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:
Dr. William Burke, Vice Chair (left during afternoon recess)
Speaker of the Assembly Appointee
Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich (left during afternoon recess)
County of Los Angeles
Councilmember Marvin Braude
Cities of Los Angeles County - Western Region
Cody G. Cluff
Governor’s Appointee
Councilmember Norma J. Glover
Cities of Orange County
Mayor Ronald O. Loveridge (left during afternoon recess)
Cities of Riverside County
Councilmember Leonard Paulitz
Cities of San Bernardino County
Supervisor James W. Silva
County of Orange
Councilmember Nell Soto
Cities of Los Angeles County - Eastern Region
Supervisor S. Roy Wilson, Ed.D.
County of Riverside
Members absent:
Ms. Mee H. Lee
Senate Rules Committee Appointee
The meeting was called to order at 9:42 a.m. by Chairman Mikels.
• Retirement Presentation to Norman T. Mattson Honoring His 29 Years of Service at AQMD
Chairman Mikels presented a retirement award to Norman T. Mattson in appreciation of his 29 years of service at the AQMD.
• Presentation to Marvin Braude Honoring His Service on the AQMD Governing Board
On behalf of the Board and staff at the AQMD, Chairman Mikels presented a plaque to Mr. Braude in recognition of his role as a clean air pioneer; for his leadership and commitment to air quality as a Governing Board member from 1977 to 1987 and from 1989 to 1997; for being an eloquent and effective advocate for clean air and strong environmental policy during his unprecedented tenure on the AQMD’s Board and as the last remaining founding member of the original Board; for being a driving force in accelerating development and successful commercialization of EVs and their infrastructure in the Southland--one example of scores of clean air efforts that he has effectively and passionately championed; and for bringing the clean air vision significantly closer to reality for the South Coast District’s 15 million residents, on behalf of whom the Board expresses great gratitude.
Mr. Braude was also presented with a large framed picture illustrating the design of the EV1 electric vehicle manufactured by General Motors, to commemorate his many years of support for EVs as an air pollution control measure.
Mr. Braude stated that apart from his passion for cleaning the air, of all the accomplishments that he has had, he is most proud of the creation of the AQMD Board as a democratic institution, which has maintained high democratic standards, high professionalism, and has achieved a high degree of consensus.
(Mr. Antonovich arrived at 9:50 a.m.)
• Award Clean Air Solvent Certificates
Pat Leyden, DEO of Stationary Source Compliance, presented certificates to the following eight companies for thirteen products which, because the products are environmentally benign and surpass future rule requirements, qualify as Clean Air Solvents:
• For Best Cleaning Solution, Inc.
• Gemtek
• Ipax Cleanogel Inc.
• Mirachem
• Namico, dba Chemifax
• PCI of America
• Ultra Shield Products International, Inc.
• W. R. Grace & Co.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Agenda Items Nos. 3, 15 and 22 were held for discussion.
James M. Lents, Ph.D., Executive Officer, noted the following correction to the description of fixed assets in place at the Lancaster Air Monitoring Station listed in the last paragraph on Page 1 of the board letter for this item:
"One (1) Bendix-Friese Wind Monitoring Instrument, #4008 #0001585"
Ms. Soto commented that contracting repeatedly with the same law firm for over 20 years as the AQMD has done with the Goldstein, Kennedy & Petito (GKP) firm is, to her, unacceptable. Further, she hopes that future contracting will not be done on a sole-source basis, as it was with the last three-year contract with GKP.
In response to Mr. Braude, Nick Nikkila, DEO of Technical Support Services, clarified that an RFP was issued and three firms were deemed qualified. The Administrative Committee expressed concern, however, that there were not more firms that were qualified. Therefore, staff is reissuing the RFP in an effort to attract responses from a larger number of qualified firms. Since Guttierez & Preciado was one of the three firms that went through the full competitive process and indicated extensive litigation experience, staff recommends contracting with them, on an interim basis, for any new cases that might arise while the RFP is reissued and responses evaluated. Staff also recommends that the contract with GKP be extended, so that GKP can continue to handle cases already in progress.
