AQ-2022-002-RULE245-REPORTTOTHEBOS-2023-04-26.PDF

Board Hearing Date: 
April 26, 2023 
Case Number/Title:  
AQ-2022-002-Rule 245 (Continuous Source Emission 
Monitoring) 
Agenda Item: 
(Pending) 
Supervisor Districts: 
All Districts 
The Maricopa County Air Quality Department (MCAQD) complied with all statutory and county 
policies throughout this rulemaking process. Per the Enhanced Regulatory Outreach Program 
(EROP) Policy: “In addition to the required staff report, an executive summary of the report including 
an overview of stakeholder input and staff responses will be provided to the Board of Supervisors at 
least one week prior to any Board of Supervisors’ public hearing.”   
Overview of the Report to the Board of Supervisors: 
The purpose of Rule 245 is to set forth continuous source emission monitoring requirements for fossil 
fuel-fired steam generators, nitric acid plants, sulfuric acid plants, and fluid bed catalytic cracking units. 
Rule 245 was adopted to address Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP) requirements in 40 CFR 
51.214. Per 40 CFR 51.214, each SIP must contain legally enforceable procedures to require stationary 
sources subject to emission standards as part of an applicable plan to install, calibrate, maintain, and 
operate equipment for continuously monitoring and recording emissions. Per Appendix P of 40 CFR 
51, the requirements in 40 CFR 51.214 apply to owners and operators of fossil fuel-fired steam 
generators, nitric acid plants, sulfuric acid plants, and fluid bed catalytic cracking units. 
The purpose of this rulemaking is to revise Rule 245 since it has not been approved into the Arizona 
SIP because of rule approvability issues identified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
(EPA), such as control officer discretion. Consequently, the precursor rule to Rule 245, Rule 41 
(Monitoring) which was adopted in 1979, remains in the SIP. MCAQD is proposing to revise Rule 
245 to address rule approvability issues identified by EPA and to replace Rule 41 with the revised rule. 
Replacing Rule 41 with Rule 245 will update the SIP. 
Proposed revisions also include removing “fossil fuel-fired steam generators” as a source subject to 
Rule 245 due to similar requirements already addressed in Rule 322 (Power Plant Operations) and 
replacing an obsolete testing method reference with an EPA performance specification for 
transmissometer testing. 
The proposed revisions clarify rule applicability, update the rule, and address rule approvability issues 
identified by the EPA. 
Overview of Stakeholder Input and Staff Responses: 
MCAQD has not received any comments on the rulemaking.
Executive Summary of the Report to the Board of Supervisors 
Prepared by Maricopa County Air Quality Department 
1

Report to the Board of Supervisors 
Prepared by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department 
Board of Health Meeting Date: October 24, 2022 
Board Hearing Date: 
April 26, 2023 
Case Number/Title:  
AQ-2022-02-Rule 245 (Continuous Source Emission Monitoring)  
Agenda Item: 
(Pending) 
Supervisor Districts: 
All Districts 
Applicant:  
Staff 
Request: 
Approve revision of Maricopa County Air Pollution Control 
Regulations, Rule 245 (Continuous Source Emission Monitoring) and 
approve submission of the revised rule as a revision to the Arizona 
State Implementation Plan (SIP). 
The purpose of Rule 245 is to set forth continuous source emission 
monitoring requirements for fossil fuel-fired steam generators, nitric 
acid plants, sulfuric acid plants, and fluid bed catalytic cracking units. 
Rule 245 was adopted to address Arizona State Implementation Plan 
(SIP) requirements in 40 CFR 51.214. Per 40 CFR 51.214, each SIP 
must contain legally enforceable procedures to require stationary 
sources subject to emission standards as part of an applicable plan to 
install, calibrate, maintain, and operate equipment for continuously 
monitoring and recording emissions. Per Appendix P of 40 CFR 51, 
the requirements in 40 CFR 51.214 apply to owners and operators of 
fossil fuel-fired steam generators, nitric acid plants, sulfuric acid 
plants, and fluid bed catalytic cracking units. 
The purpose of this rulemaking is to revise Rule 245 since it has not 
been approved into the Arizona SIP because of rule approvability 
issues identified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
(EPA), such as control officer discretion. Consequently, the 
precursor rule to Rule 245, Rule 41 (Monitoring) which was adopted 
in 1979, remains in the SIP. The Maricopa County Air Quality 
Department (MCAQD) is proposing to revise Rule 245 to address 
rule approvability issues identified by EPA and to replace Rule 41 
with the revised rule. Replacing Rule 41 with Rule 245 will update the 
SIP. 
Proposed revisions also include removing “fossil fuel-fired steam 
generators” as a source subject to Rule 245 due to similar 
requirements already addressed in Rule 322 (Power Plant Operations) 
and replacing an obsolete testing method reference with an EPA 
performance specification for transmissometer testing. 
2

MCAQD is proposing to revise Rule 245 to clarify rule applicability, 
update the rule, and address rule approvability issues identified by the 
EPA. 
Support/Opposition: 
During the rulemaking process, MCAQD has not received any 
comments from stakeholders. 
Staff 
Recommendation: 
Approve 
Board of Health 
Recommendation: 
Approve 
Additional Comments: 
This regulatory change is following the Enhanced Regulatory 
Outreach Program (EROP) Policy and workflow process. The 
County Manager briefed the Board of Supervisors regarding this 
rulemaking in April 2022. A Stakeholder Workshop was held on 
September 29, 2022. 
The Board of Health approved an expedited rulemaking process for 
Rule 245 on October 24, 2022 and the Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking was posted on the EROP website on November 16, 
2022. 
A newspaper notice of the Board of Supervisors public hearing will 
be published in the Arizona Business Gazette on March 16, 2023 and 
March 23, 2023. This regulatory change will take effect immediately 
upon approval by the Board of Supervisors. 
Presented By: 
Philip A. McNeely, R.G., Director 
Prepared By: 
Planning and Analysis Division 
Attachments: 
Preamble required by Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) § 49-471.07 
(See the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking) 
Summary of the proposed regulatory change (See Item 4 of the Draft 
Notice of Final Rulemaking) 
Analysis of input received during the process and how that input was 
responded to (See Item 9 of the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking) 
Language of proposed regulatory change or amendment (See the 
Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking) 
Draft Rule 245 - Strikethrough/underline version 
Draft Rule 245 - Clean version   
Copies of all written and electronic Stakeholder input 
(MCAQD has not received any comments on the rulemaking)
Minutes from Board of Health meeting – October 24, 2022
3

DRAFT NOTICE OF FINAL RULEMAKING 
MARICOPA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS 
REGULATION II – PERMITS AND FEES 
RULE 245: CONTINUOUS SOURCE EMISSION MONITORING 
The Maricopa County Air Quality Department (MCAQD) is proposing to amend Rule 245 
(Continuous Source Emission Monitoring). The Control Officer is posting this Draft Notice of 
Final Rulemaking on the Maricopa County Enhanced Regulatory Outreach Program (EROP) 
website as part of the Report to the Board of Supervisors, in accordance with the Maricopa County 
EROP Policy. This notice includes the preamble, as prescribed in Arizona Revised Statute (A.R.S.) § 
49-471.05, and the full text of the rule, including the intended actions to make new sections or 
amend, repeal, or renumber the sections of the rule. This notice also includes a list of all previous 
notices posted on the Maricopa County EROP website addressing the proposed rule and the 
concise explanatory statement prescribed in A.R.S. § 49-471.07(B). 
PREAMBLE 
1.
Statutory authority for the rulemaking (A.R.S. § 49-471.05(1)):
A.R.S. §§ 49-112, 49-474, 49-479 and 49-480
2.
Name and address of department personnel with whom persons may communicate
regarding the rulemaking (A.R.S. § 49-471.05(2)):
Name:
Lisa Richey or Kimberly Butler 
Maricopa County Air Quality Department 
Planning and Analysis Division 
Address: 
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 410 
Phoenix, AZ 85003 
Telephone: 
602-506-6010 
Fax: 
602-506-6179 
Email: 
AQPlanning@maricopa.gov 
Online: 
Submit a Comment 
3.
Rulemaking process (A.R.S. § 49-471.05(3)):
This rulemaking is following procedures identified in state statutes and the Maricopa County
EROP Policy.
County Manager Briefing:
April 6, 2022 
Stakeholder Workshop:
September 29, 2022 
Board of Health Meeting to Approve Expedited
Process Rulemaking:
October 24, 2022 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking:
November 16, 2022 
Return to list of attachments
4

Board of Supervisors Formal Meeting to Set the 
Public Hearing: 
March 15, 2023 
Board of Supervisors Public Hearing: 
April 26, 2023 
4.
Explanation of the rule, including the control officer's reasons for initiating the
rulemaking (A.R.S. § 49-471.05(4)):
The purpose of Rule 245 is to set forth continuous source emission monitoring
requirements for fossil fuel-fired steam generators, nitric acid plants, sulfuric acid plants, and
fluid bed catalytic cracking units. Rule 245 was adopted to address Arizona State
Implementation Plan (SIP) requirements in 40 CFR 51.214. Per 40 CFR 51.214, each SIP
must contain legally enforceable procedures to require stationary sources subject to emission
standards as part of an applicable plan to install, calibrate, maintain, and operate equipment
for continuously monitoring and recording emissions. Per Appendix P of 40 CFR 51, the
requirements in 40 CFR 51.214 apply to owners and operators of fossil fuel-fired steam
generators, nitric acid plants, sulfuric acid plants, and fluid bed catalytic cracking units.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to revise Rule 245 since it has not been approved into the
Arizona SIP because of rule approvability issues identified by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), such as control officer discretion. Consequently, the precursor
rule to Rule 245, Rule 41 (Monitoring) which was adopted in 1979, remains in the SIP.
MCAQD is proposing to revise Rule 245 to address rule approvability issues identified by
EPA and to replace Rule 41 with the revised rule. Replacing Rule 41 with Rule 245 will
update the SIP.
Proposed revisions also include removing “fossil fuel-fired steam generators” as a source
subject to Rule 245 due to similar requirements already addressed in Rule 322 (Power Plant
Operations) and replacing an obsolete testing method reference with an EPA performance
specification for transmissometer testing.
The proposed revisions clarify rule applicability, update the rule, and address rule
approvability issues identified by the EPA.
5.
Studies relied on in the control officer's evaluation of or justification for the rule and
where the public may obtain or review the studies, all data underlying the studies,
any analysis of the studies and other supporting material (A.R.S. § 49-471.05(5)).
No studies were relied on in the control officer’s evaluation of the rule.
6.
An economic, small business and consumer impact statement (A.R.S. § 49-471.05(6)):
The following discussion addresses each of the elements required for an economic, small
business and consumer impact statement, as prescribed by A.R.S. §§ 41-1055, subsections A,
B and C, and 41-1035:
An identification of the proposed rulemaking, including all of the following (A.R.S. §
41-1055(A)(1)):
This rulemaking is proposing to revise Rule 245.
(a) The conduct and its frequency of occurrence that the rule is designed to change
(A.R.S. § 41-1055(A)(1)(a)). 
Return to list of attachments
5

Not Applicable. The proposed revisions to Rule 245 limit the applicability to nitric acid 
plants, sulfuric acid plants, and fluid bed catalytic cracking units. None of these sources 
currently exist in Maricopa County and no new regulatory requirements are being 
proposed with this rulemaking. Therefore, there is no change to conduct or frequency of 
occurrence. 
(b) The harm resulting from the conduct the rule is designed to change and the 
likelihood it will continue to occur if the rule is not changed (A.R.S. § 41-
1055(A)(1)(b)). 
Not Applicable. The proposed revisions to Rule 245 limit the applicability to nitric acid 
plants, sulfuric acid plants, and fluid bed catalytic cracking units. None of these sources 
currently exist in Maricopa County and no new regulatory requirements are being 
proposed with this rulemaking. Therefore, there is no harm resulting from the conduct 
the rule is designed to change or the likelihood it will continue to occur if the rule is not 
changed. 
(c) The estimated change in frequency of the targeted conduct expected from the 
rule change (A.R.S. § 41-1055(A)(1)(c)).  
Not Applicable. The proposed revisions to Rule 245 limit the applicability to nitric acid 
plants, sulfuric acid plants, and fluid bed catalytic cracking units. None of these sources 
currently exist in Maricopa County and no new regulatory requirements are being 
proposed with this rulemaking. Therefore, there is no estimated change in frequency. 
A brief summary of the information included in the economic, small business and 
consumer impact statement (A.R.S. § 41-1055(A)(2)). 
This rulemaking should not have an economic impact on small businesses or consumers in 
Maricopa County. The proposed revisions to Rule 245 limit the applicability to nitric acid 
plants, sulfuric acid plants, and fluid bed catalytic cracking units. None of these sources 
currently exist in Maricopa County and no new regulatory requirements are being proposed 
with this rulemaking. 
Name and address of agency employees who may be contacted to submit or request 
additional data on the information included in the economic, small business and 
consumer impact statement (A.R.S. § 41-1055(A)(3)). 
Name: 
Lisa Richey or Kimberly Butler 
Maricopa County Air Quality Department 
Planning and Analysis Division 
Address: 
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 410 
Phoenix, AZ 85003 
Telephone: 
602-506-6010 
Fax: 
602-506-6179 
Email: 
AQPlanning@maricopa.gov 
Online: 
Submit a Comment 
An identification of the persons who will be directly affected by, bear the costs of or 
directly benefit from the proposed rulemaking (A.R.S. § 41-1055(B)(2)). 
6

This rulemaking is proposing to revise Rule 245. Once the rule is revised, it will only apply to 
nitric acid plants, sulfuric acid plants, and fluid bed catalytic cracking units of which none 
exist in Maricopa County. Therefore, there are no persons who will be directly affected by, 
bear the costs of or directly benefit from the proposed rulemaking. 
A cost benefit analysis of the following: 
(a) The probable costs and benefits to the implementing agency and other agencies 
directly affected by the implementation and enforcement of the proposed 
rulemaking (A.R.S. § 41-1055(B)(3)(a)). 
This rulemaking does not impose any new compliance burdens on permitted sources or 
introduce additional regulatory requirements. Therefore, MCAQD does not anticipate 
this rulemaking will have an economic impact on either MCAQD or any other agency. 
(b) The probable costs and benefits to a political subdivision of this state directly 
affected by the implementation and enforcement of the proposed rulemaking 
(A.R.S. § 41-1055(B)(3)(b)). 
This rulemaking does not impose any new compliance burdens on permitted sources or 
introduce additional regulatory requirements. Therefore, MCAQD does not anticipate 
this rulemaking will have an economic impact on any political subdivision of this state. 
(c) The probable costs and benefits to businesses directly affected by the proposed 
rulemaking, including any anticipated effect on the revenues or payroll 
expenditures of employers who are subject to the proposed rulemaking (A.R.S. § 
41-1055(B)(3)(c)). 
This rulemaking does not impose any new compliance burdens on permitted sources or 
introduce additional regulatory requirements. Therefore, MCAQD does not anticipate 
this rulemaking will have an economic impact on any businesses. 
A general description of the probable impact on private and public employment 
in businesses, agencies and political subdivisions of this state directly affected by 
the proposed rulemaking (A.R.S. § 41-1055(B)(4)). 
This rulemaking does not impose any new compliance burdens on permitted sources or 
introduce additional regulatory requirements. Therefore, MCAQD does not anticipate 
this rulemaking will have an economic impact on private or public employment in 
business, agencies or political subdivisions. 
A statement of the probable impact of the proposed rulemaking on small businesses. 
The statement shall include: 
(a) An identification of the small businesses subject to the proposed rulemaking 
(A.R.S. § 41-1055(B)(5)(a)). 
Currently there are no small businesses operating nitric acid plants, sulfuric acid plants, 
or fluid bed catalytic cracking units in Maricopa County. 
(b) The administrative and other costs required for compliance with the proposed 
rulemaking (A.R.S. § 41-1055(B)(5)(b)). 
Currently there are no small businesses operating nitric acid plants, sulfuric acid plants, 
or fluid bed catalytic cracking units in Maricopa County. Additionally, the proposed 
7

revisions of this rulemaking do not impose any new compliance requirements and 
therefore, no costs are required for compliance with the proposed rulemaking. 
(c) A description of the methods that the agency may use to reduce the impact on 
small businesses (A.R.S. § 41-1055(B)(5)(c)). 
i.
Establish less stringent compliance or reporting requirements in the rule for
small businesses (A.R.S. § 41-1035(1)).
Currently there are no small businesses operating nitric acid plants, sulfuric acid
plants, or fluid bed catalytic cracking units in Maricopa County. Additionally, the
proposed revisions of this rulemaking do not impose any new compliance or
reporting requirements on small businesses.
ii. Establish less stringent schedules or deadlines in the rule for compliance or
reporting requirements for small businesses (A.R.S. § 41-1035(2)).
Currently there are no small businesses operating nitric acid plants, sulfuric acid
plants, or fluid bed catalytic cracking units in Maricopa County. Additionally, the
proposed revisions of this rulemaking do not impose any new compliance or
reporting requirements on small businesses.
iii. Consolidate or simplify the rule's compliance or reporting requirements for
small businesses (A.R.S. § 41-1035(3)).
Currently there are no small businesses operating nitric acid plants, sulfuric acid
plants, or fluid bed catalytic cracking units in Maricopa County. Additionally, the
proposed revisions of this rulemaking do not impose any new compliance or
reporting requirements on small businesses.
iv. Establish performance standards for small businesses to replace design or
operational standards in the rule (A.R.S. § 41-1035(4)).
Currently there are no small businesses operating nitric acid plants, sulfuric acid
plants, or fluid bed catalytic cracking units in Maricopa County. Additionally, the
proposed revisions of this rulemaking do not impose any new compliance or
reporting requirements on small businesses.
v. Exempt small businesses from any or all requirements of the rule (A.R.S. § 41-
1035(5)).
Currently there are no small businesses operating nitric acid plants, sulfuric acid
plants, or fluid bed catalytic cracking units in Maricopa County; therefore, there are
no small businesses to exempt from any or all requirement of the proposed rule.
(d) The probable cost and benefit to private persons and consumers who are directly 
affected by the proposed rulemaking (A.R.S. § 41-1055(B)(5)(d)). 
This rulemaking should not result in any significant costs for private persons or consumers. 
A statement of the probable effect on state revenues (A.R.S. § 41-1055(B)(6)). 
The rulemaking will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state 
agencies, political subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated. Without 
costs to pass through to customers, there is no projected change in consumer purchase 
patterns and, thus, no impact on state revenues from sales taxes. 
8

A description of any less intrusive or less costly alternative methods of achieving the 
purpose of the proposed rulemaking, including the monetizing of the costs and 
benefits for each option and providing the rationale for not using nonselected 
alternatives (A.R.S. § 41-1055(B)(7)). 
The purpose of this rulemaking is to clarify, update, and address rule approvability issues 
identified by the EPA.   
A description of any data on which a rule is based with a detailed explanation of how 
the data was obtained and why the data is acceptable data (A.R.S. § 41-1055(B)(8)). 
Not Applicable. 
7.
The proposed effective date of the rule (A.R.S. § 49-471.05(7)):
The proposed effective date of this rulemaking is April 26, 2023.
8.
Such other matters as are prescribed by statute and that are applicable to the county
or to any specific rule or class of rules (A.R.S. § 49-471.05(8)):
Under A.R.S. § 49-479(C), a county may not adopt a rule or ordinance that is more stringent
than the rules adopted by the Director of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality
(ADEQ) for similar sources unless it demonstrates compliance with the applicable
requirements of A.R.S. §49-112.
§49-112 County regulation; standards
§49-112(A)
When authorized by law, a county may adopt a rule, ordinance or regulation that is more 
stringent than or in addition to a provision of this title or rule adopted by the director or any 
board or commission authorized to adopt rules pursuant to this title if all of the following 
requirements are met: 
1.
The rule, ordinance or regulation is necessary to address a peculiar local condition.
2.
There is credible evidence that the rule, ordinance or regulation is either;
(a) Necessary to prevent a significant threat to public health or the environment that
results from a peculiar local condition and is technically and economically feasible. 
(b) Required under a federal statute or regulation, or authorized pursuant to an 
intergovernmental agreement with the federal government to enforce federal statutes 
or regulations if the county rule, ordinance or regulation is equivalent to federal 
statutes or regulation. 
3.
Any fee or tax adopted under the rule, ordinance or regulation does not exceed the
reasonable costs of the county to issue and administer the permit or plan approval
program.
§49-112(B)
When authorized by law, a county may adopt rules, ordinances or regulations in lieu of a 
state program that are as stringent as a provision of this title or rule adopted by the director 
or any board or commission authorized to adopt rules pursuant to this title if the county 
demonstrates that the cost of obtaining permits or other approvals from the county will 
9

approximately equal or be less than the fee or cost of obtaining similar permits or approvals 
under this title or any rule adopted pursuant to this title. If the state has not adopted a fee or 
tax for similar permits or approvals, the county may adopt a fee when authorized by law in 
the rule, ordinance or regulation that does not exceed the reasonable costs of the county to 
issue and administer that permit or plan approval program. 
The department is in compliance with A.R.S. §49-112(A) and §49-112(B). This rulemaking is 
not making the rule more stringent. 
9.
List of all previous notices posted to the Maricopa County EROP website addressing
the proposed rule and a concise explanatory statement, as prescribed by A.R.S. § 49-
471.07(B):
(a) List of all previous notices posted to the Maricopa County EROP website
addressing the proposed rule: 
Notice 
Date of Posting 
Briefing Notification to County Manager 
May 4, 2022 
Notice of Stakeholder Workshop 
September 15, 2022 
Notice of Board of Health Meeting 
October 10, 2022  
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
November 16, 2022 
(b) The following discussion addresses each of the elements required for a concise 
explanatory statement, as prescribed by A.R.S. § 49-471.07(B): 
i.
A description of any change between the proposed rule or ordinance, the final
rule or ordinance or notice of final supplemental rule or ordinance.
No additional changes were made after the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was
published on November 16, 2022.
ii. A summary of the comments and arguments for and against the notice and
the county’s response to the comments and arguments.
MCAQD has not received any comments on the rulemaking.
EXACT WORDING OF THE RULE 
MARICOPA COUNTY 
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS 
REGULATION II – PERMITS AND FEES 
RULE 245: CONTINUOUS SOURCE EMISSION MONITORING 
INDEX 
SECTION 100 – GENERAL 
101 
PURPOSE 
Return to list of attachments
Return to list of attachments
10

102 
APPLICABILITY 
306 
103 
EXEMPTIONS 
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS 
201 
CAPACITY FACTOR 
202 
CONTINUOUS MONITORING SYSTEM 
203 
EMISSION STANDARD 
204 
FOSSIL FUEL-FIRED STEAM GENERATOR 
205 
204 
NITRIC ACID PLANT 
206 
205 
SULFURIC ACID PLANT 
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS 
301 
EQUIPMENT INSTALLATION AND PERFORMANCE TESTS 
302 
MINIMUM MONITORING REQUIREMENTS 
303 
MINIMUM SPECIFICATIONS FOR MONITORING EQUIPMENT 
304 
MINIMUM DATA REQUIREMENTS 
305 
MONITORING EQUIPMENT OPERATING REQUIREMENTS 
306 
EXEMPTIONS 
307 
SPECIAL CONSIDERATION 
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS (NOT INCLUDED) 
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS 
501 
DATA REDUCTION 
502 
MONITORING DATA REQUIRED 
503 
MONITORING EQUIPMENT INSPECTIONS 
504 
TRANSMISSOMETER RESULTS 
11

Revised 07/13/1988; Repealed and Adopted 11/15/1993; Revised MM/DD/YYYY 
MARICOPA COUNTY 
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS 
REGULATION II – PERMITS AND FEES 
RULE 245: CONTINUOUS SOURCE EMISSION MONITORING 
SECTION 100 – GENERAL 
101 
PURPOSE: To set forth continuous source emission monitoring requirements for fossil 
fuel-fired generators, nitric acid plants, sulfuric acid plants and fluid bed catalytic cracking units. 
102 
APPLICABILITY: This rule applies to: 
102.1 Fossil fuel-fired steam generators, as specified in Section 302.1 of this rule, which shall 
be monitored for opacity emissions, nitrogen oxides emissions, sulfur dioxide emissions 
and oxygen or carbon dioxide. 
102.2 102.1 
Nitric acid plants, as specified in Section § 302.1 302.2 of this rule, which shall be 
monitored for nitrogen oxides emissions. 
102.3 102.2 Sulfuric acid plants, as specified in Section § 302.2 302.3 of this rule, which shall be 
monitored for sulfur dioxide emissions. 
102.4 102.3 Fluid bed catalytic cracking unit catalyst regenerators, as specified in Section § 302.3 
302.4 of this rule, which shall be monitored for sulfur dioxide emissions. 
306 
103 
EXEMPTIONS: The provisions of this rule shall not apply to any source which is: 
306.1 103.1 
Subject to a New Source Performance Standard promulgated in 40 CFR part 60; 
306.2 103.2 Not subject to an applicable emission standard of the approved State Implementation 
Plan; or 
306.3 103.3 Scheduled for retirement within five years after inclusions of monitoring requirements 
for the source in these Regulations, provided that adequate evidence and guarantees are 
provided that clearly show that the source will cease operations prior to such date. 
306.4 A temporary exemption from the monitoring and reporting requirements of this rule 
may be provided during any period of monitoring system malfunction, provided that 
the source owner or operator shows to the satisfaction of the Control Officer that the 
malfunction was unavoidable and is being repaired as expeditiously as practicable. 
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS: For the purpose of this rule, the following definitions shall apply: 
201 
CAPACITY FACTOR: The ratio of the average load on a machine or equipment for the 
period of time considered to the capacity rating of the machine or equipment. 
202 
CONTINUOUS MONITORING SYSTEM: The total equipment required under Section § 
302 of this rule to sample and analyze emissions or process parameters and to provide a 
permanent data record. 
12

203 
EMISSION STANDARD: A regulation (or portion thereof) setting forth an allowable rate of 
emission, level of opacity, or prescribing equipment or fuel specifications that result in control 
of air pollution emissions. 
204 
FOSSIL FUEL-FIRED STEAM GENERATOR: A furnace or boiler used in the process of 
burning fossil fuel for the primary purpose of producing steam by heat transfer. 
205 
204 
NITRIC ACID PLANT: Any source producing nitric acid 30% to 70% percent in strength 
by either the pressure or atmospheric pressure process. 
206 
205 
SULFURIC ACID PLANT: Any source producing sulfuric acid by the contact process by 
burning elemental sulfur, alkylation acid, hydrogen sulfide, or acid sludge. This does not include 
sources where conversion to sulfuric acid is utilized primarily as a means of preventing 
emissions to the atmosphere of sulfur dioxide or other sulfur compounds. 
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS 
301 
EQUIPMENT INSTALLATION AND PERFORMANCE TESTS: Every owner or 
operator of an emission source in a category described in Section § 102 of this rule shall: 
301.1 
Install, calibrate, operate, and maintain all monitoring equipment necessary for 
continuously monitoring the pollutants specified in this rule, and 
301.2 Complete the installation and performance tests of such equipment and begin 
monitoring and recording within 18 months of plant approval. 
302 
MINIMUM MONITORING REQUIREMENTS: 
302.1 Fossil Fuel-Fired Steam Generators: Each fossil fuel-fired steam generator, except as 
provided in Sections 302.1a and 302.1b of this rule, with an annual average capacity 
factor greater than 30 percent as reported to the Federal Power Commission for 
calendar year 1974, or as otherwise demonstrated to the Control Officer by the owner 
or operator, shall conform with the following monitoring requirements when such 
source is subject to an emission standard of an applicable plan for the pollutant in 
question. 
a. A continuous emission monitoring system for the measurement of opacity which 
meets the performance specifications of Section 303.1 of this rule shall be installed, 
calibrated, maintained, and operated in accordance with the procedures of this rule 
by the owner or operator of any such steam generator of greater than 250 million 
BTU per hour heat input except where: 
(1) Gaseous fuel is the only fuel burned, or 
(2) Oil or a mixture of gas and oil are the only fuels burned and the source is able 
to comply with the applicable particulate matter and opacity regulations without 
utilization of particulate matter collection equipment, and where the source has 
never been found through any administrative or judicial proceedings to be in 
violation of any visible emission standard of the applicable plan. 
b. A continuous emission monitoring system for the measurements of sulfur dioxide 
which meets the performance specifications of Section 303.3 of this rule, shall be 
13

installed, calibrated, using sulfur dioxide calibration gas mixtures, gas cells or other 
gas mixtures approved by the Control Officer, maintained, and operated on fossil 
fuel-fired steam generators of greater than 250 million BTU per hour heat input 
which has installed sulfur dioxide pollutant control equipment. 
c.
A continuous emission monitoring system for the measurement of nitrogen oxides
which meets the performance specification of Section 303.2 of this rule shall be 
installed, calibrated, using nitric oxide calibration gas mixtures, gas cells or other gas 
mixtures approved by the Control Officer, maintained, and operated on fossil 
fuel-fired steam generators of greater than 1000 million BTU per hour heat input 
when such source is located in an air quality control region where the Control 
Officer has specifically determined that a control strategy for nitrogen dioxide is 
necessary to attain the national standards, unless the source owner or operator 
demonstrates during source compliance tests as required by the Control Officer 
that such a source emits nitrogen oxides at levels 30 percent or more below the 
emission standard within the applicable plan. 
d. A continuous emission monitoring system for the measurement of the percent
oxygen or carbon dioxide which meets the performance specifications of Sections
303.4 and 303.5 of this rule shall be installed, calibrated, operated, and maintained 
on fossil fuel-fired steam generators where measurements of oxygen or carbon 
dioxide in the flue gas are required to convert either sulfur dioxide or nitrogen 
oxides continuous emission monitoring data, or both, to units of the emission 
standard within the applicable plan. 
302.2 302.1 Nitric Acid Plants: Each nitric acid plant of greater than 300 tons per day production 
capacity, the production capacity being expressed as 100% percent acid, located in an 
air quality control region where the Control Officer has specifically determined that a 
control strategy for nitrogen dioxide is necessary to attain the national standard, shall 
install, calibrate, maintain, and operate a continuous emission monitoring system for the 
measurement of nitrogen oxides which meets the performance specifications of Section 
§ 303.2 of this rule for each nitric acid producing source within such plant.
302.3 302.2 Sulfuric Acid Plants: Each sulfuric acid plant of greater than 300 tons per day 
production capacity, the production being expressed as 100% percent acid, shall install, 
calibrate, maintain and operate a continuous emission monitoring system for the 
measurement of sulfur dioxide which meets the performance specifications of Section § 
303.3 of this rule for each sulfuric acid producing source within such plant. 
302.4 302.3 Fluid Bed Catalytic Cracking Unit Catalyst Regenerators at Petroleum 
Refineries: Each catalyst regenerator for fluid bed catalytic cracking units of greater 
than 20,000 barrels per day fresh feed capacity shall install, calibrate, maintain, and 
operate a continuous emission monitoring system for the measurement of opacity 
which meets the performance specifications of Section § 303.1 of this rule. 
303 
MINIMUM SPECIFICATIONS FOR MONITORING EQUIPMENT: Owners or 
operators of monitoring equipment installed to comply with this rule shall demonstrate 
compliance with the performance specifications set forth in Appendix B of Part 60, Chapter 1, 
Title 40, CFR as amended, incorporated herein by reference. However, where reference is made 
to the Administrator in Appendix B of 40 CFR 60, the Control Officer may allow the use of 
14

either the state approved reference method or the federally approved reference method as 
published in 40 CFR 60. The performance specifications to be used with each type of 
monitoring system are listed below. 
303.1 Continuous emission monitoring systems for measuring opacity shall comply with 
performance specification 1. 
303.2 Continuous emission monitoring systems for measuring nitrogen oxides shall comply 
with performance specification 2. 
303.3 Continuous emission monitoring systems for measuring sulfur dioxide shall comply 
with performance specification 2. 
303.4 Continuous emission monitoring systems for measuring oxygen shall comply with 
performance specification 3. 
303.5 Continuous emission monitoring systems for measuring carbon dioxide shall comply 
with performance specification 3. 
304 
MINIMUM DATA REQUIREMENTS: 
304.1 The owners or operators of sources required to install continuous emission monitoring 
systems shall submit to the Control Officer a written report of excess emissions for 
each calendar quarter and the nature and cause of the excess emissions, if known. The 
averaging period used for data reporting shall correspond to the averaging period 
specified in the emission standard for the pollutant source category in question. The 
required report shall include, as a minimum, the data stipulated in this rule. 
304.2 For opacity measurements, the summary shall consist of the magnitude in actual 
percent opacity of all six-minute opacity averages greater than any applicable standards 
in these rules for each hour of operation of the source. Average values may be obtained 
by integration over the averaging period or by arithmetically averaging a minimum of 
four equally spaced, instantaneous opacity measurements per minute. Any time periods 
exempted shall be deleted before determining any averages in excess of opacity 
standards. 
304.3 For gaseous measurements the summary shall consist of emission averages in the units 
of the applicable standard for each averaging period during which the applicable 
standard was exceeded. 
304.4 The date and time identifying each period during which the continuous emission 
monitoring system was inoperative, except for zero and span checks and the nature of 
system repair or adjustment shall be reported. The Control Officer may require proof 
of continuous emission monitoring system performance whenever system repairs or 
adjustments have been made. 
304.5 When no excess emissions have occurred and the continuous emission monitoring 
system(s) have not been inoperative, repaired, or adjusted, such information shall be 
included in the report. 
304.6 Owners or operators of affected permitted sources shall maintain a file of all 
information reported in the quarterly summaries, and all other data collected either by 
the continuous emission monitoring system or as necessary to convert monitoring data 
15

to the units of the applicable standard for a minimum of two years from the date of 
collection of such data or submission of such summaries. 
305 
MONITORING EQUIPMENT OPERATING REQUIREMENTS: The owner, lessee, 
or operator shall provide, install, calibrate, maintain and operate air contaminant monitoring 
devices as are reasonable and required pursuant to these Regulations. to determine compliance 
in a manner acceptable to the Control Officer. 
307 
SPECIAL CONSIDERATION: The Control Officer may approve, on a case-by-case basis, 
alternative monitoring requirements different from the provisions of Sections §§ 301 through 
305 of this rule if the installation of a continuous emission monitoring system cannot be 
implemented by a source due to physical plant limitations or extreme economic reasons. 
Alternative monitoring procedures shall be specified by the Control Officer on a case-by-case 
basis and shall include as a minimum annual manual stack tests for the pollutants identified for 
each type of source in this rule. Examples of such special cases include, but are not limited to, 
the following: 
307.1 Alternative monitoring requirements may be prescribed when installation of a 
continuous emission monitoring system or monitoring device specified by this rule 
would not provide accurate determinations of emissions (e.g. condensed, uncombined 
water vapor may prevent an accurate determination of opacity using commercially 
available continuous emission monitoring systems). 
307.2 Alternative monitoring requirements may be prescribed when the affected permitted 
source is infrequently operated (e.g. some affected sources may operate less than one 
month per year). 
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS 
501 
DATA REDUCTION: Owners or operators of affected permitted sources shall use the 
procedures described in Appendix A for converting monitoring data to units of the standard 
where necessary. 
502 
MONITORING DATA REQUIRED: Monitoring information shall be provided in writing 
to the Control Officer as directed. 
503 
MONITORING EQUIPMENT INSPECTIONS: Air pollutant monitoring devices shall 
be available for inspection by the Control Officer during all reasonable times. (ARS §49-487). 
504 
TRANSMISSOMETER RESULTS: The results of continuous transmissometer monitoring 
which indicate opacity was not in excess of the standard at the time of an alleged violation from 
visual observations are probative but not conclusive evidence of the actual opacity of an 
emission. The owner or operator of a source shall meet the burden of providing proof that the 
transmissometer used meets performance specification 1 in the 40 CFR 60, Appendix B 
Arizona Testing Manual for Air Pollutant Emissions, and that the instrument has been properly 
maintained and calibrated, and the resulting data have not been tampered with in any way. 
16

Draft Rule 245 – Clean Version 
MARICOPA COUNTY 
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS 
REGULATION II – PERMITS AND FEES 
RULE 245: CONTINUOUS SOURCE EMISSION MONITORING 
INDEX 
SECTION 100 – GENERAL 
101 
PURPOSE 
102 
APPLICABILITY 
103 
EXEMPTIONS 
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS 
201 
CAPACITY FACTOR 
202 
CONTINUOUS MONITORING SYSTEM 
203 
EMISSION STANDARD 
204 
NITRIC ACID PLANT 
205 
SULFURIC ACID PLANT 
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS 
301 
EQUIPMENT INSTALLATION AND PERFORMANCE TESTS 
302 
MINIMUM MONITORING REQUIREMENTS 
303 
MINIMUM SPECIFICATIONS FOR MONITORING EQUIPMENT 
304 
MINIMUM DATA REQUIREMENTS 
305 
MONITORING EQUIPMENT OPERATING REQUIREMENTS 
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS (NOT INCLUDED) 
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS 
501 
DATA REDUCTION 
502 
MONITORING DATA REQUIRED 
503 
MONITORING EQUIPMENT INSPECTIONS 
504 
TRANSMISSOMETER RESULTS 
Return to list of attachments
17

Revised 07/13/1988; Repealed and Adopted 11/15/1993; Revised MM/DD/YYYY 
MARICOPA COUNTY 
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS 
REGULATION II – PERMITS AND FEES 
RULE 245: CONTINUOUS SOURCE EMISSION MONITORING 
SECTION 100 – GENERAL 
101 
PURPOSE: To set forth continuous source emission monitoring requirements for nitric acid 
plants, sulfuric acid plants and fluid bed catalytic cracking units. 
102 
APPLICABILITY: This rule applies to: 
102.1 
Nitric acid plants, as specified in § 302.1 of this rule, which shall be monitored for 
nitrogen oxides emissions. 
102.2 Sulfuric acid plants, as specified in § 302.2 of this rule, which shall be monitored for 
sulfur dioxide emissions. 
102.3 Fluid bed catalytic cracking unit catalyst regenerators, as specified in § 302.3 of this rule, 
which shall be monitored for sulfur dioxide emissions. 
103 
EXEMPTIONS: The provisions of this rule shall not apply to any source which is: 
103.1 
Subject to a New Source Performance Standard promulgated in 40 CFR part 60; 
103.2 Not subject to an applicable emission standard of the approved State Implementation 
Plan; or 
103.3 Scheduled for retirement within five years after inclusions of monitoring requirements 
for the source in these Regulations, provided that adequate evidence and guarantees are 
provided that clearly show that the source will cease operations prior to such date. 
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS: For the purpose of this rule, the following definitions shall apply: 
201 
CAPACITY FACTOR: The ratio of the average load on a machine or equipment for the 
period of time considered to the capacity rating of the machine or equipment. 
202 
CONTINUOUS MONITORING SYSTEM: The total equipment required under § 302 of 
this rule to sample and analyze emissions or process parameters and to provide a permanent 
data record. 
203 
EMISSION STANDARD: A regulation (or portion thereof) setting forth an allowable rate of 
emission, level of opacity, or prescribing equipment or fuel specifications that result in control 
of air pollution emissions. 
204 
NITRIC ACID PLANT: Any source producing nitric acid 30% to 70% in strength by either 
the pressure or atmospheric pressure process. 
205 
SULFURIC ACID PLANT: Any source producing sulfuric acid by the contact process by 
burning elemental sulfur, alkylation acid, hydrogen sulfide, or acid sludge. This does not include 
18

sources where conversion to sulfuric acid is utilized primarily as a means of preventing 
emissions to the atmosphere of sulfur dioxide or other sulfur compounds. 
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS 
301 
EQUIPMENT INSTALLATION AND PERFORMANCE TESTS: Every owner or 
operator of an emission source in a category described in § 102 of this rule shall: 
301.1 
Install, calibrate, operate, and maintain all monitoring equipment necessary for 
continuously monitoring the pollutants specified in this rule, and 
301.2 Complete the installation and performance tests of such equipment and begin 
monitoring and recording within 18 months of plant approval. 
302 
MINIMUM MONITORING REQUIREMENTS: 
302.1 Nitric Acid Plants: Each nitric acid plant of greater than 300 tons per day production 
capacity, the production capacity being expressed as 100% acid, , shall install, calibrate, 
maintain, and operate a continuous emission monitoring system for the measurement 
of nitrogen oxides which meets the performance specifications of § 303.2 of this rule 
for each nitric acid producing source within such plant. 
302.2 Sulfuric Acid Plants: Each sulfuric acid plant of greater than 300 tons per day 
production capacity, the production being expressed as 100% acid, shall install, 
calibrate, maintain and operate a continuous emission monitoring system for the 
measurement of sulfur dioxide which meets the performance specifications of § 303.3 
of this rule for each sulfuric acid producing source within such plant. 
302.3 Fluid Bed Catalytic Cracking Unit Catalyst Regenerators at Petroleum 
Refineries: Each catalyst regenerator for fluid bed catalytic cracking units of greater 
than 20,000 barrels per day fresh feed capacity shall install, calibrate, maintain, and 
operate a continuous emission monitoring system for the measurement of opacity 
which meets the performance specifications of § 303.1 of this rule. 
303 
MINIMUM SPECIFICATIONS FOR MONITORING EQUIPMENT: Owners or 
operators of monitoring equipment installed to comply with this rule shall demonstrate 
compliance with the performance specifications set forth in Appendix B of Part 60, Chapter 1, 
Title 40, CFR as amended, incorporated herein by reference. The performance specifications to 
be used with each type of monitoring system are listed below. 
303.1 Continuous emission monitoring systems for measuring opacity shall comply with 
performance specification 1. 
303.2 Continuous emission monitoring systems for measuring nitrogen oxides shall comply 
with performance specification 2. 
303.3 Continuous emission monitoring systems for measuring sulfur dioxide shall comply 
with performance specification 2. 
303.4 Continuous emission monitoring systems for measuring oxygen shall comply with 
performance specification 3. 
303.5 Continuous emission monitoring systems for measuring carbon dioxide shall comply 
with performance specification 3. 
19

304 
MINIMUM DATA REQUIREMENTS: 
304.1 The owners or operators of sources required to install continuous emission monitoring 
systems shall submit to the Control Officer a written report of excess emissions for 
each calendar quarter and the nature and cause of the excess emissions, if known. The 
averaging period used for data reporting shall correspond to the averaging period 
specified in the emission standard for the pollutant source category in question. The 
required report shall include, as a minimum, the data stipulated in this rule. 
304.2 For opacity measurements, the summary shall consist of the magnitude in actual 
percent opacity of all six-minute opacity averages greater than any applicable standards 
in these rules for each hour of operation of the source. Average values may be obtained 
by integration over the averaging period or by arithmetically averaging a minimum of 
four equally spaced, instantaneous opacity measurements per minute. Any time periods 
exempted shall be deleted before determining any averages in excess of opacity 
standards. 
304.3 For gaseous measurements the summary shall consist of emission averages in the units 
of the applicable standard for each averaging period during which the applicable 
standard was exceeded. 
304.4 The date and time identifying each period during which the continuous emission 
monitoring system was inoperative, except for zero and span checks and the nature of 
system repair or adjustment shall be reported. The Control Officer may require proof 
of continuous emission monitoring system performance whenever system repairs or 
adjustments have been made. 
304.5 When no excess emissions have occurred and the continuous emission monitoring 
system(s) have not been inoperative, repaired, or adjusted, such information shall be 
included in the report. 
304.6 Owners or operators of permitted sources shall maintain a file of all information 
reported in the quarterly summaries, and all other data collected either by the 
continuous emission monitoring system or as necessary to convert monitoring data to 
the units of the applicable standard for a minimum of two years from the date of 
collection of such data or submission of such summaries. 
305 
MONITORING EQUIPMENT OPERATING REQUIREMENTS: The owner, lessee, 
or operator shall provide, install, calibrate, maintain and operate air contaminant monitoring 
devices as are reasonable and required pursuant to these Regulations. 
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS 
501 
DATA REDUCTION: Owners or operators of permitted sources shall use the procedures 
described in Appendix A for converting monitoring data to units of the standard where 
necessary. 
502 
MONITORING DATA REQUIRED: Monitoring information shall be provided in writing 
to the Control Officer as directed. 
20

503 
MONITORING EQUIPMENT INSPECTIONS: Air pollutant monitoring devices shall 
be available for inspection by the Control Officer during all reasonable times. 
504 
TRANSMISSOMETER RESULTS: The results of continuous transmissometer monitoring 
which indicate opacity was not in excess of the standard at the time of an alleged violation from 
visual observations are probative but not conclusive evidence of the actual opacity of an 
emission. The owner or operator of a source shall meet the burden of providing proof that the 
transmissometer used meets performance specification 1 in the 40 CFR 60, Appendix B and 
that the instrument has been properly maintained and calibrated, and the resulting data have not 
been tampered with in any way. 
21

MARICOPA COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH 
MEETING MINUTES 
Monday, October 24, 2022, at 3:00 PM 
In Person & Virtual Meeting  
President MacMillan called the meeting to order at 3:06 p.m. 
ROLL CALL:          
Members Present:           
Debra Baldauff  
Don Cassano 
 
