State of California AIR RESOURCES BOARD State Office Building 455 Golden Gate Avenue, Room 1194 San Francisco, CA July 17, 1973 9:30 a.m. AGENDA 73-16-1 Approval of Minutes of June 12 and June 21 Meeting. 73-16-2 Public Hearing - Subvention Regulations. 73-16-3 Consideration of Rule 20.1 for LAAPCD (if necessary). 73-16-4 Consideration of Petition of Stop Smog Committee Concerning BAAPCD's Administration of Regulations - Emissions and Control Committee Report. 73-16-5 Cement Plant - Emissions and Control Committee Report. 73-16-6 Report on North Coast Air Basin Coordinating Council Request That the ARB Develop Criteria for the Economic Disposal of Wood Waste. 73-16-7 Report on EPA's Transportation Plan for South Coast, San Diego, Bay Area, Sacramento Valley and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins. 73-16-8 Preliminary Review of Air Pollution Emergency Plan. 73-16-9 Report on Guidelines for Relating Air Pollution Control to Land Use and Transportation Planning in California. 73-16-10 Status on Control of NOx Emissions from Power Plants in the South Coast Air Basin. a. Additional Regulations for Control of NOx Emissions in the South Coast Air Basin. b. Appeal to the California Coastal Zone Conservation Commission by "Friends of South Bay" opposing Approval of Southern California Edison Long Beach Plant Modifications. c. Proposed Gas Turbine Peaking Units at Burbank, Glendale, and Pasadena. d. Status of Southern California Edison Huntington Beach Plant. 73-16-11 Report on Local Enforcement Programs on Visible Emissions from Motor Vehicles. 73-16-12 Other Business. 73-16-13 Remarks from Audience - End of Morning and Afternoon Sessions. ITEM NO.: 73-16-2 Public Hearing for Confirmation and Adoption of Regulations for Administration of the Subvention Program. RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution 73-38, thereby confirming and adopting amended regulations for administration of the subvention program. SUMMARY A public hearing on proposed subvention regulations was held on April 4, 1973 in Riverside. As directed by the Board, the proposed regulations were modified and adopted by the Executive Officer as emergency regulations on April 25, and were further amended on April 27, 1973. Copies of the emergency regulations were sent to air pollution control districts on April 18, 1973, and copies of subsequent changes were sent to the districts on April 28, 1973. Copies of the notice of this hearing were sent to the districts on June 12, 1973. These regulations must be confirmed and adopted by August 23, 1973. In addition, the staff proposes changes to the emergency regulations as described in paragraph III of the attached staff report. Copies of the staff report, the Hearing Notice, Proposed Resolution 73-38 and the proposed regulations are attached. ITEM NO.: 73-16-3 Consideration of Rule 20.1 for LAAPCD. RECOMMENDATION To be made at the meeting. DISCUSSION This resolution was considered for adoption at the June 12, 1973 public hearing; however, it was deferred because the LAAPCD advised the Board at the public hearing that the District had scheduled a public hearing for July 12, 1973 to consider the adoption of Rule 20.1 which is similar to the rule proposed by the ARB. Recommendations from the staff will be made after an evaluation of the actions taken by LAAPCD on July 12, 1973. ITEM NO.: 73-16-4 Consideration of Petition of Stop Smog Committee Concerning Bay Area Air Pollution Control District's Administration of Regulations. RECOMMENDATION To be made by the Emissions and Control Committee at the Board meeting. SUMMARY The Board's Emissions and Control Committee was directed by the Air Resources Board (ARB) on November 21, 1972 to investigate Section 3212 (upset/breakdown) of the Bay Area Air Pollution Control District's rules and regulations. Action was taken in response to a petition from Mr. Ralph Warner, submitted in behalf of citizen groups in the Richmond area. The petition requested that the Board suspend 3212 of the Bay Area Air Pollution Control District regulations, that the Board hold hearings to determine the effects of Section 3212 and to require Bay Area industry to show cause why the regulations should not be suspended. Attached is a report of the Committee. ITEM NO.: 73-16-5 Emissions and Control Committee Report on the Status of Portland Cement Plants in California. SUMMARY The Board's Committee on Emissions and Control was directed by the Air Resources Board on February 7, 1973 to investigate the status of cement plants in California. The Board acted after hearing reports from the staff on extended variances issued to two cement plants in California. This is a report