Notice having been duly given, the regular meeting of the South Coast Air Quality Management District Board was held at District Headquarters, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. Members present:

Supervisor Jon D. Mikels, Chairman
County of San Bernardino

Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich (arrived at 10:00 a.m.)
County of Los Angeles

Councilman Marvin Braude
Cities of Los Angeles County - Western Region

Mayor Candace Haggard
Cities of Orange County

Ms. Mee H. Lee
Senate Rules Committee Appointee

Mayor Ronald O. Loveridge
Cities of Riverside County

Councilman Leonard Paulitz
Cities of San Bernardino County

Supervisor James W. Silva
County of Orange

Councilwoman Nell Soto
Cities of Los Angeles County - Eastern Region

Supervisor S. Roy Wilson, Ed.D.
County of Riverside

Members Absent:

Dr. William Burke, Vice Chairman
Speaker of the Assembly Appointee

Vacant:
Governor's Appointee

The meeting was called to order at 9:40 a.m. by Chairman Mikels.

• Opening Comments

Mr. Loveridge. Announced that three times during the summer, residents of Riverside and San Bernardino Counties will be able to visit San Clemente by MetroLink, with the first such connection scheduled for the upcoming weekend.

James M. Lents, Ph.D., Executive Officer. Announced that AQMD received a plaque from The Smithsonian Institute in recognition of its nomination for an award for the work done by AQMD with respect to RECLAIM monitoring and reporting systems.

Ms. Soto. Congratulated staff on a job well done for the Vendors Fair held at AQMD Headquarters on June 12, 1996 to encourage MBE/WBE/DVBE participation in AQMD contracting.

• Presentation by Coalition for Clean Air and Norco High School on "Project Clean Air"

Michele DiFrancia, Outreach Coordinator for the Coalition for Clean Air, and Norco High School student Kirlos Guerguis gave a brief presentation on the project, co-sponsored by AQMD, which provided students a basic course on air pollution and its damaging effects on health. As a part of this project, a Clean Air Rally was held on May 3, 1996 which included among the participants AQMD, American Lung Association, Clean Air Now, and the Riverside County Transportation Commission.

CONSENT CALENDAR

1. Minutes of May 10, 1996 Board Meeting

2. Set Public Hearing July 12, 1996 to Amend Rule 430 - Breakdown Provisions

3. Set Public Hearing July 12, 1996 to Amend

Rule 2002 - Allocations for NOx and SOx;
Rule 2004 - Requirements;
Rule 2005 - New Source Review for RECLAIM;
Rule 2011 - Requirements for Monitoring, Reporting, and Recordkeeping for SOx Emissions;
Rule 2012 - Requirements for Monitoring, Reporting, and Recordkeeping for NOx Emissions; and
Rule 2015 - Backstop Provisions

4. Execute Contracts for Air Quality Investment Program

5. Execute a Contract to Cost-Share the Development of a Prototype Economical
Advanced Electric Vehicle and a Plan for California Production

6. Execute a Sole Source Contract to Help Fund the Development of Air Quality
Related Educational Exhibits at the California Museum of Science and Industry's
California Science Center

7. Execute Contract for Enhancement of Facility Permit Processing System

7(A). Execute Contracts with Horizon Air Measurement Services, Inc. and
Team Environmental Services, Inc. for Source Emissions Testing

8. Award Bid for Independent Audit Services for Fiscal Years Ending June 30, 1996,
1997, and 1998

9. Establish List of Pre-Qualified Vendors for Providing Mailing Services

10. Issue a Request for Proposals to Audit AB 2766 Fee Revenue Recipients for
Fiscal Years 1993-94 and 1994-95

11. Public Advisor's Report

12. Hearing Board Variances and Appeals

13. Civil Actions Filed

14. Rule Forecast

15. Air Quality and Wildland Fires

16. Lead Agency Projects and Environmental Documents Received by the AQMD

17. Tenth Semi-Annual Report of the Coachella Valley PM10 Technical Working Group

Agenda Items 2 through 5, 10 and 14 were held for discussion.

ON MOTION OF DR. WILSON, SECONDED BY MS. LEE, THE BOARD APPROVED AGENDA ITEMS 6 THROUGH 9, 11 THROUGH 13, AND 15 THROUGH 17 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:

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

NOES: None.

ABSTAIN: Soto (on Agenda Item #6 only).

