BOARD MEETING STATE OF CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 21865 EAST COPLEY DRIVE BOARD ROOM DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA THURSDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2003 9:00 A.M. JAMES F. PETERS, CSR, RPR CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTER LICENSE NUMBER 10063 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 ii APPEARANCES BOARD MEMBERS Dr. Alan Lloyd, Chairperson Dr. William Burke Mr. Joseph Calhoun Ms. Dorene D'Adamo Supervisor Mark DeSaulnier Professor Hugh Friedman Dr. William Friedman Mr. Mathew McKinnon Mrs. Barbara Riordan STAFF Ms. Catherine Witherspoon, Executive Officer Mr. Tom Cackette, Chief Deputy Executive Officer Mr. Michael Scheible, Deputy Executive Officer Ms. Lynn Terry, Deputy Executive Officer Ms. Kathleen Tschogl, Ombudsman Ms. Diane Johnston, General Counsel Mr. Richard Bode, Chief, Health and Exposure Assessment Branch Mr. Joe Calavita, Air Pollution Specialist, Planning and Technical Support Division Mr. Bart E. Croes, Chief, Research Division PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 iii APPEARANCES CONTINUED STAFF Mr. Robert Cross, Chief, Mobile Sources Control Division Mr. Robert Fletcher, Chief, Planning and Technical Support Section Mr. Robert Jenne, Staff Counsel Mr. Renee Kemena, Manager, Planning and Regulatory Development Section Ms. Sylvia Oey, Manager, Liaison Section Mr. Rob Ogelsby, Legislative Director Ms. Linda Smith, Manager, Health and Ecosystems Assessment Branch Ms. Peggy Taricco, Stationary Source Division Mr. Hein Tran, Research Division Mr. Peter Venturini, Chief, Stationary Source Division PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 iv INDEX PAGE Pledge of Allegiance 1 Opening Remarks and Roll Call 1 Item 03-8-1 4 Chairperson Lloyd 4 Executive Officer Witherspoon 5 Staff Presentation 5 Items 03-8-2 & 03-8-3 9 Chairperson Lloyd 9 Board Member Burke Motion 15 Board Discussion 19 Executive Officer Witherspoon 20 Staff Presentation 23 Senator Martha Escutia 55 Mr. Roy Wilson 65 Ms. Jane Carney 69 Mr. Mike Antonovich 71 Ms. Cynthia Verdugo Peralta 89 Mr. Jonah Ramirez 99 Ms. Margaret Clark 101 Ms. Ophelia Hernandez 102 Ms. Dee Allen 104 Ms. Jackie McHenry 106 Mr. Hank Kuiper 109 Mr. Mark Pisano 111 Ms. Marsh McLean 116 Ms. Laurene Weste 119 Ms. Maria Lopez 123 Mr. Alberto Respar 124 Ms. Lisa 124 Mr. John Parsons 125 Mr. Fred Trueblood 128 Dr. Barry Wallerstein 129 Ms. Lynne Edgerton 174 Mr. Michael Mendez 179 Mr. Steve Veres 182 Mr. Doug Quetin 185 Ms. Karen Wilson 187 Ms. Gail Feuer 192 Mr. Tim Carmichael 195 Ms. Patricia Byrd 199 Dr. Joseph Lyou 202 Ms. Fransiska Cahya 204 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 v INDEX CONTINUED PAGE Ms. Gilbert Estrada 205 Ms. Coleen Smethers 209 Ms. Carol Piceno 211 Mr. Berishaj Rok'o 214 Ms. Linda Nicholes 217 Mr. Dennis Baker 219 Ms. Stephanie Barger 221 Mr. James Provenzano 223 Ms. Virginia Field 225 Ms. Robina Suwol 226 Mr. Jay Brakensiek 228 Mr. Rick Margolin 229 Mr. Thomas Johnson 232 Mr. John Berge 235 Mr. Chris Patton 236 Mr. Bob Wyman 238 Mr. Bill Quinn 242 Dr. Grad Edgar 247 Ms. Cindy Sullivan 251 Mr. Christopher Weaver 252 Mr. Doug Lawson 256 Ms. Bonnie Holmