facilities excluded from that requirement. Gasoline facilities still have to be in compliance with the Stage I vapor recovery rule (02D .0928) and have oversight through inspections. Chair Deerhake also asked if the State believes the AP -42 emission factors are adequately validated by long-term studies. Ms. Quinlan said she has not come across any studies that contradict AP-42 information. The numbers in the rule have been updated to reflect current technologies and current AP-42 data, and the data in AP -42 are assumed to be appropriate. Commissioner Carter asked for clarification regarding what happens if a facility goes over the 52-million- gallon per year threshold. Ms. Quinlan clarified that as stated in Rule 02Q .0801, the 02Q .0800 Exclusionary Rules do not exclude facilities from the state permitting program, but rather only provide exclusion from Title V permitting for qualifying facilities. If over the proposed threshold, a facility will be subject to a Title V permit. However, these facilities are then exempt from the state permitting program elsewhere in the rules. Currently, Rule 02Q .0802 offers two options to these facilities: 1) be excluded from Title V permitting by keeping throughput below 15 million gallons, or 2) get a Title V permit. However, there is a provision in 02Q .0802 that allows the facility to request to not be subject to 02Q .0802, which opens a third option of applying for a synthetic minor permit (a type of state permit). The proposed 52- million-gallon threshold reflects a volatile organic compound (VOC) emission rate of just below 100 tons per year (tpy), and the DAQ also verified that the hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions are below the applicable major source thresholds (25 tpy of combined HAPs and 10 tpy of a single HAP). Commissioner Carter also asked if the Rule 02D .0928 requirements apply to any gas station or dispensing facility, even small “mom-and-pop” facilities. Ms. Quinlan confirmed that this is correct. Chair Deerhake asked if a monthly rolling average is appropriate for an air quality topic that is seasonally sensitive, such as ozone. Ms. Quinlan responded that this rule is written to ensure compliance with major emission source thresholds, which are set as annual values. She added this rule has a very specific focus 4 and therefore, it is appropriate to determine compliance with the threshold on a monthly rolling average. DAQ Director Mike Abraczinskas noted that in North Carolina, anthropogenic VOCs contribute very little to ozone formation, so this matter may not be critical from an ozone consideration. Chair Deerhake asked about how many additional facilities may be coming to North Carolina. Ms. Quinlan said she is not aware of any large gas stations that are imminently moving into North Carolina. If a very large gas station were installed, the threshold would need to be checked and the facility would need to obtain a Title V permit if their throughput exceeds the proposed new 52-million-gallon per year threshold. Chair Deerhake asked if RIAs do not typically include changes in growth in the industrial sector. Ms. Quinlan responded that it depends on the nature of the revision and the facilities. If there is a lot of expected change, this may be investigated and incorporated into the fiscal analysis. Chair Deerhake also asked if the AP-42 emission factor is similar to an area source emission factor. Ms. Quinlan responded that there are multiple emission factors included in the threshold calculation for each of the components that comprise the total emissions from this source. Chair Deerhake opened the floor for a motion to approve or disapprove the draft proposed rule amendments. Commissioner Carter made the motion to recommend the full EMC approve sending the proposed rule amendments and the fiscal note out for public comment. Commissioner Davis seconded the motion. The motion carried without objection. INFORMATION ITEMS Agenda Item V-1, Director’s Remarks (Mike Abraczinskas, DAQ) The Director provided an update on the Division’s staffing resources. Vacancy rates are declining, with only 22 vacancies at DAQ. The permitting section is still working to fill positions, with six vacancies in the near term. DAQ has been discussing with EPA about a possible re-instatement of the startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) State Implementation Plan (SIP) Call and best approaches for addressing this. DAQ and EPA have agreed on a path forward of submitting the SSM rules previously approved by the EMC to EPA for review and approval into the SIP, with the exception of the two paragraphs causing concern for EPA. Removing those two paragraphs from the SIP-approval will have no practical impact on implementation day-to-day. Several other states have taken this approach and have been approved in the last six months by EPA. The Director noted that his full remarks will be covered at the full EMC meeting on September 14, 2023. CLOSING REMARKS AND MEETING ADJOURNMENT Chair Deerhake noted the next meeting of the AQC is scheduled for November 8, 2023, and adjourned the meeting.