[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:00] Just been time. Let's go around and we can introduce ourselves, and I can start with, but I
[0:11] have mentioned the last board meeting that we're going to have a new board library. It's just
[0:15] a piece of, so the governor has recommended one to be a new board member. That happened on July 8th.
[0:24] So we got, obviously, the government approved that
[0:27] our exhibition, but there's a 30-day letter that goes to the Senate to schedule a
[0:33] hearing and add on that.
[0:35] The letter was enhancement in October of 2020, but they're up to line.
[0:41] So even though we had this room in August, and the
[0:45] finalist yet, so she gets to do that with more of that in September.
[0:48] So it was important to invite her to come today.
[0:51] it's very likely that the Senate will do appointments. So I don't know if it's good to have her here.
[0:59] Here's your self and then this will be her unofficial early welcome to the war here.
[1:05] Yes, I'm Laura Manderworth, day job today. This is the environmental team made up of the
[1:08] Chevrolet Friday.
[1:13] To Sal, you knew the area. I've been so late for about 10 years. I've been doing
[1:19] everybody worked the whole time, all was shown around,
[1:22] and then I've been on the EPA's phenomenology panel
[1:25] on the seven, doing on BCFAC and carrying some
[1:29] communities there.
[1:33] And Seth Laiman, I'm the registered professor at USU
[1:36] at the Burnham campus.
[1:38] Been in the 15 years, I agree with you,
[1:40] very quality research.
[1:42] I think that's not going to happen.
[1:45] My name is Ron Rosbeth, and I work for Peter Sinek,
[1:47] who are raised to found a leader of Stanford County,
[1:52] and I don't know how to say that you're there.
[1:57] I've been a police officer for 23 years on the board for 7 reports.
[2:07] All right.
[2:08] Okay.
[2:08] That's my agency.
[2:10] My name is Leonard Reich.
[2:11] And I may wish to see out a section of very top 6, 11th,
[2:14] the fastest section.
[2:16] Where is the hiring of the few times for the general's office?
[2:22] I also support the Division of Drinking Water and Service, the Section Director.
[2:30] I agree with an expert.
[2:33] Also with the Attorney General's Office, so we advise the Division of Air Quality.
[2:39] I'll just exclusively implement some of you.
[2:41] Did Board Training and Affinity Board meetings over the past couple of years?
[2:46] And I make a lot of work to cage that on one other attorney that's very
[2:51] vibrant just joining us recently. So if any of the whole presentation to her
[2:58] I'm gonna use your stuff here. Sure, I'm Q Woods. I'm one of the new
[3:02] agencies and I support your quality explicitly.
[3:08] Oh, the Jay Morris, the deputy
[3:09] director of their quality. I've been in their quality for 31 years here.
[3:16] Same
[3:16] Several different jobs he could be.
[3:19] I think I was in the little bits of the rules of coordinator here in the fall season.
[3:25] But we're at the bottom.
[3:28] I don't know if it's going to fall over yet.
[3:32] That is.
[3:35] At the nearest to there.
[3:36] I don't
[3:44] know if all that can be there in Maryland, among the more now.
[3:48] Maybe I was supposed to.
[3:50] I don't know if you can do one any more.
[3:52] And really, they're following you about, say, about a hundred or so.
[3:56] Yes.
[3:58] We'll be on board for over a year.
[4:02] My day job is for Rio de Janeiro,
[4:05] neighborhood of our mental team,
[4:06] focused on language resources,
[4:08] but also following roadmaking.
[4:11] It's from the advocacy burden.
[4:15] That's very good.
[4:16] and you're being considerate of all of them.
[4:18] I'm Frost, air quality board member,
[4:20] and I'm working for our Regents,
[4:21] and we'll talk about the show in the info.
[4:26] I'm Tandor.
[4:27] I'm Tandor Vera.
[4:28] I work for division air quality,
[4:30] and I support staff,
[4:32] and I also process travel requests,
[4:34] and all of them with parents.
[4:38] Well, let's see.
[4:39] I support staff to provide that in the end,
[4:41] with the sanitary to the board.
[4:43] I've been here in the department for three, four years.
[4:49] I will call, I've managed a monetary section of the nomad for 18, 17 years, and then with
[4:55] their quality, we're going to turn it into the late, just a little bit more, because I'm
[5:01] quite all set up yet.
[5:04] So, again, this is a required annual training.
