State of California
AIR RESOURCES BOARD
Sacramento Community/Convention Center
El Dorado Room
1100 14th Street
September 24, 1981
81-19-1 Public Hearing to Consider the Feasibility of 001
1984 and Subsequent Model Heavy-Duty Engine
Emission Standards and to Consider a Proposed
Amendment to Title 13, California Administrative
Code, Section 1956.7 Regarding Exemptions from
Emission Standards for Heavy-Duty Vehicles.
81-19-2 Public Hearing to Consider Adoption, Repeal and 037
Amendment of Regulations Governing Air Resources
Board Administrative Procedures Contained in
Title 17, California Administrative Code, Sections
60000-60023 and 93000-93003.
81-19-3 Other Business
a. Closed Sessions
1. Personnel (as authorized by State Agency Open
Meeting Act).- Citizen Advisory Appointment.
2. Litigation (Pursuant to the attorney-client
b. Research Proposals 069
c. Delegations to Executive Officer
AB 1111 Review of Regulations: Title 13, CAC 1900-1976.
SMOKING NOT PERMITTED AT MEETINGS OF THE CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES
ITEM NO.: 81-19-1
SUMMARY AND STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR PROPOSED RULEMAKING.
In January, 1981, the Air Resources Board (the "Board") held a
public hearing to consider adoption of alternate emission
standards for the 1984 model year heavy duty engines. At that
hearing, manufacturers claimed that the primary steady-state 1984
standards of 0.5 grams per brake-horsepower-hour (g/bhp-hr)
hydrocarbons (HC), 25 g/bhp-hr carbon monoxide (CO), and 4.5
g/bhp-hr HC + oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and the optional transient
standards of 1.3/15.5/5.1 g/bhp-hr HC/CO/NOx were technologically
infeasible and economically disadvantageous for many engine
families. The Board directed the staff to study the 1984 heavy-duty
engine emission standards and report upon their feasibility.
The staff held individual workshops with the manufacturers and
determined that the 1984 standards are both technologically
feasible and cost effective. The staff determined that gasoline
engines could meet the standards without using catalysts, using
air injection pumps and exhaust gas recirculation (EGR). Some
manufacturers may use catalysts, but they are not prerequisite
for meeting the standards. Diesel engines will meet the
standards by using engine modifications such as retarded
injection timing and improved injector design. Some
manufacturers also plan to use EGR and improved cooling systems.
Control of HC and NOx is of extreme necessity in California
because those pollutants can cause severe adverse health effects.
The staff believes that it is especially important to retain
stringent standards for control of heavy-duty engine emissions of
HC and NOx because of their large contribution to total emissions
from mobile sources. Heavy-duty engine emissions will become a
dominant source of HC and NOx as other sources are more
stringently controlled. Therefore maximum environmental benefits
can be achieved through stringent control of heavy-duty engines.
The 1984 standards would reduce statewide HC + NOx emissions by
22.14 tons per day. Cost effectiveness values range according to
type of engine and control systems. Non-catalyst gasoline-powered
engines have a cost effectiveness of $1.13/lb HC + NOx.
Cost effectiveness for catalyst-equipped gasoline-powered engines
range from $2.01/lb HC + NOx to $3.08/lb HC + NOx depending on
the fuel economy penalty. Diesels have a cost effectiveness
range of $1.52 to $1.71/lb HC + NOx. These values are well
within the range of cost effectiveness of other Air Resources
In addition to holding the workshops on heavy-duty engines, the
staff also investigated problems of heavy-duty vehicle
manufacturers since most vehicle manufacturers do not manufacture
engines. Some manufacturers of vehicles designed for engines
which have been phased out of California production claimed that
no suitable California certified engines exist for use in their
vehicles, and asked for permission to install federal engines.
The staff found that this problem exists on a limited basis and
can be remedied by exempting the vehicles from California
requirements. The installation of California engines could be
required when the vehicles are redesigned. The staff also found
that the Executive Officer could asses such cases by engineering
evaluation more easily and swiftly than the Board could through
the public hearing process.
The staff proposes two actions to the Board. First, the staff
proposes that the Board reaffirm the 1984 heavy-duty engine
standards as technologically and economically feasible. Second,
the staff proposes that the Board amend Title 13, Section 1956.7
to grant the Executive Officer authority to permit use of federal
engines in California heavy-duty vehicles in special cases when
no suitable California engines are available for use.
ITEM NO.: 81-19-2
SUMMARY AND STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR PROPOSED RULEMAKING.
Regulations contained in Title 17, California Administrative
Code, Sections 60000-60023 and 93000-93003 set forth the manner
in which the Air Resources Board conducts its public business.
The sources of procedural requirements include the Administrative
Procedure Act, the State Agency Open Meeting Act, the California
Environmental Quality Act, and the Health and Safety Code; ARB
regulations implement these statutory requirements.
Matters encompassed by the regulations include the issuance of
public notices, the preparation and content of staff reports, the
conduct of various types of meetings on rulemaking and
informational matters, procedures for compliance with the CEQA,
procedures for local air pollution control districts to follow in
amending regulations adopted for them by the ARB, and the state
board review of executive officer decisions.
The proposed changes to these regulations are the result of an
internal and external review process initiated in response to
Government Code Section 11349.7 (enacted by AB 1111), which
required all California agencies to review all regulations
administered by them on the basis of five statutory criteria
(necessity, clarity, consistency, authority, and reference).
Public comments on ARB's procedural regulations were solicited by
public notice dated February 9, 1981, in accordance with a review
schedule approved by the Office of Administrative Law. In
consideration of these comments and based upon its own analysis
of the regulations pursuant to the five criteria, staff is
proposing changes which will shorten the total volume of these
regulations, enhance public participation, repeal or amend
certain regulations to eliminate unnecessary repetition of
statutory provisions and other excess verbiage, add references to
appropriate statutes, and simplify or clarify language in those
regulations proposed for retention.
Members of the public are encouraged to submit comments on the
proposed changes. A copy of the regulations and the changes, as
well as a staff report, can be inspected at or obtained from the
ARB Public Information Office, 1102 Q Street, Sacramento, CA
95814, at least 45 days before the September 24, 1981 public
hearing. Persons requiring further information or assistance with
the preparation of testimony or the understanding of issues and
procedures may contact Leslie Krinsk, Chief Counsel, 1102 Q
Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 322-2884.