of the Committee's findings. There are fourteen cement manufacturing plants in California at present. The Emissions and Control committee toured five - Calaveras Cement at San Andreas, Monolith Portland at Monolith, California Portland near Mojave, Ideal Cement at San Juan Bautista, and Lone Star Industries at Davenport. The other nine plants are in compliance with local district rules and regulations with the exception of the Calaveras Cement plant near Redding in Shasta County and the Kaiser Cement Gypsum plant in Lucerne Valley in San Bernardino County. These two plants are operating under variance for their clinker coolers. The Kaiser Cement and Gypsum plant is expected to be in compliance by July 1973 and the Calaveras plant near Redding is expected to be in compliance by April 1974. The Calaveras Cement Company has made a decision to remodel the existing plant at San Andreas. The scheduled completion date is September 1, 1974. The Committee finds that the proposed compliance schedule appears to be a reasonable one. Monolith Portland Cement is midway through a six-year construction program on new facilities which will replace their existing plant near Tehachapi in Kern County. They have stated that this schedule cannot be shortened to bring their operation into compliance in 1975 instead of 1976 because of financial difficulties. The Committee's investigation indicates that the financial situation is as reported. The Committee feels, however, that every effort should still be made by Monolith to shorten the schedule and that immediate steps should be taken to improve housekeeping. California Portland Cement near Mojave has been modified within the last two years. Tests performed by the company indicate the plant is in compliance with district rules and regulations. This company has paid dividends to its share holders since 1909. The Ideal Basic Industries Inc. Informed the Committee that they had decided to build a new cement plant at San Juan Bautista with completion by September, 1975. Since the plant visit, however, Ideal has announced that the plant will be closed and no new one constructed. The Lone Star Industries Inc. Cement plant at Davenport can serve as an example of reducing emissions and of the power of variances tied to specific progress. The 67-year old plant has been remodeled and is now in compliance with the rules and regulations of the Monterey-Santa Cruz Unified Air Pollution Control District. ITEM NO.: 73-16-6 North Coast Air Basin Coordinating Council's (NCABCC) request that the ARB develop criteria for the economic disposal of wood waste, and propose legislation to solve the problem of disposal of such waste. RECOMMENDATION This is an informational report submitted in response to Board request. DISCUSSION 1. At the meeting on May 2, 1973 in Eureka, the Air Resources board received Resolution 73-2 of the NCABCC (Del Norte, Humboldt, Trinity, Mendocino, Lake, and Sonoma Counties) requesting that the Board develop criteria for the economic disposal of wood wastes, or that the Board propose legislation to solve the rural solid waste disposal problem. (NCABCC Resolution 73-2 is attached.) The Board directed the staff to review the proposal and to report recommendations. 2. On April 23, 1973 Senator Randolph Collier, at the request of the NCABCC, introduced Senate Bill No. 805 which would authorize the air pollution control districts to permit open burning of "rural wood waste" on a permissive-burn day under certain conditions. (See attached Bill summary) 3. Following the Board meeting in May, the staff discussed with Mr. Sassenrath, the Control Officer of Humboldt County Air Pollution Control District, the situation which led to Resolution 73-2 and Senate Bill No. 805. He related that NCABCC believed the present law is unduly restrictive, primarily in forbidding the burning of demolition debris by residents of single - or two-family dwellings. The staff advised that this burning is banned by local regulations, not state law. As a result, the NCABCC requested that Senator Collier withdraw Senate bill No. 805 (see attached letter of June 12, 1973). 4. The criteria for the economic disposal of large volumes of wood waste requested by NCABCC is related to the requirements of Section 39297.6(b) of the State health and Safety code which directs the Board to conduct studies of alternative means of disposal of wood waste other than by open fires. 