ABSENT: Antonovich and Burke.

18. Items Deferred from Consent Calendar

2. Set Public Hearing July 12, 1996 to Amend Rule 430 - Breakdown Provisions

Ms. Pat Leyden, DEO of Stationary Source Compliance, reported that the proposed amendments include consideration of having the Hearing Board on standby on Saturdays, Sundays and Mondays in the event of equipment breakdowns necessitating variance relief. Staff has reconsidered that proposal, and intends to withdraw it from the proposed amendments which will be considered by the Board at the July 12 public hearing on this item.

3. Set Public Hearing July 12, 1996 to Amend

Rule 2002 - Allocations for NOx and SOx;
Rule 2004 - Requirements;
Rule 2005 - New Source Review for RECLAIM;
Rule 2011 - Requirements for Monitoring, Reporting, and
Recordkeeping for SOx Emissions;
Rule 2012 - Requirements for Monitoring, Reporting, and
Recordkeeping for NOx Emissions; and
Rule 2015 - Backstop Provisions

Attorney Curtis Coleman addressed the Board on behalf of California Portland Cement Company (CPCC) to express support of the staff recommendations on this item; but to also express concern that while CPCC is optimistic that it will be able to make modifications to its cement kilns to reduce NOx emissions and still stay under its RTC allocations cap, there is the possibility that CPCC may exceed its allocation for the year because of circumstances beyond its control. In that event, CPCC may have to come back to the Governing Board, since the Hearing Board is not authorized to grant any relief from the RTC emissions allocation cap.

4. Execute Contracts for Air Quality Investment Program

Chairman Mikels indicated that this item was not pulled for discussion, but for continuance of the item to the July 12, 1996 Board meeting.

5. Execute a Contract to Cost-Share the Development of a Prototype Economical Advanced Electric Vehicle and a Plan for California Production

The following individuals addressed the Board to speak in opposition to the staff recommendation on this item:

JIM CAMP, Consultant to State Assembly Utilities and Commerce Committee

(Read into the record a statement by Assemblyman Conroy)

*ANITA MANGELS, Californians Against Hidden Taxes

BILL WARD, Committees of Correspondence

DR. KENNETH GREEN, Reason Foundation

WAYNE KING, Orange County resident

*Submitted Written Comments

The key points/issues raised by the above individuals are summarized as follows:

• A statewide mandate already exists which provides for the development of EVs by the world's seven largest automobile makers, which are fully capable of funding the project without taxpayer assistance.

• The United States Advanced Battery Consortium (USABC), with an original four-year budget of $262 million has been working on an EV battery design for years, with limited success. It is unreasonable to assume that the recommended contract, valued at approximately $2 million, can solve a problem which has stymied the USABC for so long.

• The Board should reject the proposed contract, and instead apply the $500,000 to viable--not speculative and duplicative--air quality solutions.

• The ARB has acknowledged that the mandated introduction of over a million electric vehicles over the entire life of the mandate would result in only one percent of the smog reduction required under the SIP. To expend such a vast amount of time and resources for the return that is associated with EV usage is counterproductive.

• The proposed sole-source contract was negotiated without the benefit of the public competitive bidding process required of most government contracts in California.

• Contracting with an out-of-state firm for production of the EV conflicts with all of the "jobs for California" language that has been used for the last five years to legitimize the EV mandate. The contract should require that 75 to 80 percent of the funds be spent in California.

The following individuals commented in support of the staff recommendation:

JOHN COX, Southern California Economic Partnership (SCEP)

1) Pointed out that government investment in the business economy has gone on for many years in all industries, and the electric vehicle is no exception. 2) Expressed concern that while EVs and EV batteries are being built worldwide, not enough of them are being manufactured in the state of California. 3) Encouraged Board approval of this item because SCEP views the proposed contract as one that can fulfill the "Project California" goal of creating jobs for California.

BOB CROSS, California Air Resources Board

1) Emphasized that the goal of the project is primarily one of jobs and commerce for California, with recognition of the world market potential, as opposed to environmental. The proposed contract with Troy Design and Manufacturing (TDM), a company which has a long history of building low volume production runs for the big three automobile makers, has a reasonable chance of starting a world car production facility in California; and ARB's view is that it is a good investment. Also, the ARB contract includes a $100-per-car royalty for the first 20,000 cars if the EV is produced anywhere other than California. 2) Clarified that funding for the project would be provided as follows: TDM -- $600,000; ARB -- $500,000; AQMD -- $500,000; and $800,000 provided by the Advanced Research Projects Agency, for a total of $2.4 million.