Ms. Soto expressed her appreciation to staff for providing this report and clarifying the various expenditures made for computers.
"One (1) Bendix-Friese Wind Monitoring Instrument, #4008 #0001585"
MS. SOTO MOVED APPROVAL OF AGENDA ITEM NO. 15 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MS. GLOVER, AND PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE;
AYES: Braude, Burke, Cluff, Glover, Loveridge, Mikels, Paulitz, Silva, Soto and Wilson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: Antonovich.
ABSENT: Lee.
BOARD CALENDAR
SB 432 (Lewis) - Voluntary Ridesharing: State Funding SUPPORT
SB 521 (Mountjoy) - Reformulated Gasoline: MTBE WATCH
SB 1113 (Solis) - CEQA: Environmental Justice SUPPORT
SB 987 (Sher) - Aerosol Paints: CARB Authority WATCH
THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MS. GLOVER, AND PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Antonovich (except "Support" position on SB 1113), Braude, Burke, Cluff, Glover, Loveridge, Mikels, Paulitz, Silva, Soto and Wilson.
NOES: Antonovich (on "Support" position on SB 1113 only).
ABSENT: Lee.
Ms. Soto commented that it is mistakenly stated, in the third paragraph on Page 2 of the report, that it was "concluded that the MSRC has been performing most of the outreach efforts outlined". While it is true that the MSRC has improved its outreach over the past two years, many of the ideas presented to the MSRC by her, Dr. Burke and members of the ECAG are new to the MSRC, and she looks forward to working with the MSRC, the Board’s Ad Hoc Affirmative Action Committee and the ECAG to build and support the type of outreach discussed at the MSRC meeting.
Mrs. Marjorie Mikels, concerned citizen, addressed the Board to express her support for renewal of the executive management agreement with Dr. Lents. Suggesting that Board members look to themselves instead of blaming Dr. Lents and his top level staff, who take orders from the Board, she expressed her belief that the Board is acting out of fear that if it does not appease the politicians who are backed by the large corporate citizens, the legislature will dismantle the Board. She stated that perhaps what is needed is not removal of the scientists and top administrators of the AQMD, but rather a fresh look at the direction this agency is taking and those giving that direction; and she challenged the Board to take up the charge of protecting the breathing citizens of this basin, rather than the corporate citizens.
AYES: Braude, Loveridge, Mikels, Paulitz and Wilson.
NOES: Antonovich, Burke, Cluff, Glover, Silva and Soto.
ABSENT: Lee.
Chairman Mikels stated that there being no action by the Board on this item, the contract with Dr. Lents will expire by its own terms on July 31, 1997.
Mr. Mikels stated that the recommended action would have the Board delegate authority to the Administrative Committee to make a provisional interim appointment for one week, subject to ratification by the full Board at its August 8 meeting, which will give the Administrative Committee time to interview and consider potential candidates.
Expressing concern that the Administrative Committee’s recommendation on this item was an attempt to circumvent at least six members of the Board, Mr. Cluff suggested that this item be discussed in closed session so that Board members could try to work together towards resolution of this matter without any further embarrassment.
AYES: Antonovich, Braude, Burke, Cluff, Glover, Silva and Soto.
NOES: Loveridge, Mikels, Paulitz and Wilson.
ABSENT: Lee.
CLOSED SESSION
The Board recessed to closed session at 10:26 a.m. pursuant to Government Code Section 54957 to consider the appointment of an Interim Executive Officer; and pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b)(1) to confer with legal counsel because based on existing facts and circumstances, there is a significant exposure to litigation against the agency -- one case. The facts and circumstances are a notice submitted by three environmental groups stating their intent to initiate legal action against the District regarding an alleged failure to implement the State Implementation Plan.
The Board reconvened at 11:52 a.m. Chairman Mikels stated that there was no action taken in closed session to report; and the Board resumed with action on Agenda Item No. 32.
