State of California
AIR RESOURCES BOARD

Resources Building Auditorium
1416 Ninth Street
Sacramento, California

June 22, 1977
11:00 a.m.
AGENDA
Page

77-13-1

77-13-2 Continuation of Public Hearing Regarding Proposed 1
Exhaust Emission Standards for 1980 and Subsequent Model
Light-Duty and Medium-Duty Vehicles.

77-13-3 Public Hearing to Consider Proposed Revisions to Air 30
Resources Board Regulations in title 13 California
Administrative Code Relating to Vehicle
Enforcement (for Purposes of Delegation to the
Executive Officer).

77-13-4 Public Hearing to Consider Amendment or Adoption of 77
Continuous Emission Monitoring Rules for Specified Air
Pollution Control Districts.

77-13-5 Public Hearing for Consideration of Revisions to Air 187
Resources Board Regulations on Public Availability of
Records and Access to Information in the Possession of
Emission Sources (for Purposes of Delegation to the
Executive Officer).

77-13-6 Other Business -
Executive Session - Personnel & Litigation
Research Proposals

ITEM NO.: 77-13-2

Continuation of Public Hearing Regarding Proposed Exhaust
Emission Standards for 1980 and Subsequent Model Light-Duty and
Medium-Duty Vehicles.

RECOMMENDATION

Adopt Resolution 77-24, which establishes implementation dates
for a 0.4 gm/mi NOx standard for passenger cars, and for
comparable standards for light-duty trucks and medium-duty
vehicles. Resolution 77-24 also establishes on optional 100,000
mile certification procedure whereby vehicle manufacturers could
certify to less stringent NOx emission standards, but for a
longer mileage.

SUMMARY

At it January 25, 1977 meeting the Board decided to adopt a 0.4
gm/mi NOx emission standard for passenger cars, and similar
standards for light-duty and medium-duty trucks. Prior to
finalizing an implementation schedule and establishing
alternative standards for Diesel-powered vehicles, however, the
Board concluded that it would be desirable for the staff to
communicate further with vehicle manufacturers and to report back
to the Board.

The staff requested comments from vehicle manufacturers regarding
the desirability of a phased implementation schedule for the 0.4
gm/mi NOx standard. Of the six vehicle manufacturers which
commented on this issue, only one expressed support for the
concept in general, and none supported any of the timetables
proposed by the staff. Therefore, the staff proposes that all
passenger cars be required to meet the 0.4 gm/mi NOx standard in
1982, and that all light-duty trucks and medium-duty vehicles
meet comparable standards in 1983.

The staff held a workshop on March 8, 1977 to discuss the ability
of Diesel vehicles to achieve NOx levels of 1.0 gm/mi and lower.
Oral presentations and/or written comments were received from
General Motors, Ford, Chrysler, Caterpillar, Daimler-Benz,
Peugeot, Toyota, Volkswagen and Teledyne Continental. Testimony
from the vehicle manufacturers was often confusing, and
frequently contradicted previous statements by other
manufacturers at the workshop.

The staff believes that Diesel vehicles in the VW Rabbit weight
class can certify to a 1.0 gm/mi NOx standard by 1980 without the
use of EGR. Both VW and Peugeot have test data which support
that fact. GM, Ford and Daimler-Benz have data which indicate
that 3000-3500 lb. Diesel vehicles with EGR can achieve NOx
levels as low as 0.4 gm/mi, and GM reported data indicating that
a 4500 lb. passenger car could achieve 1.0 gm/mi NOx using EGR.
Tests run by GM and Caterpillar have not indicated durability
problems associated with the use of EGR on Diesel engines;
however, Daimler-Benz and Peugeot express concern about the
emissions durability of their Diesel EGR system.

The staff has doubts as to whether manufacturers will develop
adequate EGR system designs by 1980. Accordingly the staff
proposes that Diesels be allowed to certify at 1.5 gm/mi for
100,000 miles in 1980, which should provide in-use emissions
levels comparable to what would be achieved with a 1.0 gm/mi
standard for 50,000 miles, and would not require EGR on most
vehicles.

The staff proposes a similar degree of control for Diesel light-duty
trucks and medium-duty vehicles in 1981.

By 1982 the staff believes that most manufacturers will have
developed Diesel EGR systems which will allow manufacturers to
certify at 0.4 gm/mi NOx for 50,000 miles or 1.0 gm/mi for
100,000 miles. Similar emission levels should be possible for
light-duty trucks and medium-duty vehicles in 1983.

ITEM NO.: 77-13-3

Public Hearing to Consider Proposed Revisions to Air Resources
Board Regulations in title 13 California Administrative Code
Relating to Vehicle Enforcement (for Purposes of Delegation to
the Executive Officer).

