P & E minutes November 13, 2012

Permitting & Enforcement Committee Meeting –November 13, 2012

Lazarus Government Center

Ohio EPA

7th Floor DAPC conference room

Attendees:Co-Chairs–Sean Vadas (Akron), TBA

Minutes –Jenny Avellana (CO)

- John Paulian, Mike Hopkins,Mike Ahern,Cheryl Suttman, Alan Lloyd(CO),Rick Carleski (OCAPP/CO), Drew Bergman (CO-Legal), Todd Scarborough (CDO), Duane LaClair, (Akron), Eric Bewley, Kevin Fortune(NEDO), Carl Safreed(Canton), Jeff Canan (RAPCA), Sarah Harter (SEDO), Anne Chamberlin (Portsmouth), Peter Park (Toledo), Bonnie Pray(SWOAQA), Bryan Sokolowski, Mary McGeary(CDAQ)

  1. Enforcement issues –John Paulian

John – Bruce is doing Compliance Assurance through Enforcement Plan (CATEP) training for Districts and Locals. We are in process of implementing that.

The US EPA audit went well. We found flaws with their process, as it was the first time they ran this particular protocol. They didn’t like the inconsistency ofour inspection forms. They liked another format better. Some range from writing notes on title V permit to a pretty long form. They will want to see some consistency with that form. John may be contacting DO/LAAs again for information to submit draft to US EPA.

Thanks to everyone for submitting files that he asked for to prepare for the audit.

  1. New Source Review –Mike Hopkins

US EPA issued a direct final approval of some of our NSR rules. Unfortunately they messed it up and they will have to withdraw the approval – some of PBR stuff and storage tank exemption that we added in. Some PTIO program stuff and start construction stuff. They got mixed up on what was going to be in this approval, and didn’t intend to include the start construction rule (31-33). So there will be another federal register notice that withdraws what they issued and approved, then another federal register with a direct final approval of the parts they intended to approve (this will probably take another month or so). The main problem they have is with our language that talks about the director having some discretion. They see it as the director being able to allow companies to start construction no matter what. The intent was actually to recognize other activities that are not on the list that companies could do before getting their permit. We will probably end up clarifying that language. We need to show US EPA why the additions to the list are consistent with the rule.

Progress on permits – we are in really good shape with installation permits and right around goal of 200 permits statewide. Renewals are coming up again at the end of the year with next the 6-month goal period ending. Renewals should be done by the end of the year to meet our next round of goals. Andrew has been in contact with folks for Title V renewals and utility renewals. We should be able to meet the goals.

We are expecting in 2013 to get quite a few well-site GP applications (maybe 1000 statewide). These are relatively easy to do but it still takes work to process these.

We have seen midstream facilities that take the gas from multiple wells and clean it up or compressor facilities that move the gas along. We expect to see more applications from these types of facilities as well. These are not done by GP, these are case-by-case permits. Cheryl has drafted T&Cs for all the different engines that are associated with some of these facilities. These are in the T&C Library.

Still working on GP for oil & gas well modifications. We are getting close on that. We will probably need to make changes to incorporate NSPS into GP – it also covers activities that occurred before the production phase of the well – after fractured well and flowback of material – this is regulated by NSPS – we have previously said this is part of construction of the well and permit not needed for flowback process. But now we will probably have to do a PBR for flowback process, and will incorporate NSPS requirements. The main reason for doing it is to make it clear that Ohio EPA is the main regulatory agency for that part of the NSPS. Rather than have company go to feds when there is a problem, they will come to us. This means a rule change and adding a PBRinto the rule, so will be some time before that happens. Inthe meantime, companies need to comply with NSPS.

US EPA wants to do an audit of our permit program. They are asking for dates in March sometime. We have had some discussions with them about the fact that many of the permit files are not in CO, so coming to CO might not be beneficial for the audit.