[5:08] So the purpose of this game is, first of all, to have some, some pre-science and interacting
[5:12] I can best get a little looking at dead,
[5:15] update, get an introduction to the day spent,
[5:18] see if he has to test it.
[5:19] You can do it, you can do it, you can do it.
[5:22] Um, we'll probably give him a saying,
[5:26] oh, please, how can I do it?
[5:29] Just, here you are, kind of your air quality experience,
[5:33] and, yeah, everybody, I'm Dave Spiss.
[5:36] I, I will for Dave's time,
[5:37] the deputy director of the Health Department, there,
[5:40] They've come for about 32 years,
[5:43] or a lot of the admissions program over the years,
[5:45] and not a lot of the admissions.
[5:48] Before he was the deputy director,
[5:50] he was the manager of the HR department,
[5:53] I'm gonna make a report on that as well.
[5:54] I'm gonna make a report on that.
[6:01] Okay, maybe we'll come up with that.
[6:04] I'm actually not sure it is.
[6:07] I'm gonna give him a version where we'll be loving,
[6:09] we'll be loving.
[6:09] First, let's start thinking about data mirror data
[6:12] and then we are going to go with one.
[6:14] So you can be boarded to any,
[6:16] and then we'll go take a pause with it.
[6:18] Hi.
[6:19] We did a telephoto on this too.
[6:23] I'll pass it out on this one and we'll enter this.
[6:28] Awesome.
[6:30] We have just printed out the slides.
[6:32] So you guys done with
[6:41] your makeshift.
[6:46] We'll start if you pass it.
[6:48] was it the end?
[6:51] I did make sure I'm making sure yeah tears of it all by
[7:00] memory.
[7:04] I'm going back to the phone. There are a couple extra for the H7 answer
[7:10] interest.
[7:13] Very interesting. You said good share of your
[7:17] We'll see.
[7:19] We'll see.
[7:19] Okay.
[7:24] Oh.
[7:28] Great.
[7:30] Yeah.
[7:30] So, um, as we just said, I'm bringing Marissa being presented on that board training.
[7:36] The day is price of commented.
[7:38] It's it's one to help you in your responsibilities as board members, but to immediately go requirement,
[7:44] requiring that there's a board meeting cheer.
[7:46] We're familiar as yourself, some of those fee provisions and statutes that are to the board.
[7:52] So as far as our position, we're legal counsel with the Attorney General's Office advising
[7:57] division very poorly, but we also have responsibility under the statute to apply the board.
[8:02] So we're legal counsel, our office is legal counsel for the board as well.
[8:06] Sometimes that's separate and individual apart from the acute representation in work.
[8:11] So we're available for questions or matters that you see advice on of course that that extends to only your role and job as board members and not beyond that.
[8:24] And prefer that any any questions or risk assessments or information you need to consider and an attorney client type conversation.
[8:33] In other words, not in the open and public meeting will comment on that a little bit more later.
[8:37] but you're welcome to reach out to us our office email us for any legal work that legal questions if you have in regards to your responsibilities that are hard to drop the presentation.
[8:48] So the presentation is broken out in various sections that Marissa and I will bounce back and forth on a little bit.
[8:54] Marissa will be beginning, but we're just to give a general high overview we're going to talk about first the organization where, where, from where's board comes.
[9:04] What the rules and powers are that follow up on the board, what your duties are at board,
[9:11] requirements to come with that, the responsibilities you have ethically and serving on the board,
[9:16] and then making sure we meet the requirements that are open to public speaking apps,
[9:21] the needs of a goal that are the board meetings, this meeting, the public meeting,
[9:25] and then criminal expectations.
[9:27] So we'll keep it off and touching on word organization to begin with that, which can be that I can advance for you.
[9:35] We have a way to be a Wi-Fi means. We can't do presentation mode, so we're flipping around.
[9:42] All right. Well, to kick it off, this is how the Utah Code organizes DEQs 4.4.
[9:52] So there you guys are at the top with the air quality board, and I'm sorry, the font is a little small, but we also have the drinking water board, water quality board and the waste management radiation to fall forward.
[10:08] Those are all set out in Chapter 1 of Title 19 and then we will break into the air specifics.
[10:20] So in Chapter 2 of Title 19 is this Air Boards organizational structure.
[10:30] So as you guys know, there's nine board members.
[10:36] It has a makeup that are specific.
