SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE
SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
FRIDAY, January 8, 1999
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, Chairman
Speaker of the Assembly Appointee
Councilmember Norma J. Glover, Vice Chairman
Cities of Orange County
Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich (arrived at 10:15 a.m.; left at 12:22 p.m.)
County of Los Angeles
Councilmember Hal Bernson
Cities of Los Angeles County - Western Region
Mayor Pro Tem Bea LaPisto-Kirtley
Cities of Los Angeles County - Eastern Region
Ms. Mee H. Lee
Senate Rules Committee Appointee
Mayor Ronald O. Loveridge (arrived at 9:45 a.m.; left at approximately 12:20 p.m.)
Cities of Riverside County
Supervisor Jon D. Mikels
County of San Bernardino
Mayor Pro Tem Leonard Paulitz
Cities of San Bernardino County
Supervisor S. Roy Wilson, Ed.D.
County of Riverside
Members Absent:
Supervisor James W. Silva
County of Orange
Vacant:
Governor’s Appointee
Chairman Burke called the meeting to order at 9:38 a.m.
Opening Comments
Chairman Burke. (1) Administered the oath of office to: (i) Los Angeles City
Councilman Hal Bernson, who was appointed by the Cities Selection Committee as the Cities
of the Western Region of Los Angeles County's representative on the Governing Board,
filling the unexpired term vacated by Senator Richard Alarc�n which ends January 15,
2002; and (ii) Supervisor Jon Mikels, who was reappointed by the Board of Supervisors of
San Bernardino County to serve as the County's representative on the Governing Board for a
term ending
January 15, 2003. (2) Presented a retirement award to Mr. Joseph V. Contaoi, who joined
the District from the County of Riverside in 1984, for his years of dedicated service to
the District.
(Mr. Loveridge arrived at 9:45 a.m.)
CONSENT CALENDAR
Minutes of December 11, 1998 Board Meeting
Set Public Hearing February 12, 1999 to Amend Rule 1106.1 - Pleasure Craft
Coating Operations
Set Public Hearing February 12, 1999 to Receive Public Input on Executive Officer's
Proposed Program Goals/Objectives for FY 1999-00
Approve Compensation Package for Designated Deputy
Execute Contracts for CEQA Documentation Support
Execute Contract to Cosponsor Development and Demonstration of Advanced
Natural Gas Engine Electronic Controls
Execute Contract to Cost-Share Implementation of Low Emission, Alternative Fuel
Heavy-Duty Trucks in the Western United States
Amend Contract to Cost-Share Development of Best Practices for Natural Gas Fuel
System Design and Integration
Amend Contract to Cosponsor Development and Demonstration of Liquefied Natural
Gas Locomotive
Execute Contract to Purchase Scientific Computer
Issue RFP to Prequalify Vendors for System-wide Hardware/Software Maintenance
and Support Services
Recognize and Appropriate Funds to Office of Public Affairs and Transportation for
1998 Clean Air Awards
Recognize and Appropriate Additional Funds from EPA for PM2.5 Program
Establish List of Prequalified Vendors to Provide Supplemental Source Testing
Services
Establish Lists of Prequalified Vendors to Provide Legal Notice Publishing and
Advertising Services, Mailing Services, and Miscellaneous Office and Consumable
Computer Supplies
Issue RFP for Travel Agency Services
Public Affairs Report
Hearing Board Variances and Appeals
Civil Filing and Civil Penalties Report
Rule and Control Measure Forecast
Annual Report on Public Outreach Activities for Rule 1146.2 - Emissions of
Oxides of Nitrogen from Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers
Report on Major Projects for Information Management Scheduled to Start During
Last Six Months of FY 1998-99
Lead Agency Projects and Environmental Documents Received by the AQMD
Audit for FY Ended June 30, 1998
Air Quality Assistance Fund: Progress Report and Recommendations
Agenda Item No. 5 was withdrawn by staff; No. 21 was withheld for discussion.