(Mr. Antonovich arrived at 10:00 a.m., during public comment)

Written Comments Submitted by:

Assemblyman Bill Morrow

Assemblyman Bob Margett

Senator Ross Johnson

California Business Alliance

Mr. Braude expressed concern that the proposed contract implies that there is further development necessary for EV technology. There is no question that an EV can be built right now and be sold for less than the mass-produced gasoline-driven vehicles.

Mr. Paulitz commented that funding provided by AQMD for the proposed project is not taxpayers' money, but is money generated from air pollution fees for a special fund to advance technology to clean up the air in this basin. Therefore, this item would be an appropriate use of those funds. In response to the comment that AQMD is subsidizing the EV industry, he pointed out that the oil industry has been subsidized for many years. Expressing his belief that technology will eventually solve California's pollution problem, not changing people's driving habits, he added that the real demand for EVs is going to originate in California.

Indicating his agreement with Mr. Paulitz's comments, Dr. Wilson commented that the basic issue with this item--and why he supports it--is that it is attempting to put together a production model EV that can be used to create jobs and add a new dimension to the California economy as we service the outer rim countries with EVs.

Mr. Antonovich expressed his belief that the $500,000 the Board is being asked to appropriate would be better spent in cleaning the air by removing the polluting vehicles from the highways, and also subsidizing clean fuel programs for public transit systems.

Chairman Mikels suggested the Board continue this item to the July 12, 1996 Board meeting, and request a letter of explanation and support from Cal-EPA to address the issues and concerns raised.

Mr. Braude added that he has been a consistent supporter of using public funds to push the state of the art; but questions whether the proposed project would make the best use of the funds available. He would like to see a list of alternatives, for example, for investing the funds.

DR. WILSON MOVED TO CONTINUE AGENDA ITEM NO. 5 TO THE JULY 12, 1996 BOARD MEETING, AND TO REQUEST FROM CAL-EPA AND THE ARB A LETTER OF EXPLANATION AND SUPPORT ON THE ITEM, ADDRESSING THE ISSUES AND CONCERNS RAISED BY THE PUBLIC AND BOARD MEMBERS. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MR. PAULITZ, AND PASSED BY A UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT (Absent: Burke).

10. Issue a Request for Proposals to Audit AB 2766 Fee Revenue Recipients for Fiscal Years
1993-94 and 1994-95

Ms. Soto suggested that the board letter--which highlights the outreach that will be conducted in an effort to get responses from MBE/WBE/DVBE firms--be attached to the RFP, since copies of RFPs are now submitted to the Ethnic Community Advisory Council and the Latino and Black Legislative Caucus, among others. Dr. Lents indicated staff's agreement.

14. Rule Forecast

At Ms. Soto's request, staff agreed to contact as many of the restaurants as possible that will be affected by Proposed Rule 1138 (scheduled for public hearing in October 1996) through individual restaurant management contacts, in addition to contacting the restaurant trade associations.

ON MOTION OF MS. LEE, SECONDED BY MS. SOTO, A UNANIMOUS VOTE WAS CAST BY THE BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT (Absent: Burke) APPROVING AGENDA ITEMS 2, 3, 4, 10 AND 14 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.

BOARD CALENDAR

19. Administrative Committee

20. Legislative Committee

21. Mobile Source Committee

22. Stationary Source Committee

23. Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee

24. Air Resources Board Monthly Meeting

25. Chairman's Report of Appointment of Board Member to Serve on SCAG's Southern California Rideshare Board

25(A) Establish Office of Public Affairs & Local Government Assistance and the Position of Deputy Executive Officer to Administer its Responsibilities; Create the Local Government and Small Business Assistance Committee; and Institute an Annual General Assembly

Agenda Items 20 and 25(A) were held for discussion and separate action by the Board.

ON MOTION OF MR. SILVA, SECONDED BY DR. WILSON, A UNANIMOUS VOTE WAS CAST BY THE BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT (Absent: Burke) APPROVING RECEIPT AND FILE OF AGENDA ITEMS 19 AND 21 THROUGH 24, AND THE APPOINTMENT OF BOARD MEMBER LEONARD PAULITZ TO SCAG'S SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RIDESHARE BOARD, AS RECOMMENDED.

