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. All members were present as follows:
Dr. William Burke, Vice Chair (left during afternoon recess)
Speaker of the Assembly Appointee
Mayor 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
Ms. Mee H. Lee
Senate Rules Committee Appointee
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 (left during afternoon recess)
Cities of Los Angeles County - Eastern Region
Supervisor S. Roy Wilson, Ed.D. (arrived during closed session)
County of Riverside
The meeting was called to order at 9:52 a.m. by Chairman Mikels.
• Opening Comments
Mr. Silva. Recommended that the Board consider the closed session item (No. 38), which related to Agenda Item No. 17 on the consent calendar, prior to consideration of the consent calendar items.
AYES: Antonovich, Braude, Burke, Cluff, Glover, Silva and Soto.
NOES: Lee, Loveridge, Mikels and Paulitz.
ABSENT: Wilson.
CLOSED SESSION
The Board recessed to closed session at 9:55 a.m., pursuant to Government Code Section 54957, to consider public employee performance evaluations and action to employ or dismiss public employees. The positions are: Executive Officer, Deputy Executive Officer/Planning, Transportation & Information Management, Deputy Executive Officer/Stationary Source Compliance, Intergovernmental Affairs Officer, and Director of Small Business Assistance.
The Board reconvened at 11:10 a.m., with Dr. Wilson now present at the meeting. There was no action to report as a result of the closed session.
• Opening Comments (Continued)
Chairman Mikels. Announced that the AQMD Employee Awards Ceremony was held on May 1, 1997, and expressed the Board’s appreciation for the work of all the employees, particularly those 30 employees who received awards.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Agenda Items Nos. 1, 6 through 9, 11, 12, 16, 17 and 22 were held for discussion.
The following individuals addressed the Board regarding this item:
GARDNER L. HARRIS, owner of General Motors EV1 electric vehicle
SANDY KAPTEYN, owner of General Motors EV1 electric vehicle
MARVIN V. RUSH, EV1 Club/ owner of General Motors EV1 electric vehicle
RICK OSTROV, General Motors/Saturn Corporation
Expressed support for installation of more public charging stations for EVs, which would help to promote public awareness of EVs and also address concerns which potential EV drivers might have about the driving range or length of trips.
Referring to the last paragraph on page 3 of the Minutes of the April 11, 1997 Board meeting wherein she expressed concern that the reorganization of public outreach staff had not been publicized, Ms. Soto expressed her belief that the AQMD should do more to make the public and local government aware of its accomplishments and the good things being done by the agency--particularly with respect to contracts. Noting that all AQMD contracts that are competitively bid have a Proposition 209 disclaimer and the MSRC contracts do not have such language, Ms. Soto asked staff whether or not the law requires that the MSRC follow the same policies as AQMD.
Peter Greenwald, General Counsel, responded that since the Board has the authority to either grant or deny approval for the work program, he believes that ultimately it is the Board’s prerogative as to whether or not the MSRC will follow AQMD policies in this regard.
Emphasizing the importance of public charging stations to extend the range of EVs, Mr. Braude commented that he, too, is an EV1 owner and was pleased to see the new EV charger which has been installed in the AQMD parking lot.
Ms. Soto commented that at past Board meetings she requested staff to specify the composition of the RFP review panel and identify any co-sponsors, yet that information is still not provided on a consistent basis.
MS. SOTO MOVED THAT ALL FINANCIAL CO-SPONSORS AND MEMBERS OF REVIEW PANELS BE SPECIFIED IN THE INFORMATION PRESENTED FOR ACTION BY THE BOARD. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MR. CLUFF, AND PASSED BY A UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT (Absent: Silva).
THE MOTION BY MS. SOTO, SECONDED BY DR. BURKE TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEMS NOS. 1,6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 16 AND 22 AS RECOMMENDED, PASSED BY A UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS.
The following individuals addressed the Board regarding this item:
MICHAEL CARROLL, Attorney, on behalf of Regulatory Flexibility Group (RFG)
*BILL QUINN, California Council for Environmental and Economic Balance (CCEEB)
TIM CARMICHAEL, Coalition for Clean Air and Natural Resources Defense Council
*Submitted Written Comments
Speaking in support of renewing the contracts under consideration by the Board, urged the Board to recognize and retain the leadership and innovation that management has provided--particularly within the last two years--in improving communication between AQMD staff, the business community and the environmental community and being consistently successful in developing and implementing programs that achieve a balance between environmental and economic concerns.