5. The staff is evaluating alternative means. We are conducting tests on combustion device manufactured by the Camran Corporation of Seattle, Washington. The device has the potential of burning large quantities of wood waste without excess smoke. If our evaluation confirms this capability, it could be an acceptable alternative to open burning. ITEM NO.: 73-16-7 Staff Report on EPA's Transportation Plan for the San Francisco Bay Area, San Diego, Sacramento Valley, and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins. RECOMMENDATION None. This is an information report. SUMMARY EPA has proposed mobile and stationary source control measures for the San Francisco Bay Area, San Diego, Sacramento Valley, and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins. Many of these Mobil source measures are similar to measures recently proposed by EPA for the South Coast Air Basin. EPA will hold public hearings on its proposal during the period from August 6 to August 10, 1973. A court order requires that EPA promulgate a transportation plan for these four air basins by August 15, 1973; however, EPA has informed the staff that this deadline has been extended to October 15, 1973. ITEM NO.: 73-16-8 Preliminary Review of Revised Proposed Air Pollution Emergency Contingency Plan. RECOMMENDATION Schedule a public hearing in August or September, 1973 for the adoption of the proposed Air Pollution Emergency Contingency Plan. The plan, when adopted, would also be an addition to "The State of California Implementation Plan for Achieving and Maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards." DISCUSSION A proposed Air Pollution Emergency Contingency Plan was considered by the Board at a public hearing on September 12, 1972. The Board subsequently appointed an Ad-Hoc Medical Committee to recommend episode criteria for health warning and emergency action. The board directed the staff to notify local air pollution control districts to proceed with development of curtailment plans for stationary sources, and to work with the State Office of Emergency Services to develop a traffic reduction strategy. The attached draft of the proposed Air Pollution Emergency Contingency Plan includes: a. The episode criteria for oxidant, carbon monoxide and sulfur dioxide recommended by the Ad-Hoc Medical Committee, b. Traffic abatement measures based on the recommendations in the OES Committee's preliminary report, "Traffic Abatement Plan for Air Pollution Episodes." The plan defines episode criteria in terms of ambient concentrations of various pollutants, provides for administrative procedures to be followed when air pollutant concentration reaches or approaches episode levels and outlines actions to be taken to prevent air pollutant concentration from increasing. ITEM NO.: 73-16-9 Report on Guidelines for Relating Air Pollution Control to Land Use and Transportation Planning in California. DISCUSSION To be given at Board meeting. ITEM NO.: 73-16-10a Report on Additional Regulations for Control of NOx Emissions in the South Coast Air Basin. DISCUSSION The SCABCC will be meeting on July 13, 1973. This report will be presented at the meeting. ITEM NO.: 73-16-10b Report on appeal by "Friends of South Bay" to the California Coastal Zone Conservation Commission (CCZCC) opposing the permit the Regional Commission granted for Southern California Edison's (SCE) proposed modification of Long Beach power plant. CONCLUSION This is an informational report. DISCUSSION As instructed by the Board, the staff obtained from CCZCC a copy of the permit issued SCE and a copy of the appeal by "Friends of South Bay" opposing this permit. This information is attached and discussed in the following report. ITEM NO.: 73-16-10c Report on Proposed Gas Turbine Peaking Units at Burbank, Glendale, and Pasadena. CONCLUSION This is an informational report. DISCUSSION On June 21, 1973 the board considered a staff report which summarized the information provided at the Board's request by the Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control District regarding the proposed peaking units at Burbank, Glendale and Pasadena. The Board instructed the staff to request additional information. This additional information is summarized in the following report. ITEM NO.: 73-16-10d Report on Status of Proposed Combined Cycle Installations at Southern California Edison's (SCE) Huntington Beach Power Plant. CONCLUSION This is an informational report. DISCUSSION 1. On June 21, 1973 the Board instructed the staff to determine the status of the proposed additions to the Huntington Beach power plant. 