98-8-1 |
Continuation of a Public Hearing to Consider the
Adoption of a Regulatory Amendment Identifying
Diesel Exhaust as a Toxic Air Contaminant
SUMMARY OF AGENDA ITEM:
The proposed identification of diesel exhaust as a
TAC received much attention from both the public
and the Legislature, and many misconceptions arose.
Towards correcting these misconceptions, the Senate
Transportation Committee held an informational
hearing on August 4th and heard from expert panels
on the future of diesel fuel use in California and
related health effects. A number of Legislators
had asked the ARB to defer action until this
Legislative hearing took place. Out of respect for
this request, the ARB proceeded with the July 30th
hearing and took testimony, but deferred action on
the item until the next Board hearing on August 27,
1998.
Comments at the July Board hearing focused on three
themes: the form of the listing, the use of risk
values, and the potential litigation under
Proposition 65.
Since the July Board hearing, staff worked with a
broad spectrum of stakeholders to address these
issues. Staff identified an approach that was
consistent with the scientific information
assembled by the Office of Environmental Health
Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) and the Scientific Review
Panel (SRP), acceptable to a broad coalition, and
fully effective in protecting public health.
The first issue centered on the concerns that given
the continuing advances in engine technology and
fuel, the nature of the emissions may change to a
point where the toxic components are not of
concern, thus making it inappropriate to list
diesel exhaust as a TAC. In response to this
comment, the staff determined that the listing
could be clarified to focus on the pollutants in
diesel exhaust of greatest concern, or the
particulate and organic vapor emissions.
The second issue concerned how the range of risk
health numbers, which were derived from older
studies, could be used to characterize risk from
today's new diesel engines and fuels. In response,
the staff indicated that the range of unit risk
estimates reflect the best available scientific
information from over 30 human studies. However,
it's acknowledged that there have been reductions
in mass emissions as a result of new engine
technologies and fuel reformulations, and that
further research should be followed. Staff also
plans to develop risk management guidelines for the
local air districts to use in their permitting and
other stationary source programs.
The third issue focused on the potential litigation
under Proposition 65 that may be generated as a
result of the listing of diesel exhaust as a TAC.
The listing of diesel exhaust under AB 1807 and the
warning requirements of Proposition 65 are two
different programs which act separately and operate
independently of each other. The staff is also
sensitive to concerns voiced at the July hearing
regarding the potential use of the reported unit
risk values in the context of civil litigation.
Therefore, the staff proposed that language be
included in the Board's resolution that
acknowledges this and specifies that the proper
courts must determine whether the use of the risk
values is appropriate for specific sources, fuel
formulations, engine technologies, and exposures at
issue in any such litigation.
The staff proposed a modification to the original
proposal, and recommended that the Board identify
"particulate emissions from diesel-fueled engines"
as a TAC. This was acceptable to industry, OEHHA,
the SRP, and the environmental groups because many
of the organic vapor phase substances in diesel
exhaust are already listed as TACs and other
organics can be controlled under the ARB's criteria
pollutant program. Staff also recommended that the
Board direct staff to begin the risk management
phase and to form a diesel emissions risk
management working group to coordinate efforts to
develop a needs assessment for diesel emissions and
to develop risk management guidelines for air
districts to use in their permitting and other
stationary programs.
ORAL TESTIMONY:
Kelly Jensen
California Chamber of Commerce
Jeff Sickenger
WSPA
Dr. Chung S. Lui
SCAQMD
Bonnie Holmes-Gen
Sierra Club California
Jed Mandel
EMA
Allen Schaffer
American Trucking Assoc.
Todd Campbell
Coalition for Clean Air
Janet Hathaway
Natural Resources Defense Council
Stephanie Williams
Calif. Trucking Assoc.
FORMAL BOARD ACTION:
Approved Resolution 98-35 by a unanimous vote.
RESPONSIBLE DIVISION: SSD
STAFF REPORT: Yes
|
98-9-1 |
Public Meeting to Consider Approval of Triennial
Progress Reports and Plan Revisions Developed Under
the California Clean Air Act
SUMMARY OF AGENDA ITEM:
Under the California Clean Air Act (CCAA), air
districts are to develop plans to attain the state
ambient air quality standards by the earliest
practicable date. Districts are to revisit these
plans every three years, beginning in 1994.