[10:41] So you guys all represent different.
[10:44] Some are you some of you are government.
[10:46] Some of you are industry from fuels or manufacturing.
[10:50] There is that requirement within the code.
[10:55] But what you all have in common is your knowledgeable about air pollution matters and our remnants of the state of Utah.
[11:06] And then you also have not present, but the executive director now commissioner of DQ some Davis is a non voting member and will be tied if that occurs.
[11:20] And then price as, oh, and I put in TDW, that's because I just gave the DDW training on this last week.
[11:34] Rice, the DAQ director, serves as the executive secretary as we say non for my first end voting.
[11:47] So I'll be talking about on the last slide, all the board are created by legislative authority, and then the department will make the rules for the board organization and we'll get into those
[12:07] burglesholes as we go along.
[12:11] And yes, forum is a simple majority of five and then you have the
[12:18] staggering appointments. So usually half the board would never reappoint it or newly appointed
[12:27] every two years in their four year terms.
[12:35] And then I got a little look at myself there.
[12:38] We have the four-year terms that you will all serve.
[12:42] You can serve multiple terms as we've heard in the introductions.
[12:48] There's annual selections of the chair and vice chair.
[12:54] There are requirements that the airport needs at least quarterly.
[12:58] You guys need more frequently than that.
[13:04] And there's also ability to hold special or emergency maintenance. And we will discuss that a little further along as well.
[13:15] As I follow some questions on last night came here. You're still serving as the.
[13:20] I'm fairly sorry in the chair chair and.
[13:24] So the second we had done that, the annual domination was connected with last year's training
[13:29] last year's four games happened in the following, so that coming out is on the agenda today.
[13:34] Okay, I thought that probably the case, but-
[13:36] On that note, while you're at lunch today, make sure you're in a couple of each other and
[13:39] say you're a view or don't.
[13:42] And we do need a vice-chair, so that was my show.
[13:44] Yeah, so we need a non-nature group here, a non-nature group, and a bunch of gas bills.
[13:49] That's right, very function and significant role that the board has is it's role-making.
[13:58] You are a role-making board and so we'll just a little flip flop again, swap around the
[14:03] computer.
[14:05] And as a role-making board, it's not a typical or traditional board, but I had heard on it
[14:13] made by serving on boards and other capacities.
[14:19] It's not the same as boards that you may otherwise be familiar with.
[14:24] There are not duties that are defined by a set of lie laws
[14:27] that may be organized by a corporation or a company.
[14:30] Don't have fiduciary duties that are of particular individuals
[14:33] like fiduciary duties to shareholder.
[14:36] And you don't serve managed functions as a board.
[14:39] Your board is designed by statute.
[14:42] And design with several other responsibilities,
[14:46] but one of those key responsibilities being
[14:48] creating the laws that we set up under rules
[14:52] that will operate underneath the an a-boy stat
[14:54] that allows you to do the rules
[14:56] that we're able to do so operating
[14:57] within the bounds of the stat to.
[15:00] approve the rules that will govern state of Utah. So if it's implementation of the various acts that lie to your quality or regulation in the state of Utah. So, first and foremost, I do want to comment on because we are aware that legal citations and codes and test statute is the most boring abbreviation that exists. We try to not just reference statutes in a region
[15:31] the statutes, but nonetheless all the authorities and powers that come to your board come through all
[15:36] of these enabling rules, laws, statutes, and federal laws. So, references to our presentation,
[15:42] I try to have on the left, these, where we are, just from a bigger hierarchical structure of where
[15:49] we're sitting and where the rules apply. I want to comment on the fact that we have a lot of federal
[15:55] touchpants, you will now do an EPA. We got an over-arkey federal law and that is the Clean
[16:01] Air Act, approved by federal government and within that are always code of federal
[16:06] regulations. So EPA is designated to see how the whole list of federal regulations, but
[16:11] those are not the regulations that Utah directly is applying. Many of our regulations have over
[16:17] that. So the state, then of course the implementation plan, it's approval by the federal
[16:22] governments to run programs that DAQ runs, and then we have the state's air conservation
[16:29] app, our Equivalency to the Queen Air Act, and that's our Title 19 Chapter 2, as Merced
[16:36] and Referee said, we're in. So Title 19 is the All of Our Own Laws of Utah Code, 192, it's
[16:42] all of our air quality laws. And then under 192 is where we get the rules that this board
[16:52] So, that is our Utah Administrative Code, Section 307 is our air quality rules that we're
[17:01] following underneath our Conservation Act.
