SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE BOARD JAN. 13, 1995

The meeting was called to order at 9:30 a.m. by Chairman Mikels.

1. Opening Comments

Mr. Paulitz. Commented on his recent trip to Arlington, Virginia, to attend a conference on environmental mandates.

2. Swearing in of Newly Appointed Board Members

Chairman Mikels administered the oath of office to S. Roy Wilson and James W. Silva, who were appointed to fill the unexpired terms ending January 15, 1998 of Norton Younglove and Harriett Wieder, respectively, as the County of Riverside and County of Orange representatives on the Board.

3. Report of the Public Advisor, Small Business Assistance, and Economic Development Offices

La Ronda Bowen, Public Advisor, highlighted the current activities of Public Advisor, Small Business Assistance, and Economic Development.

CONSENT CALENDAR

4. Minutes of December 9, 1994 Board Meeting

5. AQMD Advisor, January 1995

6. Set a Public Hearing on February 10, 1995 to Consider Amendments to the AQMD's
Rules and Regulations, and to Adopt Any Necessary California Environmental
Quality Act Documentation for the Following Rule:

Adopt Proposed Regulation XXXI - Acid Rain Permit Program

7. Set a Public Hearing on March 10, 1995 to Consider Amendments to the AQMD's
Rules and Regulations, and to Adopt Any Necessary California Environmental
Quality Act Documentation for the Following Rule:

Amend Rule 2002 - Allocations for Oxides of Nitrogen and Oxides of Sulfur

8. Set a Public Hearing on February 10, 1995 to Receive Public Input on the Executive
Officer's Program Goals/Objectives for the Fiscal Year 1995-96 Budget

9. Recommendation Regarding Appointee to Designated Deputy Position

10. Recommendation Regarding 1995 Board Meeting Schedule

11. Recommendation Regarding Board Member Assistance

12. Report of Civil Actions Filed

13. Recommendation to Receive Audit Report of AB 2766 Fee Revenue Recipients
for Fiscal Years 1991-92 and 1992-93

14. Recommendation to Recognize Revenue from the Environmental Protection Agency
and Appropriate Funds to Cosponsor Four Projects

15. Recommendation to Release a Request for Proposals to Enhance Marine Vessels
Emissions Inventory and Further Evaluate Specific Control Strategies

16. Status Report on AQMD Listing of Environmental Documents and Lead Agency
Projects Received by the AQMD for Review and Comment

17. Rule Forecast Report

18. Recommendation to Delete One Technology Implementation Manager and Add
One Planning Manager Position

19. Recommendation Regarding a Request for Proposals for Medical Services Providers

20. Authorization for Disposal of Various Obsolete Equipment

21. Report Regarding Whether AQMD Can Establish Endorsement Program

Agenda Items 4, 11, 15, 17 and 21 were held for discussion.

ON MOTION OF MR. ALBRIGHT, SECONDED BY MR. PAULITZ, THE BOARD APPROVED AGENDA ITEMS 5 THROUGH 10, 12 THROUGH 14, 16, AND 18 THROUGH 20, AS RECOMMENDED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:

AYES: Albright, Braude, Burke, Haggard, Lee, Mikels, Paulitz, Silva, Soto, and Wilson.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: Antonovich.

4. Minutes of December 9, 1994 Board Meeting

Jackie Dix, Clerk of the Board, noted a correction to the motion on page 10 of the Minutes, copies of which were distributed to Board members and made available to the public. Mr. Braude, who seconded the motion referenced, concurred with the correction.

11. Recommendation Regarding Board Member Assistance

In view of the Board's increasing rhetoric on its concern about the impact of clean air regulations on small and large businesses, and the lay-off in 1994 of many AQMD employees,
Dr. Wilson and Mr. Braude expressed opposition to spending $300,000 worth of AQMD funds, which come from fees paid by businesses, to provide administrative support and assistance to Board members.

(Mr. Antonovich arrived at 9:55 a.m.)