The purpose of this meeting was to consider
approval of the triennial progress reports, and the
triennial revisions to the air quality attainment
plans developed by local districts, to meet CCAA
requirements. Seventeen districts submitted
triennial progress reports and plan revisions for
consideration. Triennial progress reports and plan
revisions for the San Joaquin Valley, Santa
Barbara, and Imperial County have not yet been
submitted for approval. These updates will be
considered at a future public meeting. The 1997
plan revision for the South Coast Air Quality
Management District (AQMD) was approved by the Air
Resources Board (ARB) in January 1998. ARB staff
reviewed the progress reports and plan revisions
and focused on the progress made over the last 3
years with respect to district rulemaking and air
quality improvement. Staff also reviewed the
districts' rulemaking commitments to determine if
the every feasible measure requirement continued to
be met.
Based on the review, the ARB staff recommended full
approval of the triennial progress reports and plan
revisions for the Bay Area AQMD, Butte County Air
Pollution Control District (APCD), Feather River
AQMD, Kern County APCD, Mojave Desert AQMD,
Monterey Bay Unified APCD, Glenn County APCD,
Colusa County APCD, Tehama County APCD, Shasta
County APCD, San Diego County APCD, and San Luis
Obispo County APCD; and conditionally approved the
triennial plan revisions for the Bay Area AQMD,
Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD, El Dorado County
APCD, Placer County APCD, Yolo-Solano AQMD, and
Ventura County APCD. In each case, the conditional
approval pertained to district review of selected control
measures to determine if further emission reductions are
achievable. The staff further recommended the conditional
approvals revert to full approvals once the Executive Officer
determines that the identified conditions have been
met.
A district representative from the Bay Area AQMD
described the importance of the Bay Area's plan
revision, outlined the aggressive rulemaking
schedule for the next 3 years and expressed support
for Board approval of the Bay Area AQMD's (Bay
Area) triennial progress report and plan revision.
A representative from the Monterey Bay Unified APCD
(Monterey Bay) also expressed support for the
approval of the Bay Area triennial progress report
and plan revision, stating that the Monterey Bay
staff had worked closely with Bay Area staff on the
development of the plan revision and Monterey Bay
will benefit from the emission reductions realized
in the Bay Area. He also expressed his
appreciation for the ARB staff who worked with
Monterey Bay staff on the preparation of their
triennial progress report and plan revision.
ORAL TESTIMONY:
Ellen Garvey
Bay Area AQMD
Douglas Quetin
Monterey Bay Unified APCD
Kathy Reheis
WSPA
FORMAL BOARD ACTION:
Approved Resolution 98-36 by a unanimous vote.
RESPONSIBLE DIVISION: EO/OAQTP
STAFF REPORT: Yes (76 pages)
|
98-9-2 |
Public Hearing to Consider Amendments to the
California Cleaner-Burning Gasoline Regulations
SUMMARY OF AGENDA ITEM:
Staff recommended raising the "cap" limit on the oxygen content of gasoline
to 3.5 percent by weight and eliminating in CO attainment areas the
requirement for oxygen in gasoline in the winter. Also, staff proposed four
technical changes to the Board's gasoline regulations.
Also, the changes were part of a more extensive set of changes requested by
the Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA) for providing more technical
and legal flexibility in the use of oxygenates in gasoline. Staff has
worked extensively on these additional requests but will need more time and
more data to develop recommendations on them.
The rescission of the minimum oxygen content in winter gasoline will apply
to all of the state except the counties of Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange,
Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura. The rescission will take effect
upon approval by OAL except in Fresno and Madera Counties and in Lake Tahoe,
where it will take effect in 2001.
The higher oxygen cap would allow the use of ethanol in gasoline at contents
up to ten percent by volume. Gasoline with ten percent ethanol is exempted
from the Board's Reid Vapor Pressure limit unless the Board makes a finding,
per criteria stated in section 43830 (g) of the Health and Safety Code, that
such gasoline would cause greater ozone-forming potential of emissions than
does gasoline meeting all the Board's standards for gasoline.
The Board heard testimony regarding staff's proposals from representatives
from WSPA, environmental groups and the ethanol industry. WSPA supported
rescission of the minimum oxygen content proposal and was neutral on the
other items. WSPA requested that implementation of the rescission be
expedited. The environmental groups expressed concern about potential
increases in emissions if the oxygen cap was increased without a finding on
the ozone forming potential increase from gasoline with ten percent ethanol.
The ethanol industry supported increasing the oxygen cap so that ten percent
ethanol could be used in gasoline this winter.