2. The following information was obtained. a. Orange County Air Pollution Control District granted an authority to construct on September 21, 1972. b. Public Utilities Commission (PUC) has received Application No. 53951 for Certificate of Convenience dated April 9, 1973. The application has been assigned to an Examiner. PUC will draft an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and issue it to state agencies, including ARB, for comment. A hearing will be set about 30 days after issuance of the EIR. c. California Coastal Zone South Coast Regional Commission has not received an application for approval of the proposed installations. The Commission advised that it would normally receive such application after approval has been granted by local agencies and PUC. ITEM NO.: 73-6-11 Status Report - Local Enforcement Programs on Visible Emissions from Motor Vehicles. RECOMMENDATION This is an informational report. DISCUSSION 1. On June 21, 1973, the Board instructed the staff to report on air pollution control district enforcement programs on visible emissions from motor vehicles. 2. The local enforcement programs for regulating visible emissions from motor vehicles are based on sections 24224 and 24355.4 of the Health and Safety Code. These sections are attached. 3. Section 24224 requires county air pollution control officers to enforce, with certain exceptions, provisions of Division 12 of the Vehicle Code. Section 24355.4 authorizes the air pollution control officer of the Bay Area Air Pollution Control district to enforce the same provisions, but if state funds are given to the District under the ARB's subvention program, the control officer is required to do so. 4. The two sections of the Vehicle Code which are likely to be enforced by the districts against vehicles are 27153 and 27153.5. In addition the county districts may enforce Section 24242 of the Health and Safety Code. 5. Section 27153 of the Vehicle code prohibits operation of a motor vehicle in a manner resulting in an excessive emission of smoke. Section 27153.5 of the Vehicle Code prohibits emissions for 10 seconds or longer at an elevation less than 3,000 feet in excess of the following; Ringelmann 1, or 20% opacity, for vehicles sold or registered on or after January 1, 1971; Ringelmann 2, or 40% opacity, for vehicles sold or registered prior to January 1, 1971. Section 24242 of the Health and Safety Code prohibits emissions greater than Ringelmann 2 or 40% opacity for 3 minutes in one hour. 6. Under Section 836.5 of the Penal code, an air pollution control district may, by order, rule, or regulation, authorize its employees to make arrests without warrants. Enforcement may only be of those sections relating to air pollution. 7. Pursuant to Section 165(g) of the Vehicle Code, the Commissioner of the highway Patrol may authorize air pollution control districts to equip their cars as emergency vehicles. 8. The local programs at present are briefly summarized as follows: a. In the programs of Monterey-Santa Cruz, Humboldt, San Bernardino, Modoc, Sacramento, San Diego, San Joaquin and Ventura APCDs, district inspectors note the license number of a vehicle with emissions in excess of the standards. Most of the districts forward the information to a law enforcement agency. The agency then contacts the owner informally to obtain compliance. b. In the Riverside and Los Angeles APCD programs, uniformed district personnel patrol public highways in marked cars. These personnel are authorized to stop and cite the owner or operator of a vehicle observed in violation. The owner or operator is usually required to appear in court regarding the violation. c. Riverside County APCD has an armed inspector who patrols the highways one or two weekdays each week and issues traffic citations for violations of the Vehicle Code. The district has issued 127 citations since the program was established in September, 1972. d. Los Angeles County APCD has nine unarmed inspectors who patrol the freeways each week day. Emphasis is on emissions from trucks and buses. If the operator of an offending vehicle is not the registered owner, a notice of violation of Health and Safety Code Section 24242 is issued which may result in a $500 fine for the owner for each violation. If the operator is the registered owner, a citation is issued for a violation of Vehicle Code Section 27153 or 27153.5. This results in an appearance in traffic court where fines are typically in the $5 to $50 range. In both types of violations, the owner is required to repair the vehicle. On the average, the district issues a total of about 200 notices of violation or citations per month. e. The Bay Area Air Pollution Control District is now training personnel and expects to have a program by September, 1973. 12 unarmed inspectors will be patrolling during weekdays. Emphasis will be on emissions from large trucks and buses. f. The remaining 39 districts rely on law enforcement agencies to enforce visible emission standards against vehicles.