Written Comments Submitted by (Agenda Item No. 5):
ON MOTION OF MS. LEE, SECONDED BY DR. WILSON AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED (Absent:
Antonovich and Silva), THE BOARD APPROVED AGENDA ITEMS 1 THROUGH 4, 6 THROUGH 20, AND 22
THROUGH 25, AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
Items Deferred from Consent Calendar
21. Annual Report on Public Outreach Activities for Rule 1146.2 - Emissions of Oxides
of Nitrogen from Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers
The following individuals addressed the Board to comment on Item No. 21:
CURTIS COLEMAN, Gas Appliance Manufacturers' Association
As a member of the Rule 1146.2 Implementation Steering Committee, commented that
because of numerous factors, data gathering activities were delayed and the time line had
slipped for getting certain reports finalized. If there are additional delays, the reports
may not be done in time to meet the 18-month gap before the compliance date. If that
happens, it may be necessary to bring Rule 1146.2 back before the Board for an extension
of the compliance dates.
DONALD PRICE, Ventura County Air Pollution Control District
Expressed support for Rule 1146.2, and commented that their district is developing a
similar rule, with the same emission limits and time frame.
GREG DANENHAUER, Parker Boiler Company
Commented that manufacturers are under pressure to develop and implement within a short
time frame technology that can meet the emission requirements of
Rule 1146.2.
ON A MOTION DULY MADE AND SECONDED AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED (Absent: Antonovich and
Silva), THE BOARD RECEIVED AND FILED AGENDA ITEM NO. 21 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
BOARD CALENDAR
Administrative Committee
Legislative Committee
Mobile Source Committee
Stationary Source Committee
Technology Committee
Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee
Air Resources Board Monthly Meeting
ON A MOTION DULY MADE AND SECONDED, AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED (Absent: Antonovich and
Silva), THE BOARD RECEIVED AND FILED AGENDA ITEMS 27 THROUGH 33, AS RECOMMENDED.
Adopt Basic Tenets and Action Initiatives and Approve Workplan to Implement Children's
Air Quality Agenda Proposed by Chairman William Burke
Dr. Wallerstein presented staff's proposed workplan for implementing the action
initiatives for the Children's Air Quality Agenda proposed by Chairman Burke.
Chairman Burke suggested that District staff contact movie studios regarding placement of
animated/interactive material orientated towards children on the District's Internet site.
With regard to the budgetary concern, he suggested that the Board, if it chose to adopt
the Children's Air Quality Agenda, should set a goal of a 50/50 match in outside funding,
particularly for future projects where the cost becomes more onerous to continue the
program.
Mr. Paulitz commented that he mentioned the Children's Air Quality Agenda in his monthly
activity report to the SANBAG board, at which time one member of the public commented that
they thought the program was desirable, however, it fell short in the sense that it did
not provide money to the children directly to get medical assistance.
The following individuals addressed the Board to comment on this item:
MIKE CARROLL, Attorney, on behalf of Regulatory Flexibility Group
Urged the District, as it implements the children's air quality initiatives, to enlist the
support of other public health agencies and encourage them to engage with AQMD in these
initiatives and undertake initiatives of their own of a similar vein.
BILL QUINN, California Council for Environmental and Economic Balance
Expressed belief that this effort is an excellent approach to address an important air
quality concern, but cautioned the District, as it moves forward in implementing the
program, not to allow emotion to get in the way of facts and good science.
TODD CAMPBELL, Coalition for Clean Air
Expressed the Coalition's position that all unit risks should be based on children, our
most susceptible population, and not on adults or healthy workers as traditionally used
throughout public agencies.
HENRY GONG, JR., M.D., USC/Rancho Los Amigos Medical Center
As a lung physician, expressed his belief that the medical community would welcome and
congratulate the District Board for this children's initiative, as there has been growing
evidence that children's health is an important aspect of total good health.