BOARD CALENDAR (Continued)
Chairman Mikels clarified that if there are not seven concurring votes by Board members at the August 8, 1997 meeting to ratify the temporary appointment made by the Administrative Committee, that appointment will be vacated at that time.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
The staff report was given by Larry Bowen, Senior Manager/SSC. The public hearing was opened. There being no requests from the public to speak on this item, the public hearing was closed.
Anupom Ganguli, Senior Manager/SSC, gave the staff report and noted the following addenda, copies of which were distributed to Board members and made available to the public:
Addendum No. 1 - Resolution: Addition of language required by state law.
Addendum No. 2 - Rule Language: Revised language for Subparagraph (k)(1)(C) of PAR 1122 which was agreed upon with the aerospace industry to allow continued use (exemption) of certain products until January 1, 2003. The staff recommendation contains a proposal for staff to conduct a technology assessment in the year 2002 and report back to the Board and, if determined necessary, recommend extending the exemptions beyond 2003.
Addendum No. 3 - Statement of Findings, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring Plan: Addition of language to clarify the mitigation measures for PAR 1122 in order to address concerns expressed by the City of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles County Sanitation District in terms of coordination with the Regional Water Quality Control Board on water quality monitoring and any associated water quality issues that may arise.
The public hearing was opened, and the Board heard testimony from the following individuals.
MS. B.J. KIRWAN, Attorney, on behalf of 3M Company
*JIM NYARADY, Air Resources Board
*TIM CARMICHAEL, Coalition for Clean Air
*GAIL RUDERMAN FEUER, Natural Resources Defense Council
BILL CARTER, Metrex Valve Corporation
STEWART JENKINS, Vicker-Eemco
CURTIS COLEMAN, California Aerospace Environmental Association
*GREG ADAMS, Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts
*MR. ING-YIH CHENG, City of Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation
CLIFF McAULIFFE, W.R. Grace & Co.
ERNIE PELTZ, mechanic
*KIM KRISTOFF, GEMTEK Products
DAN BUCKINGHAM and KURT EICHAKER, PCI of America
KATY WOLF, Institute for Research and Technical Assistance
BILL SHEAFFER, Mirachem
BARBARA KANEGSBERG, BFK Solutions
*Submitted Written Comments
There was overwhelming support expressed during public testimony, and several industry representatives commented on the success and benefits they have experienced in converting to low-VOC aqueous cleaners, including the cost-effectiveness and the fact that the new cleaners are less hazardous to the health of those using the cleaners.
There was concern expressed by representatives of the environmental community, primarily that PAR 1122 relies heavily on a "good faith" compliance, and that the incentive being provided in the rule--exemption from reporting requirements--may not be sufficient to encourage companies to convert to low-VOC products. At their request, Ms. Leyden indicated that staff was agreeable to reporting back to the Board in six months on procedures for an annual audit of affected facilities to determine compliance with Rule 1122, as well as provide backstop compliance options for consideration by the Board at that time.
Ms. Kirwan raised a concern regarding 3M Company’s non-aqueous cleaners which are non-VOC and environmentally benign, but do not qualify for CAS certification, thereby possibly placing those products at a competitive disadvantage to the low-VOC aqueous cleaners that have received CAS certification. At Ms. Kirwan’s request, staff agreed to hold a public workshop and report back to the Board by the end of 1997 either seeking an amendment to the CAS program so that non-aqueous cleaners can qualify for certification, or explain the reasons for not recommending such an amendment.
Ms. Kanegsberg commented that while she basically agrees with PAR 1122, she would like to see the wording for the small usage exemption in the rule expanded to include all high precision applications, and not just those listed in Subparagraph (k)(1)(C).
Mr. Coleman requested that the Board delete the January 1, 2003 sunset date in the exemption under Subparagraph (k)(1)(C) of PAR 1122, and pointed out that among the three rules which comprehensively regulate the field of solvent cleaning (Rule 1122 - Vapor Degreasing; Rule 1171 - Solvent Cleaning; and the federal NESHAP for halogenated solvent cleaning)--each of which contains exemptions--the exemption in Rule 1122 is the only one with a sunset date of 2003.