Dr. Burke expressed opposition to the recommendation as well, although for a different reason. He was not supportive of language in the Board Member assistance contracts which would give the District--not Board Members--ultimate authority to terminate the contracts without cause. He also stressed the importance of administrative assistance for those Board members who do not have such assistance provided by their respective cities or counties.

MR. ALBRIGHT MOVED TO CONTINUE AGENDA ITEM NO. 11 TO THE FEBRUARY 10, 1995 BOARD MEETING, AND REFER THE ITEM TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MS. SOTO, AND PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:

AYES: Albright, Antonovich, Braude, Burke, Haggard, Lee, Mikels, Paulitz, Silva, Soto, and Wilson.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

15. Recommendation to Release a Request for Proposals to Enhance Marine Vessels Emissions Inventory and Further Evaluate Specific Control Strategies

In response to Dr. Burke, Barry Wallerstein, DEO of Planning, Transportation & Information Management, indicated staff's intent to obtain input from the appropriate Board committee to insure that the criteria to be evaluated is consistent with Board policy.

21. Report Regarding Whether AQMD Can Establish Endorsement Program

Dr. Burke indicated his agreement with staff that the AQMD cannot endorse individual products, but it can--and does--conduct certification programs.

MR. PAULITZ MOVED TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEMS NO. 4 (WITH THE CORRECTION STATED BELOW), NO. 15 AND NO. 21 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.

The motion passed by the Board regarding Agenda Item No. 31 on pages 10 and 11 of the Minutes of the December 9, 1994 Board meeting was corrected to replace paragraphs (a) through (c) with paragraphs (a) through (e), as follows:

(a) REQUEST THE EPA TO TAKE THE NECESSARY STEPS TO APPROVE THE CALIFORNIA STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP), INCLUDING DELAYING PROMULGATION OF A FIP IF FINAL ACTION ON THE SIP IS NOT TAKEN BY FEBRUARY 15, 1995;

(b) REQUEST THAT THE EPA COMMIT TO THE AGGRESSIVE NATIONAL REGULATION OF THOSE SOURCES OVER WHICH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS SOLE JURISDICTION OF WHICH ARE BEST REGULATED ON A NATIONAL LEVEL, AS OUTLINED IN THE CALIFORNIA SIP. IF THESE POLICIES ARE ADOPTED THE FEDERAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (FIP) WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED;

(d) REQUEST THAT, IF A FIP IS ULTIMATELY PROMULGATED, EPA SHOULD AMEND IT TO SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE ITS ADVERSE IMPACT ON CALIFORNIA; AND

(e) STRONGLY URGE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, INCLUDING SCHOOL BOARDS, WITHIN THE SCAQMD TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION OPPOSING THOSE PORTIONS OF THE FIP THAT WOULD HAVE UNACCEPTABLE ECONOMIC IMPACTS AND SUPPORTING THE BOARD'S ACTION, AND URGING THE EPA TO EXAMINE OTHER ALTERNATIVES THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED BY THE SCAQMD AS REDUCING THE SUM TOTAL OF AIR POLLUTION.

THE MOTION TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEMS NO. 4 (AS CORRECTED), NO. 15 AND NO. 21 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF WAS SECONDED BY MR. ALBRIGHT, AND PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:

AYES: Albright, Antonovich, Braude, Burke, Haggard, Lee, Mikels, Paulitz, Silva, Soto, and Wilson.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

At staff's request, Agenda Item No. 17 was tabled until after the Board Calendar items.

BOARD CALENDAR

22. Legislation Committee Report and Recommendations

23. Administrative Committee Report

24. On-Road Transportation Committee Report

25. Planning/Stationary Source Committee Report

26. Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee Report

ON A MOTION DULY MADE AND SECONDED, THE BOARD APPROVED AGENDA ITEMS 22 THROUGH 26 AS RECOMMENDED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:

AYES: Albright, Antonovich, Braude, Burke, Haggard, Lee, Mikels, Paulitz, Silva, Soto, and Wilson.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

27. Discussion Regarding the Use of the Voting Machine

Chairman Mikels opened discussion on whether or not the Board preferred to continue casting votes using the existing voting machine, or to cast votes by roll call instead. Speaking in support of using the voting machine, Mr. Paulitz pointed out that it takes significantly more time with roll call voting; and Mr. Braude commented that from his experience, having everyone cast their vote at the same time with the voting machine is far more democratic than roll call voting.

