State of California AIR RESOURCES BOARD City Hall - Council Chambers 204 E. Lincoln Avenue Anaheim, CA January 3, 1973 9:30 a.m. AGENDA A.M. 1. Approval of Minutes of December 20, 1972 Meeting. 2. Consideration of Proposed Regulations for Releasing Information to the Public. 3. Report of the San Bernardino County APCD on the Status of Kaiser Steel's Emission Control Program. 4. Consideration of the Report to the Legislature on the Feasibility of a Ringelmann No. 1 Standard, Statewide. 5. Report on Public Utilities Commission Hearing on Proposed Combined Cycle Power Plants. 6. Other Business. 7. Remarks from the Audience. 8. Adjournment. P.M. After the meeting, the Board will meet in a workshop with its staff to discuss: subjects for ARB workshops which will be held during the next 6 months; status of proposals for transportation control; and status of the Air Pollution Emergency Contingency Plan. These discussions will be held in Suite A - Anaheim Hyatt House Hotel, 1770 South Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim, California. Other than deciding on future workshops, no actions will be taken by the ARB on the above items. ITEM Regulations for making records available to the public. RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution 72-122. DISCUSSION The proposed regulations were discussed at a public hearing during the December 6, 1972 Board meeting at Monterey. At that time, as a result of comments of the Attorney General and others, the staff proposed changes to Section 91010 and 91022. The changes were generally well-received, but because they departed somewhat from the original staff proposal, the Board held the record open for comments until December 22, 1972 (the public hearing was closed). A few written statements have been submitted. Western Oil and Gas Association, Phillips 66, and Shell Oil Company approve of the changes. The Tuberculosis and Respiratory Disease Association of California characterizes them as a "step backward", but no explanation is given other than a reference to its December 6 statement. The Sacramento Valley Air Basin Coordinating Council prefers the amendments to the original proposal, but would like to place less burden on persons submitting confidential information. With respect to this latter comment, the staff believes such persons should be made to justify their trade secret designations, so that nonmeritorious claims are discouraged. Shell Oil Company recommends that the disclosure procedures be modified to make it clear that they cover existing ARB records as well as records obtained from local air pollution control districts. The suggestion is well taken and Section 91022(a) has been modified accordingly (the additions are underlined). No other changes have been made. Copies of the Tuberculosis and Respiratory Disease Association of California, Shell Oil Company, and Sacramento Air Basin Coordinating Council letters are attached. The staff recommends the adoption of the regulations as proposed today (Resolution 72-122). ITEM Second report from the San Bernardino County Air Pollution Control District describing actions taken to control emissions from the Kaiser Steel Plant pursuant to the Air Resources Board's recommendations and action under Section 39054 of the Health and Safety Code. ISSUE What further action should the Air Resources Board take? RECOMMENDATION The Board should acknowledge receipt of the District's report and continue to follow up on further actions taken by the District regarding the Board's recommendations. ITEM Draft of Report to the Legislature on the desirability and feasibility of a statewide Ringelmann No. 1 standard. RECOMMENDATION The draft is enclosed for Board review, comment, and approval. DISCUSSION 1. In 1970, the Legislature enacted AB 85 which directs the Board to submit a report before December 31, 1972 on the feasibility and desirability of a statewide Ringelmann No. 1 standard. 2. The Bill further states that if the Board recommends the adoption of any specific standards or methods, the report shall contain proposal for implementation of its recommendation, including the estimated cost. 3. In the draft, the staff concluded that a Ringelmann No. 1 standard need not be make applicable statewide by the legislature because: a. By January 1, 1974, a Ringelmann No. 1 standard will be in effect in areas covering ninety percent of the state's population as a result of adoption by local control districts. b. In the rest of the state, the standard will continue to be Ringelmann No. 2. In these areas, sources that provide for controls to meet a Ringelmann No. 2 will generally meet a Ringelmann No. 1. Sources that cannot meet a Ringelmann No. 2 will not meet a Ringelmann No. 1. c. If a Ringelmann No. 1 proves necessary for any areas, local control districts have authority to adopt the standard. 4. Although it does not recommend a statewide Ringelmann No. 1 standard, the draft contains estimates of cost if Ringelmann 1 standard is to be met in the areas where such standard has not been adopted. 5. A first draft of the report was made available to the Emission and Control Committee on December 20, 1972. the Committee has reviewed the first draft and subsequent revisions, and will make its recommendation to the board at this meeting.