BOARD MEETING DATE: March 5, 2010
AGENDA NO. 33
REPORT:
Mobile Source Committee
SYNOPSIS:
The Mobile Source Committee met Friday, February 19, 2010. Following is a summary of that meeting.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Receive and file the attached report.
Ronald O. Loveridge, Chair
Mobile Source Committee
Attendance
Chair Ronald Loveridge called the meeting to order at 9:05 a.m. Present at the AQMD were Committee Members Jane Carney and Josie Gonzales. Vice-Chair Marion Ashley and Committee Member Bill Campbell attended via videoconference, and Committee Member Jan Perry was absent. The following items were presented:
INFORMATIONAL ITEM:
1) Update on National Air Quality Standards: Nitrogen Dioxide and Sulfur Dioxide
Dr. Jean Ospital, Health Effects Officer, presented a summary of the new National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for Nitrogen Dioxide. Finalized on January 22, 2010 U.S. EPA adopted a one hour primary standard, which is designed to protect public health, at 100 ppb. The standard is attained when the 3-year average of the 98th percentile of the annual daily maximum 1-hour average at each monitor within an area is below 100 ppb. The standard becomes effective on April 12, 2010. The standard is within the range recommended by the U.S. EPA's Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee.
Staff presented preliminary data from 2009 that showed the 98th percentile levels of NO2 from a special monitoring project near the I-710 were higher than those in the current community monitoring network, but were below the one hour standard. The near road data to date are limited, and 3 years of monitoring is needed to determine attainment.
Staff also presented a summary of the proposed new NAAQS for sulfur dioxide. U.S. EPA proposes to replace the current annual and 24-hour average standards with a one hour standard, based on the 99th percentile (or 4th highest) annual daily one our maximum averaged over three years. The proposed range is 50 - 100 ppb. The purpose of the standard is to prevent short term exposures to levels of sulfur dioxide that may cause adverse lung function effects in asthmatics. The current monitoring network for sulfur dioxide shows levels below the proposed range. U.S. EPA also proposes to require monitors near sources of sulfur dioxide. Such monitoring may change the picture for attainment. Preliminary monitoring for sulfur dioxide conducted in communities near the ports and refineries was presented by staff. The levels found were higher than those from the network monitors, and at some sites were at the lower end of the proposed new standard range. Should the standard be revised, three years of near source monitoring will be needed to determine attainment.
U.S. EPA is also reviewing the standards for particulate matter and carbon monoxide, with a decision on possible revisions due in 2011.
Committee Members asked how the near source monitoring sites will be chosen. Staff replied that U.S. EPA calls for sites where the highest levels are expected, and that staff will propose sites based on U.S. EPA criteria for U.S. EPA approval. With respect to site selection, Supervisor Campbell commented that we should comply with the federal requirements and be health protective, but not too conservative in selecting monitoring sites that would put the region in an untenable position.
2) Overview of Potential Amendments to the Statewide On-Road Truck and Bus Regulation Proposed by CARB
Henry Hogo, Assistant Deputy Executive Officer, provided an overview of potential amendments to the Statewide On-Road Truck and Bus Regulation being proposed by CARB staff. In December 2009, the CARB Board directed their staff to evaluate potential ways to provide economic relief to affected on-road truck operators given the state of the economy. The regulation will take effect beginning in 2011 with the requirement that on-road heavy-duty vehicle fleets with four or more heavy-duty vehicles begin replacing or retrofitting existing vehicles to meet particulate matter (PM) emissions requirements. Truck and school bus fleets have a choice of three options to meet the regulation requirements: 1) retrofit existing vehicles with PM filters at a rate of 25% per year; 2) replace certain model year vehicles to meet 2007 or cleaner emissions standards; or 3) meet a yearly declining fleet average target. The CARB staff provided three possible options to the CARB Board in December 2009 that would essentially delay any actions for a couple of years, but with increased compliance in the later years such that the existing regulation emissions benefits are the same in 2014 to meet the 2007 State Implementation Plan (SIP) commitment.