MR. PAULITZ MOVED TO CONTINUE USING THE VOTING MACHINE AS THE PREFERRED METHOD OF CASTING VOTES. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY DR. WILSON.

Mr. Antonovich expressed support of continued use of the voting machine, but only if the machine could be re-programmed so that each individual Board member's vote would instantly be displayed on-screen; rather than displaying the votes all at the same time after all Board members have cast their votes. Executive Officer James Lents indicated that the voting machine could be re-programmed in whatever manner the Board preferred.

MR. ANTONOVICH MADE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO USE THE VOTING MACHINE, RE-PROGRAMMED TO ALLOW INSTANTANEOUS DISPLAY OF VOTES AS THE VOTES ARE CAST BY EACH BOARD MEMBER, AS THE PREFERRED METHOD OF CASTING VOTES. THE MOTION WAS DULY SECONDED, AND PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:

AYES: Albright, Antonovich, Burke, Haggard, Lee, Mikels, Silva and Soto.

NOES: Braude, Paulitz and Wilson.

ABSENT: None.

Chairman Mikels directed staff to have the voting machine re-programmed before the February 10, 1995 Board meeting.

27(A) Recommendation to Approve Typographical Correction to Rule 1421 -Control of Perchloroethylene Emissions from Dry Cleaning Systems

ON A MOTION DULY MADE AND SECONDED, THE BOARD APPROVED AGENDA ITEM NO. 27(A), CORRECTING THE LIMIT OF 2200 GALLONS PER YEAR OF PERCHLOROETHYLENE IN THE DEFINITION OF MAJOR AND AREA SOURCES TO 2100 GALLONS PER YEAR AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:

AYES: Albright, Antonovich, Braude, Burke, Haggard, Lee, Mikels, Paulitz, Silva, Wilson and Soto.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

17. Rule Forecast Report

Pat Leyden, DEO of Stationary Source Compliance, gave a summary review of the Rule Forecast Report, a standard item on the Board meeting agenda each month. Ms. Leyden provided background information on development of the Report which, at the beginning of each year, sets forth the calendar of rules scheduled for consideration during the year, and is updated each month to reflect any changes.

A UNANIMOUS VOTE WAS CAST BY THE BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT TO RECEIVE AND FILE AGENDA ITEM NO. 17 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

28. Amend Rule 1401 - New Source Review of Toxic Air Contaminants

The staff report was given by Mohsen Nazemi, Senior Manager/Stationary Source Compliance. Copies of the following were distributed to Board members and made available to the public: (i) Changes to Proposed Amended Rule 1401 Since April 1994; (ii) Revisions For Agenda Item #28 (minor language clarification, correction of a typographical error, and three new items to be included in the adopting Resolution); and (iii) a letter dated January 12, 1995 to
Dr. Lents from James D. Boyd, Executive Officer of the California Air Resources Board, supporting adoption of Proposed Amended Rule 1401.

The public hearing was opened. Prior to hearing public testimony, the following concerns were expressed by Board members:

Ms. Lee and Ms. Soto expressed concern about the economic impact the proposed amended rule would have on small businesses. Ms. Leyden commented that the socioeconomic analysis presumes the worst possible scenario, and the actual impact to the affected sources would be much less than staff's estimate of approximately $ 4 million and loss of between 70 and 200 jobs per year.

In response to Ms. Soto, Ms. Leyden indicated that staff already provides source education classes and information on the District's loan guarantee program to small businesses. Therefore, staff was agreeable to preparing a statement to that effect for inclusion in the resolution for this rule amendment, and in the resolutions for future adoptions and amendments of all District rules.

Mr. Braude and Mr. Antonovich expressed concern that staff was not figuring in the costs to facilities for compliance with other District rules, such as Rule 1421 (for dry cleaners) and Rule 1153 (for bakeries).