CURTIS COLEMAN, CMA Southern California Air Quality Alliance
Commented on the need to expand the public education, especially to the next generation,
so that they understand the causes and effects of air pollution and be ready to accept the
lifestyle changes that may be necessary. Commended Chairman Burke for his foresight and
leadership in, once again, bringing forward a program where, he believes, everyone
agrees--not only on the general outline or idea, but also on the way of implementing the
program.
(Mr. Antonovich arrived at 10:15 a.m. during public comment)
Written Comments Submitted by:
Francene Lifson, Asthma & Allergy Foundation of America
ON MOTION OF MR. LOVERIDGE, SECONDED BY MR. PAULITZ AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED (Absent:
Silva), THE BOARD ADOPTED THE BASIC TENETS AND ACTION INITIATIVES OF, AND APPROVED THE
WORKPLAN TO IMPLEMENT, THE CHILDREN'S AIR QUALITY AGENDA.
Agenda Item No. 35 was moved
to the end of the agenda, prior to closed session.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Amend Rule 1401 - New Source Review of Toxic Air Contaminants
Jack Broadbent, Assistant DEO/Stationary Source Compliance, gave the staff report.
Dr. Wallerstein noted that a modification to the staff proposal was prepared by staff and
distributed to Board members, deleting the criteria pollutants nitrogen dioxide and
sulfur dioxide, as well as ozone and sulfates from Table I in PAR 1401 in response to
comments received and subsequent confirmation by staff that the risk factors developed for
these substances were not intended for this regulatory purpose.
Chairman Burke stated that he would not be participating in the public hearing on
Rule 1401, and Vice Chairman Glover presided over the remainder of the meeting.
The public hearing was opened, and the Board heard testimony from the following
individuals:
Speaking in support of the staff recommendation
CURTIS COLEMAN, CMA Southern California Air Quality Alliance
Expressed appreciation to District staff for removing the criteria pollutants from the
staff proposal, and urged the District not to automatically list substances when OEHHA
does.
TODD CAMPBELL, Coalition for Clean Air
Commented that the Coalition would like to see hydrogen sulfate included in Rule 1401,
which would not happen if the criteria pollutant sulfate is removed entirely. With regard
to the TERA study on soluble nickel used in plating operations, which was commissioned by
industry, its conclusions have not yet passed the critical test of peer review, whereas
the studies by the ICNCM and OEHHA have passed such tests.
MICHAEL KLEINMAN, Professor of Community and Environmental Medicine/UC Irvine
Commented that the ICNCM and the IARC have both concluded that there is substantial human
evidence for the carcinogenicity of soluble nickel salts. Soluble nickel salts are toxic,
potentially carcinogenic and enhance the carcinogenicity of other nickel compounds in
exposed people.
Speaking in opposition to the staff recommendation, with respect to the addition
of nickel compounds to Rule 1401
HARRY LEVY, DEAN HIGH, LAWRENCE J. STRAW, JR., RANDY SOLGANIK, and *DANIEL CUNNINGHAM,
Metal Finishing Association of Southern California (MFASC)
Requested that the Board continue the public hearing with respect to consideration of
adding soluble nickel to the list of toxic air contaminants in Rule 1401 to the February
12, 1999 Board meeting, to allow the Board to consider the outcome of the peer review,
scheduled to be held on January 13 & 14, 1999, of the TERA study regarding soluble
nickel used in metal plating operations. The TERA study concluded that the soluble nickel
is unlikely to be carcinogenic when exposure occurs at low concentrations. In Southern
California, nickel plating represents 71 percent of metal finishing processes--nationally,
it is approximately 56 percent, and it will be very costly to industry if they have to put
controls on the plating tanks.
(*Submitted 74 petitions from metal finishers requesting that the Board delay
consideration of adding soluble nickel to the rule until the February 12, 1999 Board
meeting.)
Ms. Lee commented that she was interested in hearing the outcome of the peer review
process and would, at the appropriate time, move to continue the nickel plating issue to
the Board's February 12, 1999 meeting. Even if the peer review panel does not arrive at a
consensus, she believes it would be beneficial for staff to provide to the Board in
February a summary of that review. She asked staff if permits issued for plating tanks
that would be affected in the interim could be conditioned on the District having the
ability to go back and amend the permits to impose any new findings the District might
have with regard to Rule 1401 at the February 12 Board meeting.
