Permitting and Enforcement Committee Final s2

Permitting and Enforcement Committee Final

When: May 10, 2016 Answer Place ID: 2140 9:30 a.m. – 11:45 p.m. Where: Central Office, Columbus 6th Floor - Conference Room A “Autumn Room” Facilitator: Mike Hopkins, Jeff Canan Minutes: Briana Hilton

Tim Topic Lead / Actions Needed e Involvement

9:30 Introductions All Brief introductions. 9:35

Compliance & Enforcement 9:35 * New items? Paulian/Bergman/Kavalec General discussion. 10:00

10:00 Permitting 10:30 * New items? Mike Hopkins General discussion. Bruce Weinberg/Mike Hopkins Comments on Draft to BW by 3/31/16. * Stack Test SOP 3/15/16 Clean and Revised PDF copy attached along with the May 10 P&E Agenda.

Mike Hopkins Request update on meeting tentatively * Quad State Oil & Gas scheduled for June 22.

Kelly Saavedra See #1 CDO: Below * TV & NSR Permit

10:30 Short Break, If Needed. All 10:40

10:40 P&E Bylaws 3/8/16: Mike H. to give back to Bob Mike Hopkins 11:00 * New Bylaws Hodanbosi to review.

10/10/15: Mercury Modeling from Jim 11:00 General Permit & Permit-By- Crematories GP- Cleveland Braun is with Ben Cirker. 11:15 Rule Development 3/8/16: Ben not to it yet. * Create new GPs and PBRs 3/8/16: There are many changes and will send to P&E group again for Compressor Stations GP #14 comments. Will then need added formal 30 day comment period.

Grain Elevator Operations GP 3/8/16: Proposal should be out soon.

11:15 Engineering Guide Revisions 11:30 #6 - PTI for Coal to Oil Misty Parsons reviewing guide Conversion #16 – Conditions for Requiring CDO (Bryon Marusek) & SWDO 10/10/15: Craig to define MM&R Additional Source Compliance (Craig Osborne) program, use actuals and more clearly Tests define “discretion”. Permitting & Enforcement Committee Meeting May 10, 2016 Tim Topic Lead / Actions Needed e Involvement #18 - SO2 Compliance 10/10/15: Review 9/24/15 Draft and Toledo – Matt Stanfield Determination Methods for Boilers get comments to Matt. #23 - Determination of Significant Comments received and making Figures for TSP Emission SEDO revisions. Limitations #29 - Applicability of the PTI Rules to Increases in Capacity of CDO update on progress a Derated Boiler #42 - Definition of BAT for New NWDO Beginning initial review Sources 6/23/15: If Sudhir has no comments #44 - Permit Issuance Policy for and if comment period has concluded Relocation of Portable/Mobile CO/SEDO then Erica and Sarah can start Facilities working on changes. Draft revisions distributed for review #45 - Calculation of "Potential to 9/9/13. Comments until 10/11/13. Canton Emit" for Surface Coating Lines Reviewing comments then will resend draft. #46 - Determination of Cost- Effectiveness for BAT and RACM NWDO Beginning initial review Evaluations #48 - VOC Compliance update on progress – reviewing guide Canton Determinations for Coating Lines – Draft expected by end of January #53 - Interpretation of Open Paul Braun Update on progress – reviewing guide. Burning Standards #58 - Definition of “Facility” for Beginning draft revisions due to recent Drew Bergman Ohio Title V Permit Program court decisions #70 - Guidance on Evaluating Emissions of Toxic Air Pollution Compounds when Processing Mike Hopkins Mike Hopkins to review comments. Permit-to-Install (PTI) Applications. 7/23/15: [On hold until asphalt plant testing issues are resolved.] Alan and #74 – Stack testing for PM2.5 Andrew Hall Jim K. have been in discussion & with court decision resolved – May be able to move forward on EG 74 & 83.

Final recommendation submitted to #80 – Methods for Calculating Mike Hopkins on 7/24/2014. May CDO PTE need to re-evaluate it based on recent BAT guidance.

7/23/15: [On hold until asphalt plant testing issues are resolved.] #83 – Asphalt Testing Production Todd Brown/Alan Todd Brown came up with procedure Rates for running at max pot - May be able to move forward on EG 74 & 83. #84 – Non-road Engines SEDO update on progress

page2of4 Permitting & Enforcement Committee Meeting May 10, 2016 Tim Topic Lead / Actions Needed e Involvement

11:30 New items 11:45 * Emergency Engines Jan Tredway NWDO See #2 NWDO; below.

#1 CDO: In regards to TV and NSR permitting, in scenarios with a control device limiting pollutants from over major source thresholds to below major source thresholds, how is PTE being evaluated (before or after control) and what is the resulting permitting classification? Does Engineering Guide 80 communicate the correct methodology for determining this, and if so, is it being followed? If it isn’t, then how is PTE being determined, and what is the resulting permitting classification (with what enforceable restrictions? then synthetic minor or true minor?)? How is 3745-31-05(F) in lieu of 31- 05(D) being utilized? Does Engineering Guide 80 need revisited and rewritten…it was included in our SOPs to CO that are being compiled, so are we expected to follow it?

We here in CDO have defaulted to before-control emissions as PTE for Title V purposes. For example, if a facility utilizing controls (as mentioned above) would want to avoid Title V, then the facility would need to make their control device(s) federally enforceable (through associated permit terms and draft issuance), and they would then result in a synthetic minor permit status. This seems to be the correct approach supported in published US EPA guidance as well as our own Engineering Guide 80. But we would like to hear everyone’s input and discussion about this topic since we have received guidance and direction recently regarding other permitting approaches for this scenario. We also want to understand how we should proceed from here forward, so we can successfully train new permitting staff on PTE evaluation.

#2 NWDO EMERGENCY ENGINES: The current permit-by-rule (PBR) for emergency electrical generators, water pumps, and air compressors powered by internal combustion engines has never really “lined up” with NSPS & RICE MACT requirements (as evidenced by the Director’s F&Os in April 2013 which allowed peak shaving until May 2014).

A recent DC Appeals Court decision vacated the “emergency demand response and low voltage and frequency” provisions of NSPS & RICE MACT. USEPA has indicated, the vacatur means emergency engines may not operate for the purpose of emergency demand response or low voltage and frequency situations. The vacatur of emergency demand response and low voltage and frequency provisions (which are defined as emergency situations in our state rules) has presented an additional layer of our emergency engine PBR differing or departing from federal rules. NWDO is looking for input as to how to precede going forward with what seems to be the ever constant changing emergency engine rules.

Pending Action Items Date Action Completed 3/8/16: Send all comments/recommendations to Mike Hopkins by the end of this week, 3/11/16. Next step will Possible revisions to permit application & instructions then be determined.

3/8/16: [CDO to consider how to resolve EG #61 and/or Chapter 77 rules as relates to 20% provision used to EG #61 vs 20% provision avoid Title V applicability.] Mike Hopkins yet to talk to A. Hall and B. Cirker about adding it into the rules.

Updated 5/6/2016 jrc

Next meeting: July 12, 2016

page3of4 Permitting & Enforcement Committee Meeting May 10, 2016

page4of4