[17:03] So, the structure of that is a cooperative setup with EPA, and this is something I think
[17:10] that often gets confusing as are we just trying to do what EPA rules say, or if there are
[17:16] a lot of requirements are the clean air acts requirements.
[17:19] No, I guess the sort of that.
[17:21] Not directly, we operate within the boundaries of that,
[17:24] but it's Utah law, Utah rules, Utah governance,
[17:29] Utah's policy direct with those rules look like,
[17:31] but they will fit within that larger umbrella
[17:34] of this federal landscape of the Clean Air Act.
[17:37] That makes sense.
[17:39] So on that cooperative federalism arrangement
[17:41] means EPA plays a significant part to that.
[17:44] They have over-filing authority in much of that
[17:46] but those rules are new toggles.
[17:55] But making those rules, those powers being derived
[17:58] under that new talk code Title 19 allows
[18:02] and expects rules covering these various topics
[18:05] in these bullets.
[18:06] The language and the structure of this rulemaking provision
[18:10] of the talk code is permitted language
[18:14] as far as statutory legal construction meaning they use May.
[18:18] So it is not that you are just a rubber stammer
[18:20] that you must create the statute that copy and paste an EPA standard and a new improvement
[18:26] as a state standard. The idea is that you cover these topics. So there's discretionary
[18:32] boundaries around these issues that you're enabled and authorized to create rules on.
[18:38] None of them are obligatory copy and base language. And as you can see there,
[18:42] it's regarding air pollution and air pollution issues, control and evaporation of those issues.
[18:46] use establishing qualities, air quality standards, and then the decision there is division
[18:56] of air quality under the authority that Bryce has is to do permeate, but there are expectations
[19:03] that rules and in Utah rules allow that for many, so you approve the rule making for permeity,
[19:10] and then Bryce has the all the authority to permit facilities under those rules that issue.
[19:15] So that's why I have the required rules to require her meeting.
[19:19] And then several of the other acts that are connected
[19:21] around the clear act of substance or lab.
[19:25] And these acts that are having certain regulations,
[19:27] regulations, develop formula rules around those.
[19:35] That reference I made as far as how we construct statutes.
[19:38] And when we use may, when we use shallow,
[19:41] that distinction continues with some other authorizations that the board has.
[19:46] those first three bullets are some of those authorizations.
[19:50] So if the board see fit that a hearing needs to be held on something,
[19:54] not to, so they're not to educate and decide and create orders on certain issues,
[19:58] but if the board feels that a hearing is necessary, the board is authorized to do so.
[20:03] It's also authorized to make recommendations to press funny enough.
[20:07] We all feel press is doing a job.
[20:10] We have, you have to say to create a
[20:17] recommendation
[20:18] that can be on various subjects, such as we think that our particular and particular
[20:24] instance and force we should have, there may be a recommendation to price to undertake
[20:28] a particular portion.
[20:30] There may be a recommendation to undertake a particular rulemaking, as far as initiating
[20:34] the research and developing initial proposed language, there may be a investigation recommendations.
[20:40] Those can all be given to the agency that I take based off the board's recommendations.
[20:48] There are also several shells, which we're going to get into a little bit more of the detail on.
[20:54] Some of those shells are, again, the agency and Bryce as the director is provided the authority to enforce their requirements of the Air Conservation Act.
[21:05] So under his authority, and how often times with our involvement, we take civil enforcement on those actions, but when they cross a threshold, $25,000 or more,
[21:14] Those are enforcement that had our just confirmed or approved by the board.
[21:21] That's a requirement is a shallow, but the board must do if we had a seven minute or 25,000.
[21:26] To meet those requirements, the federal air policing laws, that's associated with what I was describing earlier,
[21:31] can be umbrella, but the requirement is a common case.
[21:36] Establishing work practice standards mean rules may touch on industry standards
[21:40] of as far as how their operations are permitted, scope of those operations and what their
[21:47] permitted to do. And then the last one I didn't, there are a few more shallow, but I just
[21:51] noticed there are one on fours. You want to look at them that are very specific and narrow
[21:55] to like unique practices within particular industries, like beyond usual battles that this board
[22:04] deals with, but do they have any questions left for those cells? I'm happy to go in for
[22:09] their death, but then give a quick example of the app of acquiring rules for the contracts
[22:19] for higher demolishing, renovations, salvaging, encapsulation, we're involving friables that's
[22:24] this containing materials or inspections. That's kind of narrow specific rules, specific
[22:29] as specific category that there are some requirements to create those rules.