Paul Stander 
Paula Banahan 
Robert MacMillan  
Scott Celley 
Supervisor Bill Gates 
Members Absent: Kristen Acton         
Ex-Officio: Marcy Flanagan 
1.
CALL TO ORDER
President MacMillan 
A. Roll Call 
B. Call to the Public 
Addressing the public, President MacMillan advised all how to use the chat box to comment or add any 
questions for the agenda items. Ms. Sampler informed all that there were no requests known to speak at this 
time; all were told that they would have the opportunity to type questions using the chat box, which will be 
acknowledged during and or after the meeting accordingly. 
DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS: 
2.
Approval of Minutes
President MacMillan 
President MacMillan asked for a motion to approve the minutes from the Board of Health (BOH) meeting held 
on July 25, 2022. Mr. Cassano made a motion to approve the BOH minutes as presented. Ms. Baldauff 
seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.  
3.
Public Health Update – Fiscal Year 2023 Quarter 1 Budget Status Report
Scot Pitcairn 
Mr. Pitcairn provided an update for the Public Health FY23 Quarter 1 Budget Status Report for the funds listed 
below. A memo was provided outlining the updates for the below listed funds. 
•
Fund 100 – General Fund
The report was read from the memo provided in the agenda, which outlines fund 100 in greater detail. A brief 
discussion was had relating to just one person filling not just one but two or three part-time positions and 
combining positions, which is currently being done with the dental sealant program. Some of those positions are 
hard to find, so public health is starting to explore it more often in those hard to fill positions, especially when 
you talk about medical nurses, physicians, and providers.   
Return to list of attachments
22

•
Fund 265 –Public Health Fee Fund
The report was read from the memo provided in the agenda, which outlines fund 265 in greater detail. There 
were no questions asked about Fund 265. 
•
Fund 293 – Justice Reinvestment Fund
The report was read from the memo provided in the agenda. This funding source is from the state marijuana tax 
per A.R.S 36-2863. The memo outlines fund 293 in greater detail. There were no questions asked about Fund 
293. 
•
Fund 296 – State & Local Recovery Funds/American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA)
Fund 296 report was provided from the memo attached to the agenda. The memo outlines fund 296 in greater 
detail. There were no questions asked about Fund 296. 
•
Fund 297- Opioid Settlement Fund
Ms. Flanagan briefly reported on monies received from the Opioid Settlement Fund earlier in the meeting. Mr. 
Pitcairn advised the board of how the fund was set up. Refer to the PHS Finance memo, which outlines Fund 297 
in greater detail. There were no questions asked about Fund 297. 
•
Fund 532 - Grant Fund
Fund 532 was summarized to the board, noting that the department received about $2.1 million more today 
from the COVID/ELC grant. Concerns were addressed about the delays in payments from the State. There were 
no additional questions relating to Fund 532. Refer to the memo attached to the agenda, which outlines fund 
532 in greater detail. There were no additional questions asked about Fund 532. 
(memo and report summary attached to meeting agenda) 
4.
Environmental Services– Fiscal Year 2023 Quarter 1 Budget Status Report
Sylvie Donaldson 
Ms. Donaldson provided the Board with the Environmental Services Quarter 1 FY23 update. A memo was 
provided outlining the updates and summarizing each fund listed.  
•
Fund 100 - County General Fund
Fund 100 report was read from the memo provided in the agenda, which outlines fund 100 in greater detail. 
Increased transit fees are not reflected in the report just yet.  
•
Fund 290 – Environmental Tire Fund
Fund 532 was summarized to the board from the memo provided in the agenda. Greater detail can be read in 
that memo. 
23

•
Fund 506 – Environmental Fee Fund
The report for fund 506 was read from the memo provided in the agenda. Comments were made about the 
inflation of materials, such as the cost of rocks. There is also an increase in the cost of fleets and equipment. No 
additional questions were had about Fund 506. 
(memo and report summary attached to meeting agenda) 
5.
Fee Waiver Applications – 15 permit fee waiver approval requests
Robert Stratman 
Fee Waiver Application Summary Sheet and Fee Waiver Staff Report
The department received 15 Permit Fee Waiver applications, and staff determined that all met the criteria 
outlined in the Environmental Health Code. The criteria - an operator of a charitable non-profit establishment 
which operates predominantly for the poor distressed, or underprivileged that may apply to the Board of Health 
for the waiver of a permit. A waiver may be granted only if the operator maintains a current 501 (c)3 tax-exempt 
status and demonstrates that the payment of the said fee will cause a financial hardship. In addition, waiver of 
fees associated with administering and the issuance of food employee certificate may be granted to an operator 
of an establishment who maintains a current 501 (c)3, and the sponsoring school must demonstrate to the 
board of health that said payment would cause financial hardship. The department is asking for the board’s 
approval of the 15 fee waiver applications on the summary sheet as P1-P12 and C1-C3.  
(memo and report summary attached to meeting agenda) 
President MacMillan asked if there was a motion to approve the 15 fee waiver applications presented as P1 
through P12 and C1-C3. A motion was made by Mr. Celley to approve P1 through P12 and C1-C3 fee waiver 
applications and seconded by Dr. Farber. All were in favor, and the motion carried. 
6.
Air Quality Department
Greg Verkamp  
Kimberly Butler 
Mr. Verkamp and Ms. Butler presented three rulemakings to the board for approval of the expedited process 
rulemaking. The rulemakings will not make new compliance requirements for sources; they’re not 
expected to have a major impact on sources that the department is regulating, which is why they are 
presenting them for expedited process rulemaking. Notices and Reports for each were previously 
distributed to the board for their review. Each rulemaking requires its own action to be acted on by the 
members of the board. 
AQ-2022-002 - Rule 245 (Continuous Source Emission Monitoring) 
The Maricopa County Air Quality Department (MCAQD) is proposing to revise Rule 245 to address rule 
approvability issues identified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and to replace State 
Implementation Plan Rule 41 (Monitoring) with the revised rule. 
Revisions also include the removal of continuous source emission monitoring requirements for fossil 
fuel-fired steam generators because these requirements are addressed in Rule 322 (Power Plant 
Operations). Rule 245 is applicable to four source types; three are not in the county. The revision is to 
remove the regulation of boilers. The applicability of this rule to the boiler is at the power plants, 
which are regulated under a different rule. Therefore, the revised rule will only be applicable to three 
source types, which do not exist in Maricopa County. The rule is on the books because the Clean Air Act 
requires that you have continuous emissions monitoring for these source types in your state 
24

implementation plan at the federal level, revisions also address EPA concerns. A Stakeholder Workshop 
was held in September, and stakeholders were allowed time to submit comments. 
President MacMillan asked if anyone wanted to approve expedited process rulemaking for AQ-2022-002 - 
Rule 245. Dr. Farber made a motion to approve the expedited rulemaking process, and Mr. Celley seconded 
the motion. All were in favor of the motion. 
AQ-2022-005 - Rule 311 (Particulate Matter from Process Industries) 
The purpose of Rule 311 is to limit the discharge of particulate matter into the atmosphere by 
establishing emission rates based on process weight. It was initially adopted on July 13, 1988, and the 
most current version was adopted in 2003. MCAQD is proposing to rescind Rule 311 because it is an 
obsolete rule. Any sources currently in or planning to locate in Maricopa County with particulate 
matter emissions are or will be regulated under other existing particulate matter rules. The 
department is looking to rescind the entire rule. 
President MacMillan asked if anyone wanted to approve expedited process rulemaking for AQ-2022-005 - 
Rule 311. Ms. Banahan made a motion to approve the expedited rulemaking process, and Mr. Cassano 
seconded the motion. All were in favor of the motion. 
AQ-2022-007 
Appendix B (Standard Permit Application Form and Filing Instructions) 
MCAQD is proposing to revise Appendix B by removing the filing instructions and standard permit 
application form from the appendix. The revision will include the addition of a statement providing the 
website link to the MCAQD webpage, which includes all current Title V permit application forms and 
instructions. These revisions will make it easier for the application form and instructions to be updated 
in the future without having to go through the rulemaking process. President MacMillan shared some 
comments for the department to consider relating to the application.  
President MacMillan asked if anyone wanted to approve expedited process rulemaking for AQ-2022-007 – 
Appendix B. Mr. Celley made a motion to approve the expedited rulemaking process, and Dr. Farber seconded 
the motion. All were in favor of the motion. 
7.
Maricopa County Medical Society
John McElligott 
John McElligott is the Executive Director of the Maricopa County Medical Society. Mr. McElligott presented the 
board with an overview of his background and outlined the Medical Society's history. The Medical Society is the 
oldest Medical Association in the State of Arizona, dating back to 1892 in Frontier Medicine, incorporated in 
1935. Their focus is on the future of trying to create medicine and carving out what the future of medicine will 
look like for health care on the ballot. Their mission is to promote excellence in the quality of care and the 
health of the community while representing members by acting as a strong, collective physician voice. Their 
main audience is physicians practicing physicians. 
The board is comprised of practicing docs for a wide range of medical specialties. They have all sorts of 
employment settings, ethnic and racial backgrounds, as well as social and political perspectives. But where they 
come together is how they want to drive forward on improving healthcare, improving the business climate for 
people who are in private practice, or those who are employed physicians and hospital systems, increasingly, so 
that patient care will continue to improve. There are currently 13,000 physicians practicing in the valley, which is 
rapidly growing.  
25