Mr. Albright questioned the need for the AQMD to adopt regulations for these compounds listed in the proposed amendment before adoption of the federal air toxics program. Ms. Leyden responded that if the same compounds that will be required to be regulated are placed in Rule 1401, staff believes a strong equivalency argument can be made that will let the AQMD's BACT (Best Available Control Technology) process basically drive the definition for compliance with the federal regulations.

Copies of the following Amendment to the Board Resolution for Rule 1401 - New Source Review for Toxic Air Contaminants were distributed to Board members and made available to the public:

"WHEREAS, the Board of the South Coast Air Quality Management District directs staff to develop source education classes for all small businesses and provide information regarding the AQMD's low interest loan guarantee program to each small business."

The above Amendment was revised by Ms. Soto as follows, because she felt it was not sufficient to just provide information; but that staff should help the businesses in understanding also:

" . . . and provide assistance and information regarding . . ."

Chairman Mikels announced that the Board would recess for lunch, during which time the Board would also take up Agenda Item No. 31 - Closed Session.

CLOSED SESSION

31. Recommendation Regarding a Closed Session to Consider Pending and/or Potential Litigation and Personnel Matters

The Board recessed to closed session at 12:00 p.m., pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (a), to confer with legal counsel regarding pending litigation which has been initiated formally, and to which the District is party. The titles of the litigation are:

Paige Bruyn, et al., v. South Coast Air Quality Management District, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. KC018186; and

Coalition for Clean Air, et al. v. U.S. EPA, et al., United States District Court, Central District of California, Case No. CV8844414 HLH

The Board reconvened at 1:00 p.m., and District Counsel Peter Greenwald stated that a written report of actions taken by the Board in closed session would be available in the Clerk of the Board's Office following the Board meeting.

-o-

Chairman Mikels administered the oath of office to Michael Antonovich, who was reappointed as Los Angeles County's representative on the Board for a term ending January 15, 1999.

-o-

PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)

28. Amend Rule 1401 - New Source Review of Toxic Air Contaminants

The public hearing was resumed, and the Board heard testimony from the following individuals:

*ROBERT FLETCHER, California Air Resources Board (CARB)

FRANK MYCROFT, California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal EPA)

GREG ADAMS, Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts

ED TORRES, Orange County Sanitation Districts

JEB STUART, California Aerospace Environmental Association

LEE WALLACE, Southern California Gas Company

TOM TISCH, Lipsner-Smith Company

MILLIE YAMADA, Southern California Air Quality Alliance of the California Manufacturer's Association

*ED LAIRD, Small Business Coalition of Southern California

*JOHN BILLHEIMER, Consultant

ROGER BENVENUTI, Akzo Nobel Coatings

RANDY SOLGANIK and HARRY LEVY, Metal Finishing Association of Southern California

BOB OLSON, Finishing Equipment

GARY STAFFORD, California Furniture Manufacturing Association

KATY WOLF, Institute for Research and Technical Assistance

DOUGLASS ROHRMAN, Rank America (Deluxe Laboratories)

*Submitted Written Comments

Overwhelming support of Proposed Amended Rule (PAR) 1401 was expressed by representatives of the various industries and the sanitation districts, which was attributed to AQMD staff's efforts to meet with industry representatives and develop revisions and clarifications to the proposed amended rule to address many of their concerns. Although there were still concerns outstanding, the consensus of the represented industries was that the changes proposed in PAR 1401's list of toxic compounds were inevitable; and to a large degree dictated by federal and state mandates. Representatives of CARB and Cal EPA encouraged the Board to adopt the proposed amendments to help insure statewide consistency in the management of air toxics and air toxic risk assessments.

Mr. Olson expressed opposition to the proposed rule amendment with respect to solvent degreasing. Staff defines T-BACT for degreasers as a carbon adsorption system, which has been disclaimed by EPA, primarily because of the high cost (up to $250,000) and cross-media implications. He believed that staff's estimate that 90 percent of degreasing can be accomplished by aqueous cleaning is overly optimistic; and added that in March 1995, there will be new effluent guidelines issued by USEPA which will result in those who have switched over to aqueous cleaning being faced with further regulatory concerns.