RECOMMENDATION

Delegate to the Executive Officer the authority to notice and
conduct a public hearing on the proposed amendments, and
thereafter file the amendments, with such changes as the
Executive Officer deems appropriate, with the Secretary of State.
(If not delegated, the staff will re-schedule this matter for a
later hearing before the Board).

SUMMARY

This item has been rescheduled from May 26, 1977. Although it is
proposed that the authority to take action on this item be
delegated to the Executive Officer, the following Summary, and
the attached proposed amendments and Staff Report are included
for information.

The Board has several important enforcement programs relating to
new and in-use production vehicles to assure that such vehicles
comply with the applicable emissions standards and are
substantially the same in construction in all material respects
as the certification test vehicles. These programs are: the
assembly-line test procedures, compliance and inspection testing,
dealership surveillance, and surveillance of emissions from in-use vehicles.
Under the applicable provisions of the Health and
Safety Code, several types of enforcement actions are available
as sanctions against violations detected during any of the
aforementioned programs. These actions consist of requiring the
manufacturer to take corrective action (including recall), the
revocation, modification or conditioning of certification, and/or
the imposition of statutory fines and penalties.

In the past, the Board has considered or taken one or more of the
enforcement actions described above. The Board's regulations,
however, do not comprehensively set forth the enforcement actions
which would govern the various kinds of violations which could be
detected under any of its enforcement programs. The proposed
amendments define the types of violations which will give rise to
any or all of the aforementioned enforcement actions, and where
appropriate, specify the governing procedures. The proposed
amendments are not intended to announce any major new enforcement
policies or procedures; rather, they are intended to confirm and
clarify the interpretations, policies and procedures which have
governed the Board's enforcement activities over the past several
years under the applicable provisions of the Health and Safety
Code.

ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Amendments to Title 13, California
Administrative Code
Staff Report #77-13-3
Public Hearing Notices

ITEM NO.: 77-13-4

Public Hearing to Consider Amendment or Adoption of Continuous
Emission Monitoring Rules for Specified Air Pollution Control
Districts.

RECOMMENDATION

The staff recommends that the Board adopt Resolution 77-18,
thereby amending Sections 3210.5 through 3210.11 of the Bay Area
APCD rules and adopting Rule 108 for Kern, San Joaquin, and
Fresno County APCDs, Rule 105 for the Ventura county APCD, Rule
113 for the San Luis Obispo County APCD, and Rule 215 for the
Monterey Bay Unified APCD, all as shown in Attachments I through
VII of the staff report.

SUMMARY

On November 26, 1975, the Executive Officer of the ARB requested
the basin control councils and APCDs to change their
implementation plans and rules to include requirements for
continuous emissions monitors, incorporating both state and
federal requirements established by the ARB on October 27, 1975,
and by the EPA on October 6, 1975. On December 23, 1976, the ARB
staff sent out suggested model regulations on continuous emission
monitoring to each basic control council and APCD to assist them
in developing their regulations.

One of the EPA requirements is that operators of certain steam
generators and fluid bed catalytic cracking unit (FC) catalyst
regenerators shall install opacity monitoring instruments. After
review of the EPA reports and discussions with industry and APCD
representatives, convincing data have not been found to justify
recommendation of adoption of this requirement by the Board.

Although several of the APCDs have adopted some regulations or
have scheduled or will soon schedule hearings, it is apparent
that some of the districts do not have regulations approvable by
the EPA and ARB adopted by the EPA imposed deadline of April 6,
1977. Therefore, the ARB is holding a hearing today to consider
adoption of regulations for these districts.

While the staff is not recommending that the Board adopt all
requirements suggested by EPA for the various districts, if a
district has already adopted in-stack monitoring regulations
which exceed the requirements recommended by ARB staff, the staff
is not recommending that such additional requirements be deleted.

ITEM NO.: 77-13-5

Public Hearing for Consideration of Revisions to Air Resources
Board Regulations on Public Availability of Records and Access to
Information in the Possession of Emission Sources (for Purposes
of Delegation to the Executive Officer).

RECOMMENDATION

Delegate to the Executive Officer the authority to notice and
conduct a public hearing on the proposed amendments, and
thereafter file the amendments, with such changes as the
Executive Officer deems appropriate, with the Secretary of State.
(If not delegated, the staff will reschedule this matter for a
later hearing before the Board).

SUMMARY

This item has been rescheduled from May 26, 1977. Although it is
proposed that the authority to take action on this item be
delegated to the Executive Officer, the following Summary, and
the attached proposed amendments and Staff Report are included
for information.

The proposed amendments expand and clarify the procedures