Chromium MACT – Akron – recently did about 7 PTIO renewals on chromium process tanks. The issue is the expiration is about 9 or 10 years away. MACT updating record keeping requirements and lowering emission limitations– will we need to reopen these permits and reissue to reflect updated MACT requirements? If the MACT updates require some sort of conflict that they cannot comply with both at the same time – our permit and the new MACT updates. Apparently there are some conflicts – we might have to do some administrative mods to correct those. Cheryl just updated all of those terms, and these are in the library. Existing units have until September 2014 to comply - when all the limits change.

Oil & Gas Wells subject to NSPS subpart OOOO – from agenda:

Canton has received a notification for a conventional, non-Utica Shale well (currently not within the scope of the Oil & Gas Well General Permit program). The conventional well is subject to NSPS subpart OOOO, but the GP is not supposed to be for conventional (non-Shale) wells. What should they do with these notifications?

Mike Hopkins – at this time we are not going to require companies to get permits for a conventional oil well. We previously decided the operation was small enough not to need a permit. Companies may send notifications to us, but US EPA needs the notification since we will not be regulating them under the permit program. If they copied US EPA, we don’t need to do anything. If not, contact company and tell them to send those to US EPA.

3.STARS2 and permit issuance update– Mike Ahern

We updated permit templates to update 40th anniversary logo. We are getting ready to gear up for next year’s emissions reporting period. We are looking at which populations are going to get the reminder letters. Tom Velalis says there are no significant changes for emissions reporting.

Outstanding item – Compliance Certifications – Most utilities are reporting excess opacity deviation reports and one utility is not. Mike is reviewing the calendar year 2011 deviation reports to see which facilities are identifying deviation reports as part of the compliance certification. He will have more information on that soon.

Mike is setting up a call with US EPA to talk about whether compliance certifications submitted through Air Services can be recognized by US EPA. Hopefully this coming year will be the first year companies can submit their compliance certifications just through Air Services.

E-document management project still progressing. Permanent solution will be ready early June of next year. This is pretty powerful software for scanning documents. It is being set up for locals to have same functionality as the DOs – locals will no longer need to scan, just save documents into the system. For the back file – all of Akron is done, all Toledo documents are in, all Mahoning-Trumble is in. NWDO is the only outstanding office – still need some open burning documents.

CETA integration – Elisa and Safaa will be doing some final testing this week.

4.New Rules and SIP Update – Paul Braun

No update

5.Terms and Conditions - Cheryl Suttman

The Chromium Electroplating NESHAP, Subpart N, has been separated into the categories identified by the standards. These templates are updated for the amendments of 9/19/12. Each category contains all of the applicable control options; i.e., the un-chosen options will still need to be deleted.

New terms have been drafted for OAC 3745-21-10(B), the determination of VOC content, solids content, and density of coatings, VOC mass emission rate, and VOC control efficiency.

New terms have been drafted for OAC 3745-21-10(C), the determination of VOC concentration, VOC mass emission rate, and VOC control efficiency.

The terms for OAC 3745-21-09(Y), for flexographic, packaging rotogravure, and publication rotogravure lines, have been updated to include the recordkeeping and reporting requirements from OAC 3745-21-09(B) and PER the report.

Coating terms B4 and B5, for a demonstration of compliance by using complying coatings and a daily volume-weighted average VOC content, were modified and the PER report was added.

The new source CEM certification testing terms were repaired to read:Within 60 days of achieving the maximum production rate at which the emissions unit(s) will be operated, but not later than 180 days after initial startup, the permittee shall conduct certification tests of the CEM...... The original terms said that CEM certification must be completed “within 60 days of the effective date of this permit”. This term has read this way since 1997. It could easily require certification before the source is installed.

The General Permit (GP) for Natural Gas and Oil Well-Site Production has been modified into 2 GPs. They are almost ready for public comment. A larger flare was requested for the storage vessels; so I drafted a 2nd GP for the larger flare and lowered the allowable total horsepower for the natural gas engines in order to pass modeling for NOx, which was already permitted at the max.

It has been determined that a permit will not be required for flowback operations, since well completion is finished so quickly and we know of a few other states who are not requiring permits. However, a permit-by-rule for flowback operations will soon be submitted for public comment. The template permits in the Library for flowback can be used for inspections or guidance.