District Counsel Barbara Baird responded that the rule currently provides that the version
of Rule 1401 that is in effect at the time a permit application is deemed complete is the
version which would apply, therefore, the Board, should it chose to do so, would have to
amend
Rule 1401 to state that, in this case, the version of Rule 1401 that the Board adopts in
February 1999 would be the applicable version.
Mr. Mikels suggested that since Rule 1401 may be amended in February, that the issuance of
permits for any permit applications regarding nickel plating that might be subject to Rule
1401 be delayed until after the February 12 Board meeting.
MS. LEE MOVED TO:
1) APPROVE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 99-1, AMENDING RULE 1401 AND
CERTIFYING THE FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT;
2) DELETE "nitrogen dioxide, ozone, sulfates, and sulfur dioxide" IN
TABLE I OF PAR 1401;
3) CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON RULE 1401 TO THE FEBRUARY 12, 1999 BOARD MEETING
REGARDING PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE EFFECTIVE DATES IN TABLE I OF RULE 1401;
4) CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON RULE 1401 TO THE FEBRUARY 12, 1999 BOARD MEETING WITH
RESPECT TO CONSIDERATION OF ADDING NICKEL AND NICKEL COMPOUNDS TO THE RULE; AND
5) DIRECT STAFF TO DELAY ISSUANCE OF PERMITS FOR PERMIT APPLICATIONS THAT WOULD
POTENTIALLY BE AFFECTED BY THE ADDITION OF NICKEL COMPOUNDS TO RULE 1401 UNTIL AFTER THE
BOARD HAS TAKEN ACTION ON THE NICKEL COMPOUND ISSUE AT THE FEBRUARY 12, 1999 BOARD
MEETING.
THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MR. PAULITZ.
Public testimony continued, and the Board heard comments from the following
individuals:
Speaking in support of the staff recommendation
DR. MELANIE MARTY, OEHHA
Commented that California is not the only place where soluble nickel is considered a
carcinogen. The OEHHA has reviewed the draft TERA report and new studies. There is ample
evidence that all nickel compounds are carcinogenic. (Submitted Written Comments)
MIKE CARROLL, Attorney, on behalf of Regulatory Flexibility Group
In response to Mr. Carroll, Dr. Wallerstein clarified that the motion on the floor did
include the modification to PAR 1401 recommended by staff regarding the criteria
pollutants. He also pointed out that permit applications are subject to the version of the
rule in effect at the time the application is deemed complete by the District; therefore,
if there are permit applications currently being processed which would not have been
affected by the amendment of Rule 1401 at this time, staff would proceed to process and
issue those permits.
HENRY GONG, JR. , M.D., USC/Rancho Los Amigos Medical Center
Commented that several studies have been published since 1994, including a 1997 review
which concluded that different nickel compounds may have different toxic potentials, and
that soluble nickel compounds such as nickel sulfate enhance the respiratory cancer
effects associated with less soluble or insoluble forms of nickel. Most occupational
exposures to nickel are largely mixed, with both soluble and insoluble nickel. In 1998,
there was an important epidemiological study of nickel smelter and refinery workers, which
concluded that nickel sulfate is likely responsible for the increased risk of nasal and
lung cancers among workers exposed to nickel.
SHIPRA BANSAL, Communities for a Better Environment
Commented that there is no controversy that nickel is a carcinogen in man; the only
controversy that exists is whether nickel is a carcinogen in animals. CBE and metal
finishers are working on pollution prevention methods, so not all tanks would have to add
control equipment. There is, in CBE's opinion, no reason to wait an additional month for
the outcome of the peer review.
Speaking in opposition to the staff recommendation, with respect to addition of
nickel compounds
CAROL McCRACKEN, Foss Plating/MFASC
Commented that the peer review will be broad based, conducted by ten scientists from
regulatory agencies, federal government, and academia. It is important, she believes, that
the Board hear what these scientists have to say about the TERA study.