In response to a question by Mr. Silva as to why there is a sunset clause for the exemptions in PAR 1122, but not its companion rule--Rule 1171, Dr. Ganguli responded that there are compliant solutions that are being introduced which staff believes will be effective in cleaning for the particular applications exempted under PAR 1122, Subparagraph (k)(1)(C). The Board can either have the January 1, 2003 sunset clause, with a technology assessment in 2002; or the sunset clause can be deleted, and staff can report back to the Board at a later date on whether a sunset date should be included in the rule. Ms. Leyden added that the sunset clause was placed in the proposed amended rule as a technology forcing component.
Mr. Silva expressed concern about the technology and the fact that many in the industry feel it is not cost effective. Indicating her concern as well, Ms. Soto commented that the sunset clause for the exemptions does not need to be included in the rule at this time and the Board can always amend the rule at a later date to include the sunset clause if necessary.
MR. SILVA MOVED TO AMEND THE MAIN MOTION TO DELETE THE JANUARY 1, 2003 SUNSET PROVISION FROM SUBPARAGRAPH (k)(1)(C) OF RULE 1122. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MR. CLUFF.
Speaking in opposition to the amendment to the main motion, Mr. Braude emphasized the importance of pushing technology.
AYES: Antonovich, Cluff, Glover, Silva and Soto.
NOES: Braude, Loveridge, Mikels, Paulitz and Wilson.
ABSENT: Burke and Lee.
THE MAIN MOTION BY MR. PAULITZ, SECONDED BY DR. WILSON, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 97-23, AMENDING RULE 1122 AND CERTIFYING THE PREVIOUSLY PREPARED 1997 AQMP FINAL PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, THE RULE 1171 FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, AND THE ADDENDUM PREPARED FOR THIS PROJECT AS THE FINAL CEQA DOCUMENTS, AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF, INCLUDING THE PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE ADOPTING RESOLUTION, PROPOSED AMENDED RULE 1122, AND THE MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN AS SET FORTH IN ADDENDA NOS. 1, 2 AND 3, RESPECTIVELY, FAILED, FOR A LACK OF SEVEN CONCURRING VOTES, AS FOLLOWS:
AYES: Braude, Glover, Loveridge, Mikels, Paulitz and Wilson.
NOES: Cluff, Silva and Soto.
ABSTAIN: Antonovich.
ABSENT: Burke and Lee.
Chairman Mikels suggested that the Board reconsider the sunset clause when staff reports back to the Board on the compliance audit. While representatives of the environmental community requested that staff report back to the Board on the audit in six months, he believes a year would be needed for staff to gather sufficient information.
1) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 97-23, AMENDING RULE 1122 AND CERTIFYING THE PREVIOUSLY PREPARED 1997 AQMP FINAL PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, THE RULE 1171 FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, AND THE ADDENDUM PREPARED FOR THIS PROJECT AS THE FINAL CEQA DOCUMENTS, AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF, INCLUDING THE PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE ADOPTING RESOLUTION, PROPOSED AMENDED RULE 1122, AND THE MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN AS SET FORTH IN ADDENDA NOS. 1, 2 AND 3, RESPECTIVELY;
2) DIRECT STAFF TO REPORT BACK TO THE BOARD WITHIN ONE YEAR ON ANNUAL AUDIT PROCEDURES AND BACKSTOP PROVISIONS FOR RULE 1122; AND
3) DIRECT STAFF TO NOT SUBMIT TO ARB OR EPA AS PART OF THE SIP APPROVAL PACKAGE THE SUNSET PROVISION SET FORTH IN SUBPARAGRAPH (k)(1)(C) OF RULE 1122, WHICH THE BOARD WILL RECONSIDER WHEN STAFF REPORTS BACK TO THE BOARD ON THE ANNUAL AUDIT PROCEDURES AND BACKSTOP PROVISIONS.
THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MR. BRAUDE, AND PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Braude, Cluff, Glover, Loveridge, Mikels, Paulitz, Silva, Soto and Wilson.
NOES: Antonovich.
ABSENT: Burke and Lee.
(The Board recessed for lunch at 1:20 p.m., and reconvened at 2:00 p.m. Not returning were Board members Antonovich, Burke and Loveridge.)
The staff report was given by Dr. Ganguli. The public hearing was opened, and the Board heard testimony from the following individuals.
JOHN BILLHEIMER, Small Business Coalition
Expressed the Coalition’s opposition to the proposed amendments to the BACT Guidelines; suggested that before this document is put into practice, there be added to it the throughput and amount of emissions corresponding to those reduction to practices cited in the document; requested that the number of sources that are represented by the SCC numbers be provided in order to judge the significance of that information; and commented that the cost-effectiveness analysis set forth in Table 2: Analysis of Criteria for Establishing BACT, is something that is not within the reach of the majority of small businesses.
RON WILKNISS, Western States Petroleum Association
With the clarification by staff that BACT and Rule 1158 requirements for the category of Enclosed Storage of Petroleum Coke are the same, expressed support for the proposed amended BACT Guidelines.
Rick Pearce, Director of Finance, reported that staff recommended moving and combining the public hearing on this item with the one unresolved finding regarding Los Angeles County scheduled for public hearing at the August 8, 1997 Board meeting. Mr. Pearce also noted that one of the two unresolved findings which are the subject of this item has now been resolved.
OTHER BUSINESS
Ms. Soto reported that during the last two years the Home Rule Advisory Group (HRAG) has been working with CARB and CAPCOA to integrate state and federal toxic program requirements and to obtain authority to streamline recordkeeping, reporting, and work practice requirements for companies that will be subject to federal Title III regulations. Negotiations have progressed slowly, and the HRAG has recently encountered resistance by the EPA and have come to the conclusion and understanding that perhaps the HRAG should seek assistance from the congressional delegation in its efforts to streamline what is required for small businesses to demonstrate compliance with Title III regulations.
Ms. Leyden noted that a corrected board letter containing minor edits which did not affect the substance of the HRAG proposal was distributed to Board members, and copies made available to the public.
The following individuals addressed the Board to speak on this item:
• Speaking in support of the HRAG proposal:
LEE WALLACE, HRAG
RON WILKNISS, WSPA
CURTIS COLEMAN, CMA Southern California Air Quality Alliance & California Aerospace Environmental Association
Urged the Board to adopt the policy direction proposed, which will allow everything to proceed in step with the congressional appropriations process which may serve as a legislative vehicle to obtain a one-year extension on certain Title III requirements while seeking to relieve duplicative and burdensome recordkeeping requirements for small businesses. Further, the proposal by the HRAG will provide a motivation for EPA to come to the table and negotiate.
• Speaking in opposition to the HRAG proposal
GAIL RUDERMAN FEUER, NRDC
Expressing the opposition of the NRDC, as well as the Coalition for Clean Air, to the proposal by the HRAG, suggested that the discussions with EPA continue; but if the negotiations fail, that the AQMD should then move forward to help facilities comply with the Title III requirements. Clarified two issues, if the Board does decide to approve the HRAG proposal: (i) it is their understanding that any efforts with respect to Congress will be directed only at the recordkeeping requirements, and not the underlying substantive limitations; and (ii) in specifying for which NESHAP the AQMD is seeking relief, not to do so for the Degreaser rule, because that is a rule which the AQMD is planning on implementing. (Submitted Written Comments)
Ms. Soto commented that the environmental community did not participate in the HRAG, although representatives were invited to do so. She clarified that it is not the HRAG’s intent to try to change the Clean Air Act, but to consolidate the cumbersome paper work for companies that is required by the various regulatory agencies.