Please take a few minutes to send Cheryl any mistakes that you find in the Library. The CEM mistake has been in the T&Cs for 15 years and it must have caused countless problems. Last week was the first time it was ever mentioned (by Alan Lloyd).

  1. Engineering Guide update-

EG #51 – Number of Sampling Runs to be Witnessed by Agency Observers – RAPCA. Jeff believes an update to this EG is not needed, that we should keep this one general without listing specifics or get rid of the EG altogether. He will talk to Bruce and Todd Brown.

EG #80 – Sean received comments that some changes may be needed for this EG, even though it recently went final.

Remaining Engineering Guides not revise since the 1980s – would anyone like to volunteer to revise any of the following EGs?

Guide 38 - Use of Exempt Organic Compounds to Satisfy BAT Requirements / 7/20/1982
Guide 39 - Conversion to Exempt Organic Compounds to Create Emission Offsets under the Bubble Concept & PTI / 8/25/1982
Guide 40 - Stack Testing Methods for Particulate Emissions from Process Equipment and Incinerators / 11/5/1982
Guide 41 - Stack Testing Methods for Particulate Emissions from Fuel Burning Equipment / 11/5/1982
Guide 42 - Definition of BAT for New Sources / 12/30/1982
Guide 46 - Determination of Cost-Effectiveness for BAT and RACM Evaluations / 12/5/1983
Guide 47 - Application of TSP Emission Limitations to Cyclones at Alfalfa Dehydrating Plants / 11/30/1984
Guide 49 - Particulate Emission Testing During Boiler Soot blowing Operations / 12/17/1985
Guide 54 - Use of Brine for Road Dust Suppression / 1/13/1987
  1. General Permits–

Rick Carleski is working on Misc Metal GP. He says that they are in the midst of getting modeling scenarios back from Sarah, and the rest of the permitting depends on the modeling results.

  1. Training –

3 possible courses coming up (no dates yet):

APTI 418 – Control of NOx Emissions

APTI 423 – Air Pollution Dispersion Models and Applications

APTI 445 – Inspection of Particulate Control Devices

Annual DAPC workshop will be held December 4, 2012.

  1. New Items –

Non-road Engines Flowchart is now on Answer Place #2470

US EPA is forming a workgroup to look at revising landfill NSPS. Dick Lindstromis attending call and he is supposed to report back to Mike Hopkins. If you have questions or comments, send to Dick.

Canton posted position for permit writer. MACT coordinator position in CO being offered.

  1. Pending Action Items –

From agenda:

Pending Action Items suggested by P&E Committee / Date Action Completed
1. Update preliminary completeness letter to address site preparation activities allowed under 31-33. / Final proposed sent 8/31/12 – Final template issued and uploaded to STARS2 11/2/12 – Canton believes the template is confusing as it is written. The letter implies that in order to start construction, the company has to meet the criteria listed, but actually this criteria needs only to be met to complete the activities listed in paragraph (F) of rule 31-33, it does not need to be met to complete the activities listed in paragraph (E). Canton submitted proposed language to help clarify the difference between paragrahphs (E) and (F), but during the meeting Carl said that another option would be to leave out details about specific paragraphs and just refer to the site preparation activities rule as a whole, 3745-31-33. Mike Hopkins stated his support for this simplified approach. Changes will be made to the letter and sent out for another review.
2. EAC form for Chrome Plating / Posted online 8/2/12.
3. Shale Oil/Gas Facility Naming / Canton to create Answer Place topic addressing the proposed naming technique. – Submitted language 8/10/12 – approach to be proposed in revised GP for comment. Use GP to track progress.
4. Dry cleaner general permit revision / Akron to revise necessary documents and submit to Mike and Cheryl for review. – submitted 7/19/12

P&E Minutes are available in Answer Place Topic ID 2140.

------Next meeting is Tuesday, January 8, 2013.

Please note: This document is intended for internal DAPC use only and may not reflect Agency policy or position regarding any materials accessed via this document.