Mr. Mikels expressed concern regarding the disparity between having nickel listed by the
ARB as a toxic air contaminant, but not having it listed as such in Rule 1401. He
questioned whether this could build up an increase of liability on behalf of industry.
Staff responded that under those circumstances there would, to some degree, be a liability
because the public would be exposed to the uncontrolled emissions. However, because of the
way the motion is structured, staff believes there would be no harm to the environment
over the next 30 days and the Board will be able to have the benefit of knowing what
occurred at the peer review.
THE MOTION BY MS. LEE, SECONDED BY MR. PAULITZ, TO:
1) APPROVE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 99-1, AMENDING RULE 1401 AND
CERTIFYING THE FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT;
2) DELETE "nitrogen dioxide, ozone, sulfates, and sulfur dioxide" IN
TABLE I OF PAR 1401;
3) CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON RULE 1401 TO THE FEBRUARY 12, 1999 BOARD MEETING
REGARDING PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE EFFECTIVE DATES IN TABLE I OF RULE 1401;
4) CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON RULE 1401 TO THE FEBRUARY 12, 1999 BOARD MEETING WITH
RESPECT TO CONSIDERATION OF ADDING NICKEL AND NICKEL COMPOUNDS TO THE RULE; AND
5) DIRECT STAFF TO DELAY ISSUANCE OF PERMITS FOR PERMIT APPLICATIONS THAT WOULD
POTENTIALLY BE AFFECTED BY THE ADDITION OF NICKEL COMPOUNDS TO RULE 1401 UNTIL AFTER THE
BOARD HAS TAKEN ACTION ON THE NICKEL COMPOUND ISSUE AT THE FEBRUARY 12, 1999 BOARD
MEETING.
PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Antonovich, Bernson, Glover, LaPisto-Kirtley, Lee, Loveridge, Paulitz and Wilson.
NOES: Mikels.
ABSTAIN: Burke.
ABSENT: Silva.
Amend Rule 1610 - Old Vehicle Scrapping
Laki Tisopolus, Planning & Rules Manager, clarified the staff recommendation, which
was that the Board amend Rule 1610 to incorporate the operational improvements proposed by
staff, but continue the public hearing to the February 12, 1999 Board meeting with respect
to proposed modifications to Rule 1610 regarding destruction of the engine-related
components for vehicles volunteered for scrapping.
Mr. Mikels expressed concern regarding the liability building up every month for those who
use credits given pursuant to Rule 1610. There is an inventory, which is continuously
growing, of thousands of tons of credits that have been issued and used by industry for
compliance with other District rules, relying upon the viability of this rule and its
approvability. Thus far, EPA has not approved Rule 1610, which has been in effect for more
than five years. The EPA is not going to approve Rule 1610 unless it includes entire
engine destruction; and if the rule is not approved, all of the credits that have built up
will be disallowed.
Dr. Wallerstein clarified that the dilemma the Board has had is that EPA asked for engine
destruction and a specific part list. Then, the ARB, under state law, had to adopt a
guiding rule to which the District must conform. The ARB's staff proposed destroying the
entire vehicle. The ARB took action in December 1998, requiring destruction of the entire
vehicle, but made fine tuning adjustments to the rule that must now go out for public
comment before ARB can finalize its package. District staff had hoped to be before the
Board at this meeting or at its February 12, 1999 meeting, knowing exactly what the ARB's
final rule would look like, and to have all of the necessary amendments to Rule 1610 done
at one time. However, because of the time it will take ARB to finalize its rule, that will
not be possible. Because of the specific reason mentioned by Mr. Mikels, however, staff
believes it is necessary to come back to the Board as soon as possible with amendments to
Rule 1610 necessary for EPA approval of the rule. Staff will come back before the Board at
a later date with amendments to Rule 1610 to make it conform with the ARB rule under state
law.