The Board voted to rescind the winter oxygen requirement as recommended by
staff and to make the four recommended technical changes to the regulations.
The Board did not adopt the proposed new oxygen cap, but decided to continue
consideration of the cap change for oxygen to December and at that time
consider a finding regarding the ozone-forming potential of gasoline with
ten percent ethanol. The Board instructed staff to facilitate approval by
the U.S. EPA in removing the winter oxygen requirement from the State
Implementation Plan for CO.
ORAL TESTIMONY:
Todd Campbell
Coalition for Clean Air
Mike Kulakowski
Western States Petroleum Association
Al Jessel
Chevron
Tom Koehler
Ethanol Industry
Janet Hathaway
Natural Resources Defense Council
Catherine Witherspoon
American Methanol Institute
FORMAL BOARD ACTION:
Approved Resolution 98-37, with modifications, by unanimous approval.
RESPONSIBLE DIVISION: SSD
STAFF REPORT: Yes
|
98-5-6 |
Continuation of a Public Hearing to Consider the Adoption, Amendment,
and Repeal of Regulations Regarding Certification Procedures and Test
Procedures for Gasoline Vapor Recovery Systems
SUMMARY OF AGENDA ITEM:
This item was continued from the May 21, 1998 public hearing. The original
proposal in May consisted of adding two new procedures and amending 13
existing test procedures. In August the staff proposed that the Board adopt
one new test procedure and amend 12 existing test procedures. Adoption of
two procedures is deferred until 1999 at which time a new public hearing
notice will be issued. These procedures are used to certify gasoline vapor
recovery systems for gasoline dispensing facilities, bulk plants, terminals,
cargo tanks, and novel facilities.
The new test procedure, called the tie-tank test, is used to check if the
plumbing of the gas station's underground tanks is connected properly.
The other major change is a temporary exemption for airport refueling cargo
tanks from the requirement to vent vapors into a control system prior to
testing. This exemption will expire when two certified systems are available
to collect vapors from air refueling cargo tanks. Other revisions are
editorial in nature.
The original proposal included two procedures which are deferred to a future
public hearing in 1999. The two procedures dealt with testing Onboard
Refueling Vapor Recovery (ORVR) equipped vehicles and with testing to
determine the volume ratio of air return to the underground tank to the
amount of gasoline dispensed (A/L) during a vehicle refueling.
ORAL TESTIMONY: None
FORMAL BOARD ACTION:
Approved Resolution 98-27 by a unanimous vote.
RESPONSIBLE DIVISION: MLD
STAFF REPORT: Yes (200 pages)
|
98-9-3 |
Public Hearing to Consider the Amendment of Regulations Regarding
Stationary Source Test Methods
SUMMARY OF AGENDA ITEM:
Staff presented a proposal to amend twenty existing Stationary Source Test
Methods. The proposed changes were requested by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency to ensure that ARB test methods are harmonized with
applicable federal test methods.
The methods affected are ARB Methods 1, 2, 2A, 3, 4, 5A, 5E, 6, 8, 10, 11,
12, 13A, 13B, 15, 16, 16A, 17, 20 and 21. The adopted test methods are
referenced in Sections 94101-94161, Title 17, California Code of Regulations
(CCR). These methods are used to determine compliance with local air
pollution control or air quality management district emission regulations,
to evaluate the effectiveness of air pollution control equipment, and to
support control measure development for the criteria and toxic pollutant
stationary source programs.
ORAL TESTIMONY: None
FORMAL BOARD ACTION:
Approved Resolution 98-38 by a unanimous vote.
RESPONSIBLE DIVISION: MLD
STAFF REPORT: YES (376 pages)
|
98-9-4 |
Consideration of Research Proposals
The Board approved Resolution Nos. 98-39, 98-40, 98-41, 98-42, 98-43 and
98-44 by a unanimous vote.
|
98-9-5
| Public Meeting to Consider Appointments to the Research Screening
Committee
SUMMARY OF AGENDA ITEM:
The staff recommended appointments to the Board's Research Screening
Committee. This Committee reviews and recommends air pollution research
projects to the Board. The appointments will fill current vacancies on the
Committee.
ORAL TESTIMONY: None
FORMAL BOARD ACTION:
Approved the staff recommendations for appointments to the Research Screening
Committee by a unanimous vote.
RESPONSIBLE DIVISION: RD
STAFF REPORT: None
|