Indicating their agreement with the comments made by the individuals representing three disparate groups, Board members Braude, Lee, Loveridge, Mikels, Paulitz and Wilson expressed support for senior management, who they believe are committed to the AQMD’s mission of cleaning the air and have been supportive and effective in implementing the significant change in direction which the Board took approximately four years ago. The public, as well as small business leaders, are now more supportive of the AQMD, due in large part, they believe, to the leadership of senior management staff.
Board members Cluff and Silva indicated their intent to vote no on this item. Mr. Silva indicated the comments he has heard from small businesses are completely different. Mr. Cluff indicated a perception that the earlier testimony was given by lobbyists who are adept at cutting back-room deals and now fear the loss of their power base. He does not believe it symbolizes the joining of the environment and business at all. Ms. Soto commented that she believes the positive changes that have occurred with respect to improved communication and balancing environmental and economic concerns have resulted from the Board’s direction to staff, rather than the leadership of senior management as was indicated by the speakers.
AYES: Braude, Lee, Loveridge, Mikels, Paulitz and Wilson.
NOES: Antonovich, Burke, Cluff, Glover, Silva and Soto.
ABSENT: None.
MR. SILVA MOVED THAT THE BOARD DISCUSS AGENDA ITEM NO. 17 IN CLOSED SESSION. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MS. SOTO.
MR. BRAUDE MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO HAVE THE BOARD DISCUSSION ON AGENDA ITEM NO. 17 TAKE PLACE IN PUBLIC. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY DR. WILSON, AND FAILED, FOR A LACK OF SEVEN CONCURRING VOTES, AS FOLLOWS:
AYES: Braude, Lee, Loveridge, Mikels, Paulitz and Wilson.
NOES. Antonovich, Burke, Cluff, Glover, Silva and Soto.
ABSENT: None.
THE MOTION BY MR. SILVA, SECONDED BY MS. SOTO, TO DISCUSS AGENDA ITEM NO. 17 IN CLOSED SESSION FAILED, FOR A LACK OF SEVEN CONCURRING VOTES, AS FOLLOWS:
AYES: Antonovich, Burke, Cluff, Glover, Silva and Soto.
NOES: Braude, Lee, Loveridge, Mikels, Paulitz and Wilson.
ABSENT: None.
MR. CLUFF MOVED TO: 1) APPOINT PETER GREENWALD AS INTERIM EXECUTIVE OFFICER; AND 2) EXTEND THE EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT AGREEMENTS FOR GUADALUPE C. VALDEZ, DR. ELAINE CHANG, DR. BARRY WALLERSTEIN, MS. PATRICIA LEYDEN, LARRY RHINEHART, AND LEE LOCKIE FOR SIX MONTHS. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MR. SILVA.
In response to Chairman Mikels’ question as to whether or not the Board could appoint an Executive Officer when there is already someone in that position, District Counsel Barbara Baird stated that the existing contract with Dr. Lents extends through July 31, 1997. If the Board continues on its present course of neither approving nor disapproving renewal of that contract, then the contract will expire July 31, 1997. The Board can terminate the contract at any point prior to July 31, 1997, which is subject to the Board’s discretion, and appoint an interim Executive Officer to act in the meantime. There is an issue, however, regarding the adequacy of the notice for the action of appointing an interim Executive Officer. Therefore, she advised that the matter be decided at a Board meeting where it has been noticed to the public, since there is the risk that the action could be set aside if the Board were to take it at this time.
In light of comments by Chairman Mikels, Dr. Wilson and Mr. Antonovich that a motion to appoint an interim Executive Officer was not appropriate at this time,
Chairman Mikels stated that by operation of law, this item is automatically continued to the June 13, 1997 Board meeting; unless, in the interim, a special meeting is called for that purpose and noticed appropriately.
Dr. Lents commented that along with existing management staff, this item includes a contract for a new employee, who was selected from 620 candidates for the newly-created DEO of Public Affairs & Local Government Assistance position. He urged the Board to separate that one particular contract from the others, and take action on it at this time.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Chairman Mikels announced that several individuals had submitted requests to speak on Agenda Item No. 37; however, only a few requests to speak were submitted for the other public hearing items--Nos. 34, 35, and 36. Therefore, the Board would proceed with Agenda Items 34, 35 and 36, recess for lunch, and then reconvene with the public hearing on Agenda Item No. 37.
The staff report was given by Edwin Pupka, Senior Manager/SSC. The public hearing was opened, and the Board heard testimony from the following individual:
TIM CARMICHAEL, Coalition for Clean Air
Commented that while the Coalition was not advocating fees to be targeted to a specific group, it is paramount that the Board identify a funding source or, in conjunction with the state legislature identify a funding source, for needed research on low-VOC technologies.
There being no further testimony, the public hearing was closed.