Messrs. Laird, Solganik and Levy expressed support of the proposed amended rule, contingent upon the following revisions:

SMALL BUSINESS COALITION OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA

Addition of the following language in PAR 1401:

(g)(4) Hazard Index Limit Exemption

The hazard index limit of 1.0 in paragraphs (d)(2) and (d)(3) shall not apply provided that the permit unit is constructed with T-BACT and the cumulative total acute and chronic hazard index levels, as specified in (d)(2) and (d)(3), do not exceed 3.0 at any receptor location. This exemption shall not apply to permit applications received after January 13, 1998.

Page 5 of the Governing Board resolution to include:

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Governing Board of the AQMD does hereby direct staff to monitor the permit actions taken on applications that were subject to Proposed Amended Rule 1401 and which would have exceeded the cumulative total acute or chronic hazard index of 1.0 as specified in paragraphs (d)(2) or (d)(3), and submit a report to the Board by June 1, 1997 describing such permit actions.

METAL FINISHING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA

Page 4 of the Governing Board resolution to include:

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Governing Board of the AQMD does hereby direct staff not to require T-BACT on nickel plating tanks for a period of at least one year from the date of adoption of Amended Rule 1401 in order to allow additional time to further evaluate impacts due to emissions from nickel plating, including particle size and deposition rate.

Ms. Leyden indicated staff's agreement to including the language proposed by the Small Business Coalition and the Metal Finishing Association.

There was extensive discussion, prompted by concern expressed by Mr. Benvenuti and Mr. Stafford, regarding the use of ethylene glycol monobutyl ether (EGBE), the main coalescent solvent used in water-based coatings by a majority of the coating manufacturers in the United States. Mr. Stafford pointed out that AQMD regulations have for approximately five years been moving the furniture manufacturing industry toward the use of waterborne coatings, and it would be a tremendous burden on the industry if they had to reformulate, change over their operations, and re-train personnel. Mr. Benvenuti pointed out that EGBE is contained in many common household products, and is the least hazardous of all the ethylene glycols on the list of hazardous compounds.

Staff's response was that this same issue was raised in the public hearing on Rule 1136. Staff did a specific study of industry transition to the use of EGBE in waterborne paints, and found that approximately 10 to 12 percent of the products used in the industry were being switched over to these paints. Staff also found that there were other product alternatives that were being developed without containing EGBE. The other issue is that the furniture industry is a classic example of an industry which the AQMD is proposing to include in VOC RECLAIM. Under the concept of that program, the very low gram-per-liter targets are relaxed so that the industry may move within an emission bubble with freedom between product choices. In addition, staff's position was that reformulation of coatings, as well as installation of ovens necessitated by changeover to compliance coatings, would not constitute a modification.

Ms. Wolf supported adoption of the proposed rule amendment, but requested the removal of the exemption for film cleaning. Production of the solvent used for cleaning movie film, 1, 1, 1 Tricholoroethane (TCA), will be banned on January 1, 1996 because it contributes to stratospheric ozone depletion. An alternative hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) was recently tested at Technicolor, one of the largest film production laboratories, and the HFC performed as well as TCA.

Speaking in support of the exemption for film cleaning machines, Mr. Rohrman emphasized that the exemption requires T-BACT and investigation of alternatives, and specifies a finite risk increase for a finite three-year period. While the HFC previously referred to does show promise, that product, as well as other alternatives, are not yet commercially-available and Deluxe Laboratories has not been given the opportunity to test these alternatives.

Written Comments Submitted by:

M. Dean High, Pacific Environmental Services,

on behalf of Metal Finishing Association of Southern California

(Mr. Paulitz left at 2:00 p.m. and Mr. Braude left at approximately 2:15 p.m., during public testimony.)

Ms. Soto suggested, in view of the questions and concerns raised by Board members as well as in consideration of new Board members, that the public hearing be postponed for one month.