The public hearing was opened, and the Board heard testimony from the following
individual:
JON OWYANG, Market-Based Solutions
Expressed support for the staff recommendations, and urged the Board to take action on the
minor clarifications to Rule 1610 proposed at this time. Also, expressed support for
Mr. Mikels' concern relative to continuances on the engine destruction issue.
Staff noted that copies of the staff proposal for consideration by the Board at its
February meeting had been made available to the public.
Mr. Bernson stated that he was abstaining from voting on this item because he had not had
the opportunity to review the information on Rule 1610.
MR. PAULITZ MOVED TO:
1) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 99-2, AMENDING RULE 1610 AND CERTIFYING THE EXEMPTION FROM CEQA
REQUIREMENTS, AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF; AND
2) CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON RULE 1610 TO THE FEBRUARY 12, 1999 BOARD MEETING FOR
CONSIDERATION OF MODIFICATIONS TO RULE 1610 WHICH WOULD REQUIRE THE DESTRUCTION OF THE
ENGINE-RELATED COMPONENTS FOR VEHICLES VOLUNTEERED FOR SCRAPPING,
THE MOTION WAS DULY SECONDED, AND PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Antonovich, Burke, Glover, LaPisto-Kirtley, Lee, Loveridge, Paulitz, and Wilson.
NOES: Mikels.
ABSTAIN: Bernson.
ABSENT: Silva.
OTHER BUSINESS
Election of Chair and Vice Chair
MR. PAULITZ MOVED TO CONTINUE AGENDA ITEM NO. 39 TO THE FEBRUARY 12, 1999 BOARD
MEETING. THE MOTION WAS DULY SECONDED, AND FAILED, FOR A LACK OF SEVEN CONCURRING VOTES,
AS FOLLOWS:
AYES: Lee, Loveridge, Mikels, Paulitz, and Wilson.
NOES: Antonovich, Bernson, Burke, Glover, and LaPisto-Kirtley.
ABSENT: Silva.
There being no action taken by the Board, the item was continued, by operation of Board
procedures, to the February 12, 1999 Board meeting.
Petitions for Regulation XII Hearing on CENCO Refining Company's Request for
Reinstatement and Applications for Change of Ownership of Permits for Refinery Formerly
Owned by Powerine Oil Company
District Counsel Barbara Baird summarized the process for a hearing before the Governing
Board pursuant to District Regulation XII and California Health and Safety Code Section
40509.
The Board heard comments on this item, only with respect to whether or not the Board
should hold a hearing in the matter, from the following individuals:
LIZANNE REYNOLDS, Attorney, on behalf of Petitioner, United Association of Journeymen
and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada,
Local 250
Requested that the Board hold a hearing because it was the petitioner's belief that the
procedure for allowing CENCO to resume operations had been purposely piecemealed under
pressure from CENCO and state and local officials; and that the District was pressured to
piecemeal its actions so that it could avoid environmental review and public participation
under CEQA because that is a lengthy process and would likely result in a delay in the
refinery resuming operations. Contrary to District staff's opinion, the petitioner does
not believe that the hearing on the Order for Abatement held by the District's Hearing
Board adequately addressed the concerns of the public. The District argued at that hearing
that Local 250's concerns about piecemealing of the process and failure to comply with
CEQA were wholly irrelevant to the order for abatement process, and the Hearing Board
found that, in the context of that order for abatement process, they did not have
jurisdiction to consider Local 250's concerns. Petitioner, therefore, requested that the
Governing Board hold a hearing on their petition so that there is a forum in which these
issues can be fully addressed and the informational playing field can be leveled between
the District, the refinery, and the interested public.
SHIPRA BANSAL, Representing Petitioner, Communities for a Better Environment (CBE) and
the Coalition for Clean Air
1) Read into the record a statement by Carlos Porras, CBE Southern California Director,
regarding: (i) repeated problems in the past concerning emissions from the refinery when
it was operated by Powerine Oil Company; (ii) alleging that the District was complicit
with Powerine and CENCO and is violating CEQA requirements in the piecemealing of this
project to avoid compliance with the law, and using its discretion to avoid public notice
and participation in the decision making over the reopening of this refinery--one of the
worst polluters and worst violators in the basin; (iii) stating that the population of the
community surrounding the refinery is Latino and they believe that is the reason why the
public is not being heard in this matter.