Mr. Silva expressed his belief that every time the AQMD increases its fees, it places additional burdens on businesses; and that is unacceptable to him.
AYES: Braude, Cluff, Glover, Lee, Mikels, Paulitz and Wilson.
NOES: Antonovich and Silva.
ABSENT: Burke, Loveridge and Soto.
The staff report was given by Henry Hogo, Planning & Rules Manager/PTIM. The public hearing was opened, and the Board heard testimony from the following individuals:
MICHAEL CARROLL, Attorney on behalf of Regulatory Flexibility Group
1) Expressed opposition to the proposed amendments that would go beyond what the AQMD has already established as acceptable levels of risk in Rules 1401 and 1402, because it would overly restrict the scrapping program and diminish incentives for scrappers; thereby making it unlikely for the potential of the program to be fully realized. 2) Suggested the following modifications to PAR 1610 (copies submitted to Board members):
* Amend section (i)(4)(B)(ii) as follows:
"use of MSERCs does not result in a Significant Risk Level in accordance with Rule 1402 paragraph (d)(11) when the increased carcinogenic health risk or Hazard Index as determined pursuant to clause (e)(1)(B)(ii) of this rule resulting from use of MSERCs are added to the total facility risk for those facilities that were required to prepare a health risk assessment pursuant to the Hot Spots Act, for the purpose of Rule 1402 for a facility or category of facilities; or as required pursuant to subdivision (e) of Rule 1402."
TIM CARMICHAEL, Coalition for Clean Air and Natural Resources Defense Council
While the Coalition and NRDC do not believe PAR 1610 goes far enough to protect communities from increases in localized toxic emissions, it is clearly an improvement to the existing rule and a move in the right direction; therefore, they believe the Board should adopt PAR 1610 as recommended by staff.
RON WILKNISS, Western States Petroleum Association
CHARLES AARNI, Chevron Products Company
With clarification from staff that facilities will not be required to conduct a new health risk assessment every time a compliance plan is renewed, urged the Board to adopt PAR 1610 and submit it to EPA immediately so that it can be approved as part of the SIP. Because Rule 1610 has not been SIP approved, several companies within the basin using Rule 1610 credits as an alternative method for a Regulation XI rule have been threatened with enforcement actions by EPA.
There being no further testimony, the public hearing was closed.
In response to a question by Mr. Silva regarding the need for the additional requirements related to toxics, Barry Wallerstein, DEO of Planning, Transportation & Information Management, explained that the U.S. EPA has threatened to disapprove Rule 1610, unless additional toxic provisions are included in the rule. The state ARB is in the process of drafting an auto scrapping regulation under SB 501 that would supersede Rule 1610, and the ARB will have to incorporate toxics provisions within that regulation. But in the event that ARB’s regulation does not move forward in a timely fashion, the AQMD needs to adopt PAR 1610 and have it approved by EPA so that the companies using Rule 1610 are not subject to civil suits.
There being no further testimony, the public hearing was closed.
Chairman Mikels announced that in the interest of time, the Board would take action on the board calendar items next; and then proceed with Agenda Item No. 35.
BOARD CALENDAR
AB 57 (Escutia) - Smog Check, Vehicle Repair Loans WATCH
AB 171 (Cunneen) - Transit Pass Tax Credits SUPPORT
AB 613 (Margett) - Telecommuting Tax Credits SUPPORT
AB 1368 (Villaraigosa) - NOx Control/State Funded SUPPORT IN CONCEPT
SB 1096 (Brulte) - Low Emission Trucks/Stations SUPPORT
SB 1306 (Sher) - Particulate Matter Research Act SUPPORT WITH AMENDMENTS
SB 431 (Costa) - Air Districts, Video Teleconferencing OPPOSE
AB 1376 (Baugh) - Consumer Products, Enforcement OPPOSE
AB 375 (Firestone) - Tire Recycling, Combustion NEUTRAL
THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MR. PAULITZ AND PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Antonovich (except SB 1306), Braude, Cluff, Glover, Lee, Mikels, Paulitz, Silva and Wilson.
NOES: Antonovich (on SB 1306 only).
ABSENT: Burke, Loveridge and Soto.
PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
The staff report was given by Patrick Pearce, Director of Finance.
Mr. Silva commented that it seems to him against sound budgeting practices to use reserve funds for operating expenses for the next fiscal year.
Mr. Pearce responded that approximately four years ago, AQMD enjoyed windfalls in additional revenue: (i) $5 million from additional refinery emission fees that had not been paid, and were settled with AQMD; and (ii) with the implementation of RECLAIM, many companies discovered when they audited their facilities that they were underreporting, resulting in an additional $6 million to the AQMD. At the Board’s direction, staff took the $11 million and set up designations in the reserves for the primary purpose of allowing the AQMD to downsize in an incremental way, and plan over the next three or four years to eventually bring expenditures down to meet AQMD revenues.