Dr. Wilson expressed his belief that government closest to the people develop the best rules and regulations through the involvement of the public and affected industries in the process, and that the AQMD should not wait for state or federal regulations before adopting its own.

DR. WILSON MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AMENDING RULE 1401 AND CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, WITH THE FOLLOWING MODIFICATIONS, AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF:

Page 4 of the Governing Board resolution to include:

Page 5 of the Governing Board resolution to include:

THE MOTION BY DR. WILSON DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.

MR. ANTONOVICH MOVED TO DENY THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MS. HAGGARD.

Mr. Albright asked staff if, in denying the staff recommendation and leaving Rule 1401 as it presently exists, would the District be avoiding any state or federal mandates.

Mr. Greenwald responded that there are requirements in state law for local agencies to adopt new source review programs for toxics which comply with federal law and the state laws. The federal law basically requires MACT (maximum achievable control technology) to be implemented for any new source or modification after the Title V Program is approved, which is expected for Fall 1995. Therefore, if the Board does not adopt PAR 1401, staff does not have an argument that the District is complying with that requirement and would have to comply on a more ad hoc basis. However, staff has not received any certification from EPA yet that PAR 1401 would comply with that federal requirement.

Mr. Mikels suggested that if the motion to deny the staff recommendation did pass, perhaps staff could examine the concerns expressed during the public hearing and bring a revised proposal back to the Board at its February 10, 1995 Board meeting.

DR. WILSON MADE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDED RULE 1401 TO THE FEBRUARY 10, 1995 BOARD MEETING, AND TO DIRECT STAFF TO EXAMINE THE CONCERNS EXPRESSED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING A RECOMMENDATION BACK TO THE BOARD AT THE FEBRUARY 10 BOARD MEETING. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MS. SOTO.

Mr. Albright commented that the substitute motion should provide clear direction to staff as to the Board's intent. His opposition to the rule was with the technical aspects such as risk assessments.

Mr. Antonovich urged Board members to deny the staff recommendation, and not continue the public hearing to February. District staff could then work in a constructive manner with the public and private sectors to develop a responsible rule amendment, whether it be within 30 days or 60 days.

Mr. Mikels expressed concern regarding existing sources which are not presently affected by Rule 1401, but have to change their product to water-based coatings; and once that changeover is made, the sources become subject to Rule 1401 requirements with which they will not be able to comply. He raised the issue that the hazard index or risk assessment number being set for new sources is different than the level for existing sources. Also new Board members have not had exposure to the depth of the discussion at past Board meetings, including scientific debate with regard to the basis for risk assessment standards. In addition, the Board needs to know exactly what mandates the AQMD faces with regard to Rule 1401--what is and is not required, when is anything required, if it is--so that Board members have a complete understanding of what type of flexibility or lack thereof the Board has with respect to re-fashioning or fashioning a new version of Rule 1401. He believed the intent in Mr. Antonovich's motion was to re-build the rule amendment from a different basis, as opposed to re-working the rule amendment presently proposed.

Speaking in support of a 30-day continuance of the public hearing, Dr. Wilson commented that there was a lot of confusion as far as the costs applying to new sources only and not existing sources. All of the issues need to be clarified by staff and brought back to the Board in February so that the Board could consider, clearly, all of the issues. Ms. Soto added that a specific date should be set for staff to report back to the Board.

Ms. Leyden responded that staff could bring an issues paper (listing issues and concerns, as well as alternatives) back to the Board at its February 10, 1995 meeting.

Ms. Haggard expressed her concern that the proposed rule amendment appeared to go beyond what was mandated by the state and federal governments, and that clarification was needed on exactly what was required. She was also concerned that the health hazards were speculative.

Mr. Silva expressed his belief that Rule 1401 would apply to existing sources, and he was supportive of denying the staff recommendation and not setting a specific 30-day time for staff to bring this rule back to the Board.

THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION BY DR. WILSON TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDED RULE 1401 TO THE FEBRUARY 10, 1995 BOARD MEETING, AND TO DIRECT STAFF TO EXAMINE THE CONCERNS EXPRESSED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING A RECOMMENDATION BACK TO THE BOARD AT THE FEBRUARY 10 BOARD MEETING, FAILED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:

AYES: Wilson and Soto.