Commenting that this issue does not seem so pressing that the Board should not allow the parties more time to negotiate,
THE MOTION BY DR. WILSON, SECONDED BY MS. SOTO, TO APPROVE THE PROPOSAL BY THE HOME RULE ADVISORY GROUP AS SET FORTH IN PAGES 4 AND 5 OF THE CORRECTED BOARD LETTER, PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Cluff, Glover, Mikels, Paulitz, Silva, Soto and Wilson.
NOES: Braude.
ABSENT: Antonovich, Burke, Lee and Loveridge.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD - (Public Comment on Non-Agenda Items, Pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.3)
Gail Ruderman Feuer, NRDC, addressed the Board to respond to comments made about the environmental community’s non-participation on the HRAG (Agenda Item No. 37). Commenting that she has traveled to San Francisco repeatedly to represent the environmental community in the toxics negotiations, she has participated in nearly every discussion that has happened on this issue, and that she made it clear that she was unable to participate on the HRAG because of time constraints, she stated for the record that the environmental community is very interested and involved in this issue, and hopeful that AQMD will resolve its concerns over time.
Richard M. Scherer addressed the Board, on behalf of Electro-Thermal Equipment Corporation and Hillcrest Beverly Oil Corporation to request that the Board consider two possible modifications to the way in which Rule 219 is applied with respect to stationary natural gas engines rated at 50 brake horsepower (bhp). Chairman Mikels explained that the Board cannot take action on any request made under public comments, and suggested that Mr. Scherer provide his recommendations, in writing, to the Board so that this issue can be considered and potentially agendized for Board action.
Larry Hottenstein, of Dames & Moore, addressed the Board regarding the award of a sole-source contract for a tracer study on ships approved by the Board at its June 13, 1997 Board meeting. Mr. Hottenstein was unable to attend the Board meeting, and, therefore, submitted written comments prior to the Board meeting stating their belief that there was not sufficient justification for a sole-source award and presenting the qualifications of the team assembled by his company to conduct the study. He stated for the record that his company would have liked to bid on the item, and would like the opportunity in the future to bid on any similar contracts.
Dr. Lents stated that it has been an honor to be the Executive Officer of the best air pollution control agency in the world, and wished the Board well in moving forward to clean up the air. He encouraged the Board to continue to push technology because he believes that by doing so it makes it possible to adopt rules such as PAR 1122 adopted today, which he believes would not have been possible seven years ago.
Chairman Mikels stated on behalf of the Board, the AQMD and its employees, and on behalf of Southern California that Dr. Lents’ efforts at this District have made a tremendous impact on air quality in Southern California, and on the respect other agencies throughout this nation, and the world, have regarding the SCAQMD. The respect and standing he has in the scientific community, the regulatory community, the academic community and the business community have all stood this agency in great stead as we have tried to move forward in a difficult, conflict-laden environment in proposing, discussing and approving the air quality regulations that affect so many businesses in Southern California. Dr. Wilson and Mr. Paulitz joined with Chairman Mikels in expressing their appreciation to Dr. Lents for a job very well done, and to wish him good luck in the future.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned by Chairman Mikels at 2:50 p.m.
The foregoing is a true statement of the proceedings held by the South Coast Air Quality Management District Board on July 11, 1997.
Respectfully Submitted,
SAUNDRA McDANIEL
Senior Deputy Clerk
Date Minutes Approved: ________________________
____________________________________________
Jon D. Mikels, Chair
ACRONYMS
AB = Assembly Bill
AQMD = (South Coast) Air Quality Management District
ARB/CARB = California Air Resources Board
CAPCOA = California Air Pollution Control Officers Association
CEQA = California Environmental Quality Act
CMA = California Manufacturers’ Association
DEO = Deputy Executive Officer
ECAG = Ethnic Community Advisory Group
FY = Fiscal Year
MSRC = Mobile Source (Air Pollution Reduction) Review Committee
NESHAP = National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
NOx = Oxides of Nitrogen
PAR = Proposed Amended Rule
PM10 = Particulate Matters < 10 microns
SB = Senate Bill
SIP = State Implementation Plan
WSPA = Western States Petroleum Association