[22:34] The agency, of course, formulates those rules of the process that has been done.
[22:38] Those requirements, they're in a section.
[22:42] There are some limitations on that power as well.
[22:45] So the rules that can be approved are the categories that we just talked about.
[22:49] That's the scope of rules that can be created.
[22:52] But the board can't go
[22:58] too wild with the rules that they want to create
[23:00] based on the boundaries of the statute set.
[23:02] So, the statute is structured and described to say that the authorizations for rule-making
[23:08] need to be specified in being a statute.
[23:10] So, in other words, the law in Utah expects explicit authorization to create certain rules
[23:17] out of the post to a very broad, whenever rules the board feels are necessary.
[23:22] It's expected that there's a direction in the code to provide certain set of rules, which
[23:25] is why there's a memorations of rule-making of the word at an equation.
[23:31] One of these limitations to view where I'm not going to go into detail on it for this
[23:36] meeting, in part because we've got more detail on it than the previous training I respect.
[23:41] We have an important member, but the short of it is, and it's going to be tiny language,
[23:46] which is impossible to read, and it doesn't matter.
[23:47] We're not going to go through a red light on, but it was just the highlight that a provision
[23:51] was changed to create a limitation on asbestos inspections and the scope of how far to
[23:59] rules could go on. So there was a post-1992 limitation that said after January 1992,
[24:06] the board may not create any rules to require that certain types of buildings,
[24:12] in too much detail, but touching on like residential versus a four-unit facility versus commercial
[24:18] facilities, that certain types of those would not be required to assess this infection based on
[24:24] on the assumption that spest this was no longer used after 1992.
[24:28] So that's an amendment that just happened
[24:31] in team effect even on instead of the top,
[24:33] maybe at the 2026, this would be effective data that rule.
[24:36] Limiting the board's ability to create rules
[24:40] as it was otherwise not right to do under the spest this rules.
[24:44] Other, other quick limitations to mention are,
[24:50] as I touched on, you know,
[24:51] permitting authority. You have authority to make rules, authorizing permitting, but not
[24:56] the ability to issue the event for overvote permits, argument, certifications, those are authorizations
[25:00] by the director. And you do not have the ability to speak as an agent of the board without approval
[25:08] from the other members of the board. So in public-facing settings, public meetings, you would need to
[25:16] get that approval from other members of the board that happened by
[25:20] We both actually have to say a certain media outlet that would like information to be
[25:25] talking about the board.
[25:26] There's an approval from the board to do so that can be done, but otherwise you ought to
[25:32] authorization to see you as an agent of the board.
[25:38] Regarding those limits and boundaries of power, a little visual to try to represent what
[25:43] I was describing earlier, which is the way that Utah is attaching the structure is to say
[25:51] It is expected that the board will create rules in line with the federal standards set by the Clean Air Act.
[25:59] So whatever that boundary is, so I'm kind of representing this fence, is the boundary of law.
[26:04] And is that fence border that state law will be on the same side of that boundary?
[26:08] Otherwise, Utah laws will go as far as or be as stringent as whatever the federal approval standards.
[26:14] That's a, you think of hierarchy of laws as to hear your law, we'll cover it, but so that you have laws to be.
[26:22] Equally air act, however, is not restricted in saying that Utah law couldn't be.
[26:29] Beyond that down, whatever that boundary of federal law is, so the board may undertake roommate, maybe it's different than federal law.
[26:39] But it's a different, like beyond the scope of a federal law, beyond that, down through
[26:43] that fence.
[26:43] But the board must make very specific findings that it's going to do that, and those findings
[26:48] are mentioned in one or two.
[26:50] So you want to process that thing, so what's staying on a federal law fence, the public process,
[26:56] the common theory and public theories, and then you have to make very specific findings
[27:01] means that that rule that you need is necessary or reasonable for protections of the public
[27:08] area of health in the environment, finding that the federal standard is in submission
[27:14] to meet the public requirements that are needed and say that you can talk.
[27:18] That finding must be written and it's a very explicit find that we need documentation and
[27:25] directly be being in order to even make that fine.