NOES: Albright, Antonovich, Burke, Haggard, Lee, Mikels and Silva.

ABSENT: Braude and Paulitz.

THE MOTION BY MR. ANTONOVICH TO DENY THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FAILED, FOR A LACK OF SEVEN CONCURRING VOTES, AS FOLLOWS:

AYES: Albright, Antonovich, Haggard, Lee, Mikels and Silva.

NOES: Burke, Wilson and Soto.

ABSENT: Braude and Paulitz.

MR. ANTONOVICH MOVED TO REJECT THE PROPOSED AMENDED RULE 1401 RECOMMENDED BY STAFF, AND DIRECT STAFF TO MEET WITH THE PRIVATE SECTOR AND ALSO THE STATE AND FEDERAL CONGRESSIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES IN DEVELOPING A NEW PROPOSAL FOR ADOPTION BY THE BOARD.

CHAIRMAN MIKELS ASKED IF THERE WAS ANY OPPOSITION TO RECONSIDERATION. HEARING NONE, THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR A VOTE ON THE ORIGINAL MOTION BY MR. ANTONOVICH TO DENY THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. THE MOTION PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:

AYES: Albright, Antonovich, Burke, Haggard, Lee, Mikels, and Silva.

NOES: Soto and Wilson.

ABSENT: Braude and Paulitz.

Chairman Mikels directed staff to meet with the private sector and state and federal agencies to determine what needs to be accomplished with respect to amending Rule 1401, and report back to the Board at a later date to be determined by staff and reported to the Board, with alternatives. All of the exemptions and changes discussed at the public hearing should be addressed in the discussion on alternatives.

(Ms. Lee left at 2:45 p.m.)

Agenda Item No. 30 was taken out of order so that the Board could take action on the proposed amendments while a quorum of Board members was still present. This item required immediate action by the Board in order to avoid sanctions by USEPA.

30. Amend Rule 1106 - Marine Coating Operations;
Rule 1124 - Aerospace Assembly and Component Manufacturing Operations;
Rule 1125 - Metal Container, Closure, and Coil Coating Operations;
Rule 1126 - Magnet Wire Coating Operations;
Rule 1153 - Commercial Bakery Ovens; and
Rule 1164 - Semiconductor Manufacturing

In the interest of time, there was no oral staff report given on this item. The public hearing was opened, and the Board heard testimony from Jerry Kraim of Kraim Environmental Engineering Services.

Mr. Kraim expressed opposition to the provision in the proposed amendments that capture efficiency of emission control systems be determined by the USEPA method cited in 55 Federal Register 26865 (June 29, 1990), because he believed the testing procedure to be unrealistic and too costly.

There being no further testimony, the public hearing was closed.

A UNANIMOUS VOTE WAS CAST BY THE BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 95-1, AMENDING RULES 1106, 1124, 1125, 1126, 1153 AND 1164 AND CERTIFYING THE EXEMPTION FROM CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT REQUIREMENTS, AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.

29. Amend Rule 1121 - Control of Nitrogen Oxides from Residential Type Natural Gas-Fired Water Heaters

Because of the likelihood of losing a quorum of Board members,

A UNANIMOUS VOTE WAS CAST BY THE BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND RULE 1121 TO THE FEBRUARY 10, 1995 BOARD MEETING.

PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD - (Public Comment on Non-Agenda Items,
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.3)

There was no public comment on non-agenda items.

ADJOURNMENT

The meeting was adjourned by Chairman Mikels at 2:55 p.m.

The foregoing is a true statement of the proceedings held by the South Coast Air Quality Management District Board on January 13, 1995.

Respectfully Submitted,

SAUNDRA MCDANIEL

Senior Deputy Clerk

Date Minutes Approved: _______________________________

__________________________________________, Chairman

Jon D. Mikels

This page updated: July 09, 2015
URL: ftp://lb1/hb/1995/February/9501bm.html