Agencies | Governor
Virginia Regulatory Town Hall

Final Text

highlight

Action:
Amend federal operating (Title V) permit regulations to remove ...
Stage: Final
 
9VAC5-80-250

9VAC5-80-250. Malfunction.

A. A malfunction constitutes an affirmative defense to an action brought for noncompliance with technology-based emission limitations if In the event of a malfunction, the owner may demonstrate that the conditions of subsection B of this section are met.

B. The affirmative defense of malfunction shall be demonstrated by the permittee may, through properly signed, contemporaneous operating logs, or other relevant evidence that, show the following:

1. A malfunction occurred and the permittee can identify the cause or causes of the malfunction.

2. The permitted facility was at the time being properly operated.

3. During the period of the malfunction, the permittee took all reasonable steps to minimize levels of emissions that exceeded the emission standards or other requirements in the permit.

4. The permittee notified the board of the malfunction within two working days following the time when the emission limitations were exceeded due to the malfunction. This notification shall should include a description of the malfunction, any steps taken to mitigate emissions, and corrective actions taken. The notification may be delivered either orally or in writing. The notification may be delivered by electronic mail, facsimile transmission, telephone, telegraph, or any other method that allows the permittee to comply with the deadline. This notification fulfills the requirements of 9VAC5-80-110 F 2 b to report promptly deviations from permit requirements. This notification does not release the permittee from the malfunction reporting requirements under 9VAC5-20-180 C.

C. In any enforcement proceeding, the permittee seeking to establish the occurrence of a malfunction shall have the burden of proof.

D. The provisions of this section are in addition to any malfunction, emergency or upset provision contained in any applicable requirement.

9VAC5-80-650

9VAC5-80-650. Malfunction.

A. A malfunction constitutes an affirmative defense to an action brought for noncompliance with technology-based emission limitations if In the event of a malfunction, the owner may demonstrate that the conditions of subsection B of this section are met.

B. The affirmative defense of malfunction shall be demonstrated by the permittee may, through properly signed, contemporaneous operating logs, or other relevant evidence that, show the following:

1. A malfunction occurred and the permittee can identify the cause or causes of the malfunction.

2. The permitted facility was at the time being properly operated.

3. During the period of the malfunction the permittee took all reasonable steps to minimize levels of emissions that exceeded the emission standards, or other requirements in the permit.

4. The permittee notified the board of the malfunction within two working days following the time when the emission limitations were exceeded due to the malfunction. This notification shall should include a description of the malfunction, any steps taken to mitigate emissions, and corrective actions taken. The notification may be delivered either orally or in writing. The notification may be delivered by electronic mail, facsimile transmission, telephone, telegraph, or any other method that allows the permittee to comply with the deadline. This notification fulfills the requirements of 9VAC5-80-490 F 2 b to report promptly deviations from permit requirements. This notification does not release the permittee from the malfunction reporting requirements under 9VAC5-20-180 C.

C. In any enforcement proceeding, the permittee seeking to establish the occurrence of a malfunction shall have the burden of proof.

D. The provisions of this section are in addition to any malfunction, emergency or upset provision contained in any applicable requirement.