[27:28] It's not an informal, which generally speaking,
[27:32] we stay on that top side of that fence.
[27:35] Staten law is the same as federal law.
[27:39] Another thing here is,
[27:42] I talked, I mentioned that con,
[27:43] that phrase co-operated federalism,
[27:45] as we work with EPA in the state.
[27:47] The state has authority as far as running these delegated programs,
[27:51] which means the state, under its governor,
[27:54] develop certain policies. When there's a distinction between a federal policy and a state policy,
[28:00] and it's a state delegated program that the state is running, it is the state policy that will
[28:05] dictate what that rule will look like. In other words, if the federal law allows two interpretations,
[28:12] and the federal government would say, hey, and the state government would say B, but both fit with
[28:16] them, whatever the federal law allows, then the state's policy is what will dictate what the Utah
[28:21] was sort of a blank obligation.
[28:35] One of those bullets we touched on was the settlement
[28:42] requirement to review settlements that was $25,000 and these are various laws that will set
[28:50] the boundaries for that. First and foremost, it is the director's authority to settle the
[28:54] enforcement, it just might be approved by the board. And that approval is under, it is
[29:01] indicated by a few different laws that are being in our time of two, which is the air quality
[29:08] law. Section 115 is the civil penalties. And that said that the agency made issue penalties
[29:14] up to $10,000, serves as a maximum amount per violation per every game that that violation happens.
[29:23] That is a maximum, and there are other loans that come into that that is a discretionary
[29:27] calculation that takes into account many factors of what that should be.
[29:33] So I say
[29:37] something, I think, yeah, you can probably notice in today's board reading there's
[29:40] some language in the compliance thing about a settlement that's a really large settlement
[29:45] but it's a federal settlement so it didn't fall under the board's purview to approve or
[29:50] disapproved. So, if you had any questions on the online renew large settlement today, and
[29:55] why you guys didn't get to hear about it or see it, it was a federal settlement.
[30:02] Thanks. Yeah.
[30:07] So yeah, going over here. There's three sets of how this looks. So the state has actually developed a rule that is our penalty policy. The agency uses an adulting. What the penalty amount should be and recommended to the board under 20 over $25,000. So that is first. If penalty is set up in categories, they're ABC&D, they being really high impact,
[30:31] or just to say, hi, hi, I'm back on open the environment.
[30:35] So these are involving hazardous air pollutants
[30:38] issue with non-team and areas.
[30:40] High impact areas are going to be in category A,
[30:42] category B are significant levels of emissions,
[30:45] but don't fall under category A.
[30:47] They deal with non-compliance for monitoring
[30:49] requirements, significant violations
[30:51] of permit conditions, category C, minor violations,
[30:56] with less or no significant environmental or public health
[30:59] impact, and category D minor violations that are required, but you know that's the
[31:06] other impact is identified. For example, I think a woodbird violation of something like that.
[31:14] Once, once we followed in a category, of course the statute still indicates that rate,
[31:18] which is $7 to $10,000. So the agency takes into account additional things that would decide what
[31:23] that appropriate numbers should be within the range of the category that is determined.
[31:28] So, the agency would look at, for example, if it was an excessive emissions, if it was
[31:34] willful, the conduct when the facility was reckless or negligent, they would look at
[31:39] whether they took good faith mitigation efforts to limit those emissions while raising with
[31:45] the agency a biased history at this repeat of violations, familiarity with the legal requirements
[31:52] through the longevity of the facility, and those penalties, they are not just direct
[31:58] compensatory. It's not calculated off of what that emission is valid in that. It does
[32:03] serve a punitive purpose, which is to try to encourage compliance moving forward.
[32:09] So the agency may also look at the statute, specifically says that the agency may look at
[32:13] facilities inability to, so if the punitive nature of the same penalty is much
[32:20] heavier for a very small operation, that $10,000 per day penalty would undo that
[32:37] So that's a lot of what this step three is indicating find category, find the amount from the category, and then other discretionary factors he went off point out here is economic benefits. So facility determined a control device was more expensive.
[32:56] then the penalties as a result of that control advice, so why not just take the penalty?
[33:02] That can be taken into account by agency as an academic benefit.
[33:05] That can increase the penalty by saying you're trying to save money by just taking the
[33:10] punishment as opposed to complying with clean air act.
[33:29] a little far.