The Medical Society partners with the county health department by gathering information that often comes 
from other staff, and the county's health departments push that out to physicians. Relevant data is shared by 
the Medical Society. In the last couple of years, the logistics team was a huge help, all of the PPE that the county 
provided or that came from the HHS to the county and then out to the medical study was a godsend. A lot of 
physicians reported back that it helped them to keep their doors open. Gratitude was expressed! 
The Medical Society routinely gets updates on infectious diseases and communicable outbreaks from physicians 
about what’s relevant to their colleagues. Information was published via emails or live updates from the Medical 
Society’s board of physicians. A few documents received were sent out to the Pulse Car Wash and wash cars to 
raise money and let the community know that their physicians want to help the community. Additional 
information was had about community screenings led by a group called the Endocrine Society, a national 
organization. Other activities were shared on behalf of the Medical Society.  
The society publishes a quarterly magazine that was passed around during the meeting. Mr. McElligott thanked 
the board for their time to present. 
Discussion Items 
8.
Public Health Report
Marcy Flanagan 
I. 
Human Resources
II.
Communications
III. Infrastructure
IV. Strategic Planning
V. Programs 
VI. Disease Update
VII. Future Topic
Ms. Flanagan provided the board with the COVID-19 case updates for Maricopa County. 
COVID-19 Update 
•
Maricopa County case count 1.4 million (as of last week)
•
Daily cased reported around 450 reported per day
•
Majority of the county’s isolates are still matching the BA5 variant
•
Sub variant of BA5 have been reported in the news as BQ.1 BQ1.1, currently Maricopa County is not
testing for those variants or the State, it’s expected to start showing up.
•
More than 188,000 (7%) residents in the county have received their COVID booster shots
•
The County continues to receive calls from individuals interested in getting their booster vaccine, which
is recommended
•
Hospital’s admissions have decreased slightly as of last week
•
Home testing kits are not reported to the county, therefore they are excluded from the case counts
•
Much like the flu, the county does more of a surveillance with COVID, which is why they look at the
hospitalization admissions which is why they look at the percent positivity for those that are done in a
lab for the numbers that are reported.
•
The county is expecting an increase over the coming months, as well as an increase in the flu season this
year
•
The city of Tempe is the only one’s testing water and waste surveillance, however they continue to
report those numbers and those go into the county’s community transmission level.
26

The county approached ASU in hopes to expand some of conversation in the early stages, to make certain once 
the information received detects a level, the county and act on it. 
Monkeypox 
•
As of Oct. 19, the county has confirmed 430 probable cases
•
203 of those cases were hospitalized
•
Zero deaths have been associated
•
Six people are under investigation
•
7,328 vaccines have been administered
•
Four vendors are on board to provide the vaccine at their clinics
•
Vaccines were offered at a recent Pride event
•
The county continues to target the most outbreak for the at-risk populations
Measles outbreak 
October 23, the county celebrated their second incubation period, or 42 days, without any new cases, officially 
closing out that outbreak in the county, with only 5 cases. The outbreak was linked to the Sudan Ebola virus, 
unfortunately that strain has no vaccines or therapeutics that have been approved for prevention or treatment 
its reported as having 64 cases and 14 are currently active and 25 of those people have recovered, however 
another 25 are deceased. The county continues to work with the World Health Organization (WHO) and the 
CDC. Originally early on, when the outbreak was going on in Uganda, individuals that were returning from 
Uganda were being diverted to just five airports in the US. They've now expanded. They're allowed to come into 
any airport, but local public health authorities are notified when that happens. Maricopa County is responsible 
for monitoring for 21 days, those individuals that returned from those countries, and giving them a risk 
assessment, and monitoring them daily for any no symptoms they start to develop. Unfortunately, in Arizona, 
there are no hospitals that do any screening or treatment for Ebola. The closest is Cedar Sinai in Los Angeles. 
And so, they have to co-ordinate traveled for anyone that’s being monitored the source to develop symptoms, 
to send them to that hospital for no treatment, or even a risk assessment, beyond what the county is able to 
do.  
Right now, they have nine individuals being monitored that have returned. Luckily, all of them are low risk, 
although today the county was notified of two folks that are returning that were health care providers helping 
with this outbreak, so, there'll be at a higher risk level than we've been seeing, but the team will monitor them 
for the 21-day period, making sure they don't develop any symptoms. 
Opioid Settlement 
Ms. Flanagan briefly reported that the county is receiving payment for 18 years. These are the opioid settlement 
payments that are related to the distributor settlement agreement. Public Health is responsible for distributing 
the funds out to the other cities and towns within the county that choose to take their distribution. These 
counties have the option to keep their distribution at Maricopa County, and the county will do the work in those 
communities. Ms. Flanagan is presenting to cities and towns this week to inform them of the plan. The Public 
Health team has been invited to a future meeting to present to the board. An initial payment of 2.4 million was 
received and the second payment was just over 2.3 million although the amounts are subject to change. For the 
life of the agreement, the state of Arizona received about $374 million, a little over 50% will go to local 
governments, the other portion is kept at the state level.  
Hospitalizations and Diseases 
Information was provided relating to hospitalizations rates and childhood diseases. Ms. Flanagan advised the 
board that yes, there have been an increase in respiratory illnesses, more common in children lately, the county 
is seeing higher rates of the spectrum from whooping cough to other respiratory illnesses increases, often 
having to do with lower vaccine rates. Arizona has some of the lowest vaccine rates for no vaccine preventable 
diseases, especially in school aged children, so that’s a contributing factor. The county has also seen increases in 
27

illnesses and respiratory. Relating to the flu season, the fact that the county was masked up contributed to a 
reduction in the numbers reported. So, there is conversations happening at public health at the national level, 
about how it would be appropriate to encourage, especially in schools, to consider encouraging kids to wear 
masks, continue to sanitize hands and wash hands often. The data has shown that it has reduced the spread. A 
brief conversation regarding the Piolo outbreak was had mentioning that Arizona has loose requirements about 
getting children vaccinated.  
Announcements and Current Events 
President/ 
Board Members 
Ms. Banahan proposed discussing students and medical staff testing positive for Marijuana. Counsel advised that 
this topic was not on the agenda for discussion. Ms. Banahan will email Ms. Sampler with her question for 
consideration of a future meeting topic to be added to the agenda. 
Adjournment 
President MacMillan 
There being no further business, Ms. Banahan made a motion to adjourn the meeting and Mr. Celley seconded 
the motion. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 4:37 p.m. 
28