2) Asked that the Board set a public hearing on this matter and convene the hearing in the
community of Santa Fe Springs at a time when the people who will live with the impacts can
provide testimony.
Ms. Lee stated, for the record, that she resented the fact that the District and the Board
was being accused by the comments that the previous speaker made of being a co-conspirator
in whatever actions this refinery may or may not have taken. Secondly, she resented being
accused of being a discriminator in the policies and actions of this Board against a
community just because it is of color. She took exception to those two accusations, not
only disagreeing with it, but resenting it as well. It is, she believes, an unfair
accusation to be made of this Board today, and she does not accept it.
Chairman Burke concurred with Ms. Lee's remarks. He wondered why CBE would criticize the
Board as it moves more and more to serve those who have not been served in the past, and
stated that while he might agree with much of what CBE is trying to attain, he does not
like the way they present their views.
Ms. LaPisto-Kirtley commented that she, also, was offended by some of the remarks made,
and she believes the Board, just by in December 1998 requesting a full report regarding
the La Monta�a situation, shows that it is sensitive to its constituency.
JOCELYN THOMPSON, Attorney, on behalf of Powerine Oil Company and CENCO
Refining Company
Commented that contrary to the accusations in the briefs as well as the comments today
that this project has been rushed and that the public has been excluded, there was a
four-month discussion about the status of the facility's permits and what would be
required to put those in the condition necessary to allow the refining to resume; and it
was yet another five months before the reinstatement took place, keeping in mind that this
is an action that District Counsel has agreed is a ministerial action. This process has
also included a tremendous amount of public outreach and public comment--unprecedented and
far beyond what is required by the District's rules.
(Mr. Loveridge left at approximately 12:20 p.m.)
District Prosecutor Peter Mieras presented the District's position on the petitions
requesting a Regulation XII hearing regarding restart by CENCO of the refinery previously
operated by Powerine. Staff inspected the refinery and determined that the equipment at
the refinery was in a poor state of repair, and that there had been new regulatory
requirements since the refinery had last operated in 1995 which meant that the refinery
would be in violation if it started operating. Staff was concerned that resumption of
operations at the refinery would result in an enforcement situation with a high potential
that there would be extensive violation of existing rules and regulations, including
public nuisance. In order to address that situation, staff entered negotiations with CENCO
for a stipulated order for abatement. Staff went through extraordinary efforts to inform
the public that the District was confronted with this obligation to reinstate and intended
to do what the law required, but wanted the public to have an opportunity to submit
comments and to make their views known as those actions were being evaluated by the
District.
The Order for Abatement hearing was held on December 10, and to accommodate the public,
the hearing was held in the evening and CENCO provided free coach service to and from the
hearing for members of the community. Testimony was received from numerous individuals,
including representatives of CBE and the Pipefitters' Union Local 250. The order issued by
the Hearing Board provides that the refinery cannot operate any equipment unless it comes
before the Hearing Board in a subsequently publicly-noticed hearing and makes a complete
and detailed compliance demonstration that all of the pieces equipment that it would
operate will operate in compliance with all applicable rules and regulations. A
reinstatement of operating permits to Powerine and the issuance of a Change of Operator
permit to CENCO fully comply with all applicable legal requirements. Staff, therefore,
recommended that the Board deny the petitioners' request for a Regulation XII public
hearing in this matter.
ON MOTION OF DR. WILSON, SECONDED BY MR. MIKELS AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED (Absent:
Loveridge and Silva), THE BOARD DENIED PETITIONERS' REQUEST FOR A REGULATION XII HEARING
ON CENCO REFINING COMPANY'S REQUEST FOR REINSTATEMENT AND APPLICATIONS FOR CHANGE OF
OWNERSHIP OF PERMITS FOR THE REFINERY FORMERLY OWNED BY POWERINE OIL COMPANY, AS
RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
(Mr. Antonovich left at 12:22 p.m.)
