This webinar by James Westbrook, President of BlueScape Environmental, and Keith Casto, Partner of Cooper, White & Cooper, provides an overview of the new Bay Area AQMD Air Toxics Risk Reduction Rule 11-18, adopted on November 15, 2017. This webinar provides you with helpful information you can use to understand the potential impacts from Rule 11-18, and to prepare for compliance, including: overview of applicability and requirements; meaning of the Significant Risk Threshold, the Risk Action Level, TBARCT, and other key definitions; description of Rule 11-18 process steps and compliance requirements, from emissions inventory and risk prioritization, to health risk assessment and risk reduction; tips to update and refine your facility Air Toxics Emissions Inventory, and to reduce potential prioritization as a high-risk facility; tips to work with the BAAQMD on preparation of your facility health risk assessment, and to refine the modeling and health risk calculations using technical methods; how to evaluate health risk reduction options and complete a Risk Reduction Plan for BAAQMD approval; how to demonstrate emission sources will meet TBARCT; and, Rule 11-18 compliance timelines for various risk categories and compliance options. James Westbrook can be reached at jwestbrook@bluescapeinc.com or 877-486-9257. Keith Casto can be reached at 415-765-6272. Please contact us for any questions or support on the implementation of Rule 11-18 for your facility.

1. The New Bay Area
AQMD Air Toxics Risk
Reduction Rule 11-18
Will Your Facility Be One of Hundreds Impacted?
December 7, 2017
Keith Casto, Cooper, White & Cooper, LLP
James Westbrook, BlueScape

2. Webinar
Topics
• Introduction to Rule 11-18
requirements
• Working through the Compliance
Process
• Reducing emissions and health risk
impacts
• TBARCT
• Summary & Next Steps

3. About
the
Presenters
Keith Casto, Partner, Cooper White Cooper, LLP
- Mr. Casto’s practice focuses on energy and environmental
regulatory and transactional consultation, environmental
and toxic tort litigation, white-collar environmental criminal
defense, and electronic data and cybersecurity. His
expertise stems from 10 years of practice with EPA
(Atlanta, GA) and over 25 years in private practice energy
and environmental law.
James Westbrook, President, BlueScape Environmental
- Mr. Westbrook has over 30 years’ experience managing air
quality and environmental issues for industrial clients. He
has completed more than 50 AB2588 emission inventory
and HRA projects for California petroleum refineries,
manufacturers, metal processing facilities, power plants,
rock and gravel facilities, and aerospace companies.

4. On November 15, 2017, the Bay Area Air
Quality Management District (BAAQMD)
adopted a new rule, designed to reduce air
toxic emissions from facilities located in the
San Francisco Bay Area, using a health risk
assessment process.

5. } Rule 11-18 is an extension of the California
AB2588 Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Program in the
Bay Area.
} Applies only to Toxic Air Contaminants
(TACs): 200 compounds.
} Purpose to reduce hazards to human health:
cancer, non-cancer and chronic health
impacts, and acute health impacts.
} Major reductions in TACs since 1990.

6. } Of 6000 potential sources, primarily directed
at refineries, data centers, cement
manufacturing, chemical plants, crematoria,
landfills, foundries/ metal smelting, sewage
treatment facilities, power plants, military
facilities, manufacturing facilities, and
hospitals/medical facilities.
} Total: about 400 facilities.

7. } Emergency-use Stationary Diesel Engines
} Retail Gasoline Dispensing Facilities
} (CARB and CAPCOA developing industry-wide
risk management guidelines for these
industrial sectors)

8. } Significantly More Stringent Risk Action
Thresholds (especially cancer burden- from
100 to 25 to 10 in one million cancer deaths)
} Overburdened communities
} Use of Health Risk Assessments (HRAs) based
on 2015 OEHHA HRA Guidelines and CARB/
CAPCOA Risk Management Guidelines

9. } Risk Reduction Plans
} Accelerated Schedule/Request for Extension
of time
} TBARCT

10. } District prepares preliminary HRAs (except for
smaller facilities) based on existing emissions
inventory
} Facilities above risk action thresholds must
either: (1) develop risk reduction plans and
implement plan according to plan schedule if
timeline feasible; (2) ask for extension of time
(5 years or additional 5 years thereafter) if
timeline infeasible; or (3) implement TBARCT
because of technical infeasibility or to avoid
unreasonable economic burden.

11. } Public participation in both review and
implementation of risk reduction plans.
} Annual reporting.
} District must review and approve risk
reduction plans.