The public hearing was opened, and the Board heard testimony from the following individual:
CURTIS COLEMAN, California Manufacturers Association (CMA) Southern California Air Quality Alliance
Commented that certain permit applicants have expressed concern that permits are now taking longer to be issued, and there is concern that this will only get worse as Title V is implemented. He expressed his desire to provide input regarding the permitting process for the management performance audit expected to be done later in the year.
There being no further testimony, the public hearing was closed.
1) APPROVE AMENDMENTS TO THE STAFFING PLAN;
2) REMOVE FROM RESERVES AND DESIGNATIONS ALL AMOUNTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FY 1996-97 BUDGET;
3) APPROVE TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS OF $93,657,631 AND TOTAL RESERVES AND DESIGNATIONS OF $30,260,895; AND
4) RECOGNIZE ESTIMATED REVENUES OF $87,894,000.
THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MS. LEE, AND PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Braude, Cluff, Glover, Lee, Mikels, Paulitz, and Wilson.
NOES: Silva.
ABSENT: Antonovich, Burke, Loveridge and Soto.
(The Board recessed at 12:50 p.m., and reconvened at 1:22 p.m. Not returning were Board members Antonovich, Burke, Loveridge and Soto.)
PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
Dr. Wallerstein gave the staff report; and noted the errata sheet, copies of which were distributed to Board members and made available to the public, containing the following revisions to PR 2501 and the Board Resolution to address comments received from EPA and the Construction Industry Air Quality Coalition:
Modification to PR 2501 Board Resolution
Addition of the following paragraph:
"WHEREAS, Proposed Rule 2501 is a compliance option and is not intended to preclude a petitioner’s ability to obtain a variance, the availability of which must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis by the Hearing Board; and"
Modification to PR 2501, Paragraph (c)(8)
Addition of the following sentence at the end of the paragraph: "The District rule or regulation must meet the criteria specified in Section B1 of Appendix B, "Criteria for Emissions Quantification Protocols."
Modification to Section A1, Paragraph F of Appendix A of PR 2501
"F. Other Information
Information to ensure Control Strategy Proposal is in accordance with other local, state, and federal programs and resulting emissions reductions from a specific project are not required to be as a mitigation measure to reduce adverse environmental impacts that are identified in an environmental document prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act or the National Environmental Policy Act."
Modification to Section B1, Introduction of Appendix B of PR 2501
"Section B1. Criteria for Emissions Quantification Protocols Guidelines for Quantifying Emission Reductions for Category II Control Strategy Proposals
The following criteria shall be used to develop Emissions Quantification Protocols as defined under paragraph (c)(8) of Proposed Rule 2501. District rules specifying Emissions Quantification Protocols shall comply with these criteria. In addition, Tthe following criteria can also be used for guidelines apply to those Category II Control Strategy Proposals where an Emissions Quantification Protocol as defined pursuant to paragraph (c)(8) is not available in a District rule or regulation. Category II Pproposals meeting these criteria may be preferred for selection."
The public hearing was opened, and the Board heard testimony from the following individuals:
• Speaking in support of PR 2501:
GREG ADAMS, Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts
BILL QUINN, CCEEB
*MICHAEL CARROLL, Attorney, on behalf of RFG
LEE WALLACE, Pacific Enterprises/Southern California Gas Company
DEBRA KURILCHYK, Southern California Edison
CURTIS L. COLEMAN, CMA Southern California Air Quality Alliance and California Aerospace Environmental Association
JOHN BILLHEIMER, Small Business Coalition
RAY ROBINSON, EL RAP
*Submitted Written Comments
Expressed belief that the concept of the AQIP is sound and it will provide portions of the business community with greater flexibility in complying with AQMD rules, while generating funds from the private sector to advance new technology. There was concern expressed, however, that because of the questionable approval nature of the emissions quantification protocols by EPA, lack of clear cut procedures for interfacing with Title V, the complexity of the restrictions on the use of the AQIP for relief from existing rule requirements, an overly-restrictive toxics provision, and the SIP gap issue, there may not be enough AQIP participants to produce the desired benefits of the proposed rule. The consensus was that PR 2501 should be adopted at this time, with the expressed hope of addressing the above issues and expanding the scope of the program in future rule amendments.
Mr. Billheimer raised the issue of Hearing Board jurisdiction in the event a company has a problem with the provisions of PR 2501. Also, Mr. Carroll proposed the following modification to PR 2501 to address the air toxics issue:
* Delete section (e)(1)(B)(ii).