20. Legislative Committee

Legislative Director Catherine Witherspoon reported that the Legislative Committee, at its meeting on May 24, 1996, continued a bill to the June 14 Board meeting for discussion--AB 2635 (Morrisey), concerning portable engines. At the time of the Committee meeting, staff expressed concerns about the bill, and was recommending an "oppose unless amended" position. Staff subsequently met with the sponsor of the bill, Construction Industry Air Quality Coalition, and was able to reach a compromise on amendments to the bill which would resolve staff's concerns. The ARB is continuing to refine both the legislation and their draft regulations implementing last year's bill--AB 531 (Morrisey). Staff will continue to work with both the sponsor and the ARB on bringing the two together. Staff distributed copies of the compromise amendments to Board members and recommended the Board take a position of "support with compromise amendments" on AB 2635.

Mr. Paulitz noted the following correction to page three of the committee report:
"AB (Olberg) (Brulte)".

MR. PAULITZ MOVED APPROVAL OF THE FOLLOWING POSITIONS ON LEGISLATION, AS RECOMMENDED BY THE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE:

AB 2282 (Knox) and AB 2623 (Kuehl) -- Clean Fuel Vehicles

and Car Pool Lanes SUPPORT

AB 2369 (Takasugi) -- Title V Permits SUPPORT IF

AMENDED

AB 2635 (Morrissey) -- Portable Engines: BACT and Source SUPPORT
Testing WITH COMPROMISE AMENDMENTS

AB 2937 (Brulte) -- Minor Violations/Env. Regulations OPPOSE

AB 3159 (Olberg) -- Restrictions on Civil Penalties OPPOSE

AB 1880 (Lewis) -- Portable Engines: Definition SUPPORT WITH

AMENDMENTS

THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MR. LOVERIDGE, AND PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:

AYES: Antonovich, Braude, Haggard, Lee, Loveridge, Mikels, Paulitz, Silva (except AB 2937 and AB 3159), Soto and Wilson.

NOES: Silva (AB 2937 and AB 3159 only).

ABSENT: Burke.

Ms. Witherspoon added that AQMD legal staff has been working on the possibility of defining minor violations in the air quality context in such a way that it does not bind the entire prosecutorial arm of the agency, and may be able to find a compromise for AB 2937 and AB 3159 before the legislative session is over.

25(A) Establish Office of Public Affairs & Local Government Assistance and the Position of Deputy Executive Officer to Administer its Responsibilities; Create the Local Government and Small Business Assistance Committee; and Institute an Annual General Assembly

Chairman Mikels reported that this proposal relates to AB 3248 (Napolitano) -- Public Affairs Reorganization, which the Board is on record as opposing. He, Ms. Soto, and Dr. Burke met with Assemblywoman Napolitano, Senator Polanco and Senator Archie Hudson by telephone and agreed that the Board would draft an administrative alternative to AB 3248, incorporating the important elements of concern to Assemblywoman Napolitano. Chairman Mikels and Ms. Soto will meet with Assemblywoman Napolitano on June 18, 1996 to resolve any outstanding issues and conclude discussions, which is expected to result in withdrawal of AB 3248 by the assemblywoman. Chairman Mikels recommended, therefore, that the Board approve this item provisionally, upon the withdrawal of AB 3248, such that it would not be implemented if the bill moves forward.

In response to questions by Ms. Soto and Mr. Antonovich regarding implementation of the proposal upon withdrawal of AB 3248, Dr. Lents explained that the intention is to reconfigure existing staff so that it would not involve any additional expenses, but only a reorganization of duties and responsibilities.

In response to questions by Mr. Braude, Ms. Witherspoon stated that AB 3248 is scheduled for hearing in the Senate Local Government Committee on June 26, 1996. The bill has drawn substantial opposition since the time it left the Assembly, and Assemblywoman Napolitano is developing amendments to the bill in response to the opposition that has been voiced to her directly from the Alternative Energy lobby, Electric Vehicle supporters, and environmental groups. Major industry groups in the South Coast basin are concerned about the micromanagement and the loss of fee revenue to AQMD which might result in fee increases upon them, but they have not stepped forward in opposition to the bill. Instead, they have declined to support the bill.