12. } Best Available Retrofit Control Technology (TBARCT)
} Exposed Individual (EI)
} Maximally Exposed Individual (MEI)
} Priority Community
} Risk Action Levels (e.g., 10 cancer deaths per
million)
} Risk Reduction Plan
} Significant Risk Threshold
} Source
} Toxic Risk Facility
} Unreasonable Economic Burden (for extension
beyond 5 years

13. } Section 11-18-301- Compliance with Risk
Reduction Plan
} Section 11-18-401- HRA information
Requirement
} Section 11-18-402-Early Application of Risk
Action Levels
} Section 11-18-403-Notification of HRA
Results and Submission of Plans

14. } Section 11-18-404-Risk Reduction Plan
Contents Requirements
} Section 11-18-405- Review and Approval of
Risk Reduction Plans
} Section 11-18-406-Updated Risk Reduction
Plans
} Section 11-18-501- Annual Progress Reports

15. } Install control technology
} Operating time restrictions
} Limit Throughput
} Use alternative fuels/materials
} Increase stack height
} Change stack orientation
} Relocate source
} Install TBARCT

16. } Most stringent retrofit controls: (1)
successfully utilized by same equipment; (2)
achieved by same type of equipment; or (3)
determined to be technologically feasible by
APCO.
} The definition was modified before the last
hearing to clarify that all TBARCT
determinations would consider the cost of
achieving health risk reductions, any non-air
quality health and environmental impacts,
and energy requirements

17. } Annualized cost of compliance (sum of
annual operating cost and annualized capital
costs) exceeds 10 % of annual profits of
facility or one % of annual operational budget
of non-profit facility.

18. } Technical Dispute Resolution Committee-
technical representatives of District and
facility meet jointly to address technical
issues regarding emissions inventory, HRAs
and risk reduction plans (who finally
decides?)
} Implementation Workgroup (includes
industry, affected communities) to ensure
transparency
} Direct Board Oversight

19. Keith Casto is a Partner with Cooper White
& Cooper, LLP. His practice focuses on
energy and environmental regulatory and
transactional consultation, environmental
and toxic tort litigation, white-collar
environmental criminal defense, electronic
data and cybersecurity. His energy and
environmental law expertise stems from
his 10 years of practice at the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) at
the Atlanta Regional Office and over 25
years in private practice in Northern
California and Atlanta, Georgia. He is an
expert in conventional and renewable
energy projects, greenhouse gas emissions
credit trading, green technology financing
and renewable energy project
development, and is an international
speaker on these issues.
James A. Westbrook is the President of
BlueScape Environmental. Since 1987, Mr.
Westbrook has managed or completed
more than 50 AB2588 ATIR and HRA
projects for California petroleum refineries,
rock and gravel facilities, power plants,
foundries, building material
manufacturers, coating manufacturers,
aerospace companies and many others. He
has worked closely with BAAQMD staff to
complete and refine numerous emission
inventories and HRAs under District air
permitting and AB2588 regulations. Mr.
Westbrook is a Certified Consulting
Meteorologist, and holds a B.S. in
Atmospheric Sciences from UCLA and M.S.
in Environmental Science from Indiana
University.

20. Keith M. Casto, Partner
Cooper White & Cooper LLP
201 California Street, 17th Floor
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: 415.433.1900
Direct: 415.765.6272
Mobile: 408.221.1304
Fax: 415.433.5530
E-mail: kcasto@cwclaw.com

21. Rule 11-18:
Working Through the
Compliance Process

22. Poll
What
kind
of
Bay
Area
facility
do
you
represent?
• Diesel
engine-­‐only
• Manufacturing
• Refinery
• Other
type
• I
don’t
represent
a
regulated
facility

23. Impacted Facility Types & Costs
Ref:
Rule
11-­‐18
Staff
Report,
p.42,
Oct.
2017

24. Control Equipment by Facility Type & Costs
Ref:
Rule
11-­‐18
Staff
Report,
p.40,
Oct.
2017

25. Agenda: Rule 11-18 Compliance Process
• PerspecNve:
– Air
Toxics
RegulaNon
in
the
Bay
Area
– Working
through
the
Rule
11-­‐18
process
• BAAQMD
Rule
11-­‐18
process
steps
– TAC
emission
inventory,
prioriNzaNon,
health
risk
assessment
• Risk
ReducNon
Plan
details
• How
to
avoid
a
Risk
ReducNon
Plan
• Standard
&
Case-­‐by-­‐Case
TBARCT

26. Air Toxics Regulation in the Bay Area
• 1987
–
CA
Air
Toxics
“Hot
Spots”
InformaNon
and
Assessment
Act
(AB2588)
– IniNated
Toxics
New
Source
Review
Program
• 1999
–
SB
25
–
Childrens’
Env.
Health
Prot.
Act
• 2004
–
Community
Air
Risk
EvaluaNon
(CARE)
• 2010
–
Included
Age
SensiNvity
Factors
• March
2015
–
Revised
OEHHA
Health
Risk
Assessment
(HRA)
Guidelines
• Dec.
2016
-­‐
Rule
2-­‐5
update
for
OEHHA
Guidelines
• Nov.
15,
2017,
Rule
11-­‐18
• Future
–
AB
617
Community
Monitoring

27. State AB2588 Process

28. Perspective on the 11-18 Process
• Goals:
– Protect
community
health
– Present
accurate
informaNon
– Minimize
business
impacts,
avoid
excessive
costs
• BAAQMD
Engineering
Group
is
driving
the
work
– Running
risk
prioriNzaNon
scores
– CompleNng
health
risk
assessments
– Guiding
the
risk
reducNon
outcome
• Approval
of
the
Risk
ReducNon
Plan
and
Emission
Controls
– Charging
fees
for
review
• Who
has
control
over
the
process?
You
Do!
– You
know
your
facility
processes
best
– Provide
accurate
source
and
process
informaNon
to
BAAQMD
– Agree/disagree
with
basis
of
all
technical
assumpNons
– Know
outcome
of
informaNon
before
supplied
– Right
to
review,
comment,
and
request
updates
on
BAAQMD’s
technical
analyses
– Make
proposals
for
risk
reducNon
that
make
sense,
feasible
and
cost
effecNve

29. Air Toxics Emissions Inventory
• You
want
accurate
emissions
and
source
inputs
– FaciliNes
report
annually
with
permit
fee
statements
• Most
recent
statements
for
calendar
Year
2016
• Quadrennial
AB2588
reports
may
be
“old”
• What
is
included?
“Inputs”
– Emission
sources,
permiied
and
non-­‐permiied
– Fuel
consumpNon
data
and
process
rates
– Emission
point
informaNon,
stack
parameters
• What
about
TAC
emission
rates?
• Your
consultant
should
review
previous
emission
statements
and
reports
– Revise
as
appropriate
– Request
BAAQMD
use
updates
in
risk
scoring

30. Risk Prioritization Scores
• BAAQMD
runs
site-­‐specific
cancer
and
non-­‐cancer
(chronic
and
acute)
prioriNzaNon
scores
- Score
>=
10,
high
risk
(HRA
will
be
required)
- 1
<
score
<
10,
medium
risk
- <=
1
low
risk
• PrioriNzaNon
scoring
follows
updated
guidelines
(BAAQMD,
March
2017)
• BAAQMD
will
use:
- Total
facility
emissions
and
toxicity
data
- Nearest
distance
to
receptors,
from
property
line
- Other
factors
as
required
• Receptor
types
require
verificaNon
• Your
consultant
can:
- Run
the
prioriNzaNon
scores
and
refine
emissions
- Review
and
comment
on
BAAQMD’s
analysis
Expect
the
scoring
to
be
highly
conserva4ve,
meaning
opportunity
for
refinement!!

31. Health Risk Assessment (HRA)
• Site-­‐specific
computer
modeling
• TAC
emission
rates,
max.
hourly
and
annual
average
- Process
or
fuel
rate
x
emission
factor
• Latest
technical
protocols
and
health
risk
data
• Stack
locaNons
and
emission
release
parameters
• Meteorology
and
terrain
data
• Receptor
grids
including
nearest
residents,
schools,
off-­‐site
workers
• Latest
models
include
AERMOD
and
HARP2
• Provide
technical
review
and
comment
on
BAAQMD’s
HRA

32. Risk Reduction Plan Triggers & Rule 11-18
Implementation Schedule
Ref: Rule 11-18 Staff Report, pp.32 & 38, Oct. 2017

33. Risk Reduction Plan Contents
• Discuss
toxic
emission
sources
and
points
that
contribute
to
max.
risks
• Evaluate
risk
reducNon
measures
to
be
implemented
• Provide
a
schedule
for
implementaNon
– Permit
applicaNons,
installaNon
dates,
demonstraNon
dates
• EsNmate
remaining
risk
aner
reducNon
• Cannot
reduce
below
AcNon
Level:
– Demonstrate
using
analysis
• Risk
ReducNon
Plan
is
an
enforceable
commitment!