In January 2010, the CARB staff conducted a public workshop providing specific proposals to the three options presented in December 2009. The three options are: 1) for a new fleet size category defined as a fleet with more than three vehicles but less than 20, no compliance with the regulation would be required until 2013 (essentially, a two-year relief from the existing regulation); 2) reduced PM compliance requirements for all fleets for 2011 and 2012; and 3) a one year deferral for all fleets. In addition, CARB staff proposed providing additional credits for early actions such as early PM retrofits or replacement of vehicles or retirement of vehicles due to the economy.
Staff provided an evaluation of the CARB staff proposals indicating that the proposals focus on the PM turnover options for fleets and that any delayed actions would result in emissions foregone for the early years, but would be made up by 2014. Staff indicated that based on available information, potentially up to 6,300 existing heavy-duty vehicles need to be retrofitted with PM filters to make up for the PM emission reductions foregone and about 900 vehicles would either be replaced or retrofitted to make up for the NOx emission reductions foregone. The number of vehicles represents lost emissions benefits over a three year period. Staff provided an outline of proposed comments indicating that the CARB staff report has not been released. Staff will continue discussions with CARB staff on proposed amendments and potential options to ensure that fleets participate in funding programs that can help make up the lost emission reductions. Staff indicated that as CARB moves forward with potential amendments that CARB must move forward in a manner that addresses the current economic situation and balancing with actions such as funding assistance that can help maintain emission reductions in the early years.
There were discussions by the Committee regarding the cost to retrofit or replace heavy-duty vehicles, general need to do more in the near-term, and impacts of the current economy on other statewide regulations.
3) Status Report Regarding CARB Railyard Risk Reduction Action
Henry Hogo provided an update on potential actions that CARB may take in reducing emissions at railyards. In September 2009, the CARB Board directed staff to return within 120 days with recommendations on mechanisms to further reduce railyard related emissions. The CARB Board directed their staff to evaluate potential funding incentives, CARB and South Coast AQMD authorities to regulate emissions at railyards, and potential regulation in tandem with other approaches. In addition, CARB Board requested that the railroads join in the discussions regarding reducing railyard-related emissions placing the highest priority on railyards with the highest estimated risks. Staff provided an overview of the risk levels estimated at several railyards in the South Coast Air Basin, with the highest cancer risk at the BNSF San Bernardino railyard at 2,500 in a million.
Since the September 2009 meeting, AQMD staff has met with CARB staff to discuss possible approaches to implementing the CARB Board directive. The CARB staff will be providing an update to their Board at the February 24, 2010 CARB Board meeting. CARB staff indicated that they will be seeking the Board’s direction regarding how to proceed. They indicated that there are several approaches that they have looked at, including transmitting a letter requesting the railroads to agree to commit to certain actions by certain dates; possible new enforceable agreement with the railroads; commencing developing new regulations; and seeking federal rulemaking or legislation regarding locomotives. In addition, the CARB staff will seek their Board’s direction on the timing of the actions.
Staff provided the Committee with four concerns regarding the potential approaches. The first concern relates to CARB’s traditional technology-based rulemaking, which may not sufficiently reduce risk or provide sufficient incentive for railroads to take adequate actions. Staff recommends that CARB begin development of rules that set risk limits or reduction targets for the highest-risk railyards.
Secondly, there may be delays in seeking commitment from the railroads. Staff believes that commencing rulemaking immediately concurrent with discussions with the railroads would ensure that any agreement is enforceable and subject to full public process.
Thirdly, staff expressed concern that CARB staff has not placed any emphasis in seeking federal help. Staff recommends that CARB should pursue federal rulemaking and legislation to further control interstate locomotives and/or provide greater authority to the state.
Lastly, CARB staff has not indicated taking advantage of local authorities and resources. Staff indicated to CARB that local authorities and air districts can complement CARB’s actions. Staff recommends that CARB develop regulations that contain provisions to delegate certain actions to local jurisdictions and air districts, if the local agencies so desire.
Committee members stressed the importance of having actions taken immediately to reduce emissions from railyards. All approaches should be looked at and acted upon as soon as possible.
Mayor Dennis Yates joined the meeting at 10:20 a.m.
4) Rule 2202 Activity Report
Written report submitted. No comments.
5) Monthly Report on Environmental Justice Initiatives – CEQA Document Commenting Update
Written report submitted. No comments.
6) Other Business
None
7) Public Comment
None
The meeting adjourned at 10:35 a.m.
Attachment (DOC, 52k)
Attendance Roster