Chairman Mikels added that if he and Ms. Soto are unable to conclude discussions with Assemblywoman Napolitano on June 18 such that AB 3248 is withdrawn, AQMD will prepare to present its case in opposition to the amended bill at the June 26 hearing.

ON MOTION OF MR. LOVERIDGE, SECONDED BY MS. LEE, A UNANIMOUS VOTE WAS CAST BY THE BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT (Absent: Antonovich and Burke), APPROVING AGENDA ITEM NO. 25(A) AS RECOMMENDED, PROVISIONAL UPON THE WITHDRAWAL OF AB 3248 BY ASSEMBLYWOMAN NAPOLITANO.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

26. Amend Rule 1136 - Wood Products Coatings

Jack Broadbent, Assistant DEO/Stationary Source Compliance, presented the staff report. Board members were provided copies of an Errata containing replacement pages for 1136-15, 1136-16, SR-27, and APP G. 2 of PAR 1136 to correct an enumeration error. In addition, the Board was provided with revised language for Subparagraph (c)(1)(A)(i), to delay the implementation of interim VOC limits from April 1, 1997 to July 1, 1997, and for Paragraph (b)(34) and Subparagraph (c)(1)(D)(i), to address comments by USEPA.

The public hearing was opened, and the Board heard testimony from the following individuals.

DANIEL MEER, U.S. EPA, Region 9

Emphasized the following two issues raised in the letter submitted to the Board from EPA's Air & Toxics Division Director David Howekamp: Averaging. EPA's policy is that the averaging provision in Rule 1136 (c)(1)(D)(i) must include a 10 percent benefit share for the environment, because averaging mechanisms and other economic incentive programs have the ability to greatly reduce costs to regulated industry, and EPA believes that some of those savings should be used to achieve further emission reductions. Planning. Because PAR 1136 may achieve VOC reductions at a slower rate than the version of Rule 1136 adopted by the Board in September 1995, any shortfall should be accounted for in AQMD's SIP submittal.

LARRY COZZO, Graco Inc.

Requested that Paragraph (k)(8) of PAR 1136 be amended to allow the use of air-assisted airless spray equipment provided the coatings contain 550 grams, or less, of VOC per liter, and that any spray equipment be allowed where the coatings used have a lower VOC content according to the July 1, 2005 VOC limits.

In anticipation of Mr. Cozzo's request, staff prepared revisions to PAR 1136 to define "conventional air spray" and to allow the use of any spray equipment, except conventional air spray, that uses only coatings that contain 550 grams, or less, of VOC per liter of coating, less water and less exempt compounds. Copies of the revised rule language were distributed to Board members and made available to the public.

ED LAIRD, Small Business Coalition

AL SANDBERG, Sandberg Furniture

ALLEN IRISH, National Paint & Coatings Association

BRAD MILLER, BIFMA International

GARY STAFFORD, California Furniture Manufacturing Association

ROGER BENVENUTI, Akzo Nobel Coatings

JOCELYN THOMPSON, Attorney, Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers

Expressed support for PAR 1136, and thanked staff for working cooperatively with industry on the proposed amendments.

Written Comments Submitted by:

Fred Benson, SDA Craft Technologies

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

ON MOTION OF MR. SILVA, SECONDED BY MS. SOTO, A UNANIMOUS VOTE WAS CAST BY THE BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT (Absent: Burke) ADOPTING RESOLUTION NO. 96 -11, AMENDING RULE 1136 AND CERTIFYING THE FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF, INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING REVISIONS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF:

Replacement of Pages 1136-15, 1136-16, SR-27 and APP G. 2 to correct an enumeration error;

Revision of (c)(1)(A)(i) to delay the implementation of interim VOC limits from April 1, 1997 to July 1, 1997;

Addition of a new paragraph defining "potential to emit", as follows:

"(b)(34) POTENTIAL TO EMIT means the maximum capacity of a facility to emit any air pollutant under its physical and operational design. Any physical or operational limitation on the capacity of the facility to emit an air pollutant, including air pollution control equipment and restrictions on hours of operation, emissions, or on the type or amount of material combusted, stored, or processed, shall be treated as part of its design if the limitation is enforceable by the EPA Administrator."