* Amend section (e)(1)(B)(iii) as follows:
"use of AQIP emissions will not result in a Significant Risk Level in accordance with Rule 1402 paragraph (d)(11) when the increased carcinogenic health risk or Hazard Index as determined pursuant to clause (e)(1)(B)(ii) of this rule resulting from use of AQIP emissions are added to the total facility risk for those facilities that were required to prepare a health risk assessment pursuant to the Hot Spots Act, for the purpose of Rule 1402 for a facility or category of facilities; or as required pursuant to subdivision (e) of Rule 1402."
• Speaking in opposition to PR 2501:
TIM CARMICHAEL, Coalition for Clean Air and NRDC
Commented that while staff has addressed many of the concerns they had with respect to PR 2501, the proposed rule does not go far enough to protect the public from potential increases in air toxics emissions. Therefore, suggested adding the following paragraph to the Board Resolution (copies submitted to Board members):
• No position expressed:
DEE ALLEN, City of Los Angeles
1) Expressed belief that PR 2501 attempts to address the City’s concern that regional trading programs should not result in localized impacts to communities. 2) Recommended that the AQMD pursue an interim policy or program with EPA regarding the SIP gap issue, and requested that this issue be made a priority of the Home Rule Working Group. If there is no progress made on the interim policy, request that AQMD advise those participants in the AQIP about the situation so that they know there is the possibility that EPA has not approved the program.
There being no further testimony, the public hearing was closed.
Written Comments Submitted by:
Ezunial Burts, Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce
David Howekamp, U.S. EPA
Michael P. Kenny, ARB
Michael Lewis, Construction Industry Air Quality Coalition
Mr. Braude expressed his support for incorporating the language suggested by Mr. Carmichael, except for the last two sentences, which he believed were superfluous.
Modifications to PR 2501 Board Resolution
Addition of the following paragraphs:
"WHEREAS, Proposed Rule 2501 is a compliance option and is not intended to preclude a petitioner’s ability to obtain a variance, the availability of which must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis by the Hearing Board; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Governing Board directs staff to coordinate a workshop in the Fall of 1997 on the risks associated with emissions of toxic air contaminants (TACs) and hazardous air pollutants (HAPs)."
Modification to PR 2501, Paragraph (c)(8)
Addition of the following sentence at the end of the paragraph: "The District rule or regulation must meet the criteria specified in Section B1 of Appendix B, "Criteria for Emissions Quantification Protocols."
Modification to Section A1, Paragraph F of Appendix A of PR 2501
"F. Other Information
Information to ensure Control Strategy Proposal is in accordance with other local, state, and federal programs and resulting emissions reductions from a specific project are not required to be as a mitigation measure to reduce adverse environmental impacts that are identified in an environmental document prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act or the National Environmental Policy Act."
Modification to Section B1, Introduction of Appendix B of PR 2501
"Section B1. Criteria for Emissions Quantification Protocols Guidelines for Quantifying Emission Reductions for Category II Control Strategy Proposals
The following criteria shall be used to develop Emissions Quantification Protocols as defined under paragraph (c)(8) of Proposed Rule 2501. District rules specifying Emissions Quantification Protocols shall comply with these criteria. In addition, Tthe following criteria can also be used for guidelines apply to those Category II Control Strategy Proposals where an Emissions Quantification Protocol as defined pursuant to paragraph (c)(8) is not available in a District rule or regulation. Category II Pproposals meeting these criteria may be preferred for selection."
THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MR. CLUFF, AND PASSED BY A UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT (Absent: Antonovich, Burke, Loveridge and Soto.)
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 2:05 p.m.
The foregoing is a true statement of the proceedings held by the South Coast Air Quality Management District Board on May 9, 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
Cal-EPA/U.S. EPA = California/United States Environmental Protection Agency
DEO = Deputy Executive Officer
EL RAP = Environmental Legislative & Regulatory Advocacy Program of the
Southern California Paint & Coatings Association
EV = Electric Vehicle
FY = Fiscal Year
MOU = Memorandum of Understanding
MSERCs = Mobile Source Emission Reduction Credits
MSRC = Mobile Source (Air Pollution Reduction) Review Committee
NOx = Oxides of Nitrogen
PAMS = Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations
PAR = Proposed Amended Rule
PM10 = Particulate Matters < 10 microns
PR = Proposed Rule
PTIM = Planning, Transportation & Information Management
RFP = Request for Proposals
SB = Senate Bill
SIP = State Implementation Plan
SSC = Stationary Source Compliance
TCM = Transportation Control Measure
VOC = Volatile Organic Compound