34. Risk Reduction Strategies
to get below the Action Levels
• Update
Air
Toxic
Emission
Factors
- “Beier”
published
data,
or
source
tesNng
• Make
emissions
source
refinements,
refine
dispersion
and
risk
modeling
• OperaNonal
changes:
- Reduce
air
toxic
emissions
• Material
or
fuel
process
limits
• OperaNng
Nme
restricNons,
min/hour
or
hours/
year
- AlternaNve
fuels
and
materials
• Add-­‐on
emission
controls
–
not
TBARCT

35. Health Risk Modeling Refinements
Parameter
Technique
Effect
FugiNve
Source
Type
Volume
or
Area
Dimensions
Refine
for
iniNal
diluNon
Source
Height
Increase
Reduce
impacts
Emissions
Decrease
Decreases
impacts
linearly
Gas
Velocity
Increase
Decrease
impacts
Source
LocaNon
Relocate
Move
further
from
receptors
Time
of
OperaNon
Change
Dispersion
beier
during
day
Max.
Receptors
SpaNal
Averaging
Can
either
increase
or
decrease
impacts
Chemical
Potency
Refine
exposure
and
potency
data
Lower
health
risks

36. Requirements of Toxics Best Available
Retrofit Control Technology (TBARCT)
• Similar
to
TBACT
for
new
permits,
only:
– Retrofits
– Cost
effecNveness
considered
• In
the
approved
Risk
ReducNon
Plan
• Not
feasible
to
get
below
AcNon
Levels
• Standard
TBARCT
–
BAAQMD
Workbook
• Case-­‐by-­‐case
TBARCT
determinaNons

37. Standard TBARCT Example – Engines and
Diesel PM
BAAQMD
Dran
TBARCT
Workbook,
Oct.
2017

38. Standard TBARCT Example – Metal Melting
Electric Arc Furnace and Cr VI
Ref:
BAAQMD
Dran
TBARCT
Workbook,
Oct.
2017

39. Standard TBARCT Example – Refinery All Component Types
Ref:
BAAQMD
Dran
TBARCT
Workbook,
Oct.
2017

40. Standard TBARCT Example – Refinery Connectors
Ref:
BAAQMD
Dran
TBARCT
Workbook,
Oct.
2017

41. Detailed Case-by-Case TBARCT
Determinations
• No
standard
TBARCT,
standard
TBARCT
not
feasible,
or
unreasonable
costs
• Feasibility
ConsideraNon
– IdenNfy
all
controls,
emission
limits,
and
risk
reducNon
in
their
11-­‐18
TBARCT
plans
– IdenNfy
potenNally
feasible
and
more
stringent
controls
or
emission
limits
implemented
or
under
evaluaNon
• BAAQMD,
state
ATCMs,
federal
NSPS
and
NESHAP,
BACT
clearinghouses,
applicable
rules,
permits,
other
TBARCT
plans,
CEQA
plans,
etc.
– Site-­‐specific
factors
– All
feasible
and
agreed
upon
shall
be
implemented
• Cost
ConsideraNon
– If
TBARCT
not
agreed
upon
due
to
cost,
cost-­‐effecNveness
analysis

42. Cost-Effectiveness - Example
TBARCT Emission Reductions
– Benzene: 50 pounds/year of emission reductions
– Formaldehyde: 200 pounds/year of emission reductions
CP Weighing Factor from Column 6 of Table 2-5-1
– Benzene: 1.0 E-1
– Formaldehyde: 2.1 E-2
Toxicity Weighted Emission Reductions
– Benzene: (50 lbs/yr)*(1.0E-1) = 5.0 lbs/yr
– Formaldehyde: (200 lbs/yr)*(2.1E-2) = 4.2 lbs/yr
– Total: = 9.2 lbs/yr
Calculate the cost effectiveness of the TBARCT abatement project by dividing the Total Annualized Project
Cost by the Total Toxicity Weighted Emission Resolutions.
For a Total Annualized Project of $10,000/year and the toxicity weight emissions reductions above, the
TBARCT cost effectiveness would be:
• $10,000 year/9.2 pounds/year =
• $1,087/pound of toxicity weighted emission reductions
Ref: BAAQMD Draft TBARCT Workbook, Oct. 2017

43. Summary & Next Steps

44. Webinar Summary & Next Steps
• BAAQMD
to
review
6,000
faciliNes,
more
than
400
impacted,
but:
- Heavy
focus
on
diesel
PM,
landfills,
refineries
- Many
faciliNes
should
“drop
out”
at
the
risk
prioriNzaNon
or
the
HRA
step
• Compliance,
your
goal
should
be:
- Submit
accurate
data,
work
with
BAAQMD
early
and
onen
- Avoid
the
Risk
ReducNon
Plan
- Risk
ReducNon
Plan
-­‐
Know
process/legal
and
technical
opNons
• Get
help
from
your
aiorney
and
TAC/HRA
expert!

45. QuesNons?
Contact
InformaNon
The webinar presentation will be posted on Slideshare and
YouTube
James A. Westbrook, President
BlueScape Environmental
877-486-9257
jwestbrook@bluescapeinc.com
www.bluescapeinc.com
Keith Casto, Partner
Cooper, White & Cooper, LLP
415-433-1900
KCasto@cwclaw.com
www.cwclaw.com