Revision of (c)(1)(D)(i) to include in the averaging provision a 10 percent benefit share for the environment;

Addition of a new paragraph defining "conventional air spray", as follows:

"(b)(12) CONVENTIONAL AIR SPRAY means a spray coating method in which the coating is atomized by mixing it with compressed air at an air pressure greater than 10 pounds per square inch (gauge) at the point of atomization. Airless and air assisted airless spray technologies are not conventional air spray because the coating is not atomized by mixing it with compressed air. Electrostatic spray technology is also not considered conventional air spray because an electrostatic charge is employed to attract the coating to the workpiece."

Revision of Paragraph (k)(8) to allow the use of

"(B) any spray equipment, except conventional air spray, that uses only coatings that contain 550 grams, or less, of VOC per liter of coating, less water and less exempt compounds."

27. Amend Rule 1304 - Exemptions and Rule 1306 - Emission Calculations

Dr. Anupom Ganguli, Stationary Source Compliance Senior Manager, presented the staff report. An Errata was distributed to Board members setting forth the following revision to Paragraph (a)(7) of PAR 1304 recommended by staff:

"The source is periodically relocated, and is not located more than twelve consecutive months at any one facility in the District. The residency time of twelve consecutive months shall commence when the equipment is brought into the facility and placed into operation. This paragraph does not apply to portable internal combustion engines."

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

CAROLYN GREEN, Ultramar Inc.

LEE WALLACE, Southern California Gas Company and Ad Hoc Committee on
New Source Review

DEE ALLEN, City of Los Angeles

Expressed support for PARs 1304 and 1306, and appreciation to AQMD staff for working with them to resolve their concerns with the proposed amendments. Ms. Allen expressed the City of Los Angeles' continuing concern with the potential impacts of the revised NSR rule on small business, and their appreciation for staff's commitment to modify application forms to alert small businesses to options provided to them under the rule. In addition, the City looks forward to the annual report regarding any impacts to small business, and would like to work with AQMD staff to address any issues or problems that may be identified.

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

Mr. Braude expressed his appreciation to the Board for continuing PARs 1304 and 1306 from the Board's December 1995 meeting at his request; and he commended everyone involved--particularly staff--for having worked the proposed amendments out so competently and well.

ON MOTION OF MS. LEE, SECONDED BY MR. BRAUDE, A UNANIMOUS VOTE WAS CAST BY THE BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT (Absent: Burke) ADOPTING RESOLUTION NO. 96-12, AMENDING RULE 1304 AND RULE 1306 AND CERTIFYING THE FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF, INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING REVISION TO RULE 1304 RECOMMENDED BY STAFF:

"(a)(7) The source is periodically relocated, and is not located more than twelve consecutive months at any one facility in the District. The residency time of twelve consecutive months shall commence when the equipment is brought into the facility and placed into operation. This paragraph does not apply to portable internal combustion engines."

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.

CLOSED SESSION/ADJOURNMENT

28. Closed Session to Consider Pending or Potential Litigation and Personnel Matters

There being no further business, Chairman Mikels adjourned the meeting at 11:42 a.m. to closed session for the Board to confer with its Labor Negotiator(s) Nick Nikkila/Charles Goldstein, pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 (a), regarding salaries and benefits of represented and unrepresented employees and regarding mandatory subjects within the scope of representation. The employee organizations are San Bernardino Public Employees Association and Teamsters Local 911.

The foregoing is a true statement of the proceedings held by the South Coast Air Quality Management District Board on June 14, 1996.

Respectfully Submitted,

SAUNDRA McDANIEL

Senior Deputy Clerk

Date Minutes Approved: ________________________

____________________________________________

Jon D. Mikels, Chairman

AB = Assembly Bill

AQMD = (South Coast) Air Quality Management District

ARB/CARB = California Air Resources Board

Cal-EPA/U.S. EPA = California/United States Environmental Protection Agency

DEO = Deputy Executive Officer

EV = Electric Vehicle

MBE/WBE/DVBE = Minority-, Woman-, Disabled Veteran-Owned Business Enterprise

NOx = Oxides of Nitrogen

NSR = New Source Review

PAR = Proposed Amended Rule

PM₁₀ = Particulate Matter < 10 microns

RECLAIM = REgional CLean Air Incentives Market

RFP = Request for Proposals

RTC = RECLAIM Trading Credit

SCAG = Southern California Association of Governments

SIP = State Implementation Plan

SOx = Oxides of Sulfur

VOC = Volatile Organic Compound