BOARD CALENDAR (Continued)
Update on Aggregate Recycling Systems in Huntington Park (La Monta�a)
Lupe Valdez, DEO/Local Government & Public Affairs, provided a brief update on the
status of the La Monta�a site in the City of Huntington Park. She introduced Mr. Henry
Lee Gray, the Assistant Director of Community Development & Redevelopment with the
City of Huntington Park, who was available to respond to questions by the Board.
In response to a question by Ms. Lee, Mr. Gray stated that the operator of the Aggregate
Recycling Systems facility leased the site beginning in November 1993. The City's focus,
therefore, is on the property owner, who it believes has a responsibility under state law
to resolve the matter. The leasee has agreed, as a result of federal and municipal
sentencing agreements, to relinquish possession to the property owner to enable the
property owner to then administer the contract with a company to perform the abatement
work, expected to commence in approximately April 1999. It is anticipated that the
majority, if not all, of the material would be crushed on site and then marketed from the
site.
Ms. Valdez stated the District's role in this matter, which will include: (i) review and
comment on the removal plan; (ii) providing any technical assistance or support needed;
(iii) expediting processing of any necessary District permits for equipment on site that
is required; (iv) monitoring the dust occurring during the removal and cleanup process;
and (v) participating in any community forums at the City's request throughout the entire
process.
Ms. Lee commented that she wanted to make sure that there was a commitment by the District
to continue its participation and monitoring of the cleanup of the La Monta�a site,
regardless of who is the responsible party, and that the concerns raised by the community
are addressed by the District to the extent possible.
ON MOTION OF MS. LEE, SECONDED BY DR. WILSON, AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (Absent:
Antonovich, Loveridge, Mikels and Silva), THE BOARD RECEIVED AND FILED AGENDA ITEM NO. 35
AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
-o-
Dr. Wallerstein: 1) Commented that the District had filled the positions that the Board
made available in the budget, and he asked the 25 new employees who were present to stand.
2) Commented that the new PeopleSoft software for financial accounting and human
resources, also approved by the Board as part of the budget, was recently brought on line.
The new system will also cure the Y2K problem for the District.
-o-
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
Closed Session
The Board recessed to closed session at 12:30 p.m. to confer with its counsel, pursuant to
Government Code Section 54956.9(a ), regarding pending litigation which has been initiated
formally and to which the District is a party. The actions are Coalition for Clean Air,
et al. v. SCAQMD, et al., United States District Court Case No. 97-6916 HLH (SHx); and
SCAQMD v. EPA, et al., United States District Court Case No. SACV-98-948 LHM (Anx).
ADJOURNMENT
There being no action to report as a result of closed session, the meeting was
adjourned by Vice Chairman Glover.
The foregoing is a true statement of the proceedings held by the South Coast Air
Quality Management District Board on January 8, 1999.
Respectfully Submitted,
SAUNDRA McDANIEL
Senior Deputy Clerk
Date Minutes Approved: ________________________
____________________________________________
Dr. William Burke, Chairman
ACRONYMS
ARB/CARB = (California) Air Resources Board
CMA = California Manufacturers' Association
CEQA = California Environmental Quality Act
EPA = Environmental Protection Agency
FY = Fiscal Year
ICNCM = International Committee on Nickel Carcinogenesis in Man
IARC = International Agency for Research on Cancer
MSRC = Mobile Source (Air Pollution Reduction) Review Committee
OEHHA = Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
PAR = Proposed Amended Rule
PM2.5 = Particulate Matter < 2.5 microns
RFP = Request for Proposals
SANBAG = San Bernardino Association of Governments
TERA = Technical Excellence in Risk Assessment
VOC = Volatile Organic Compound
This page updated:
July 09, 2015
URL: ftp://lb1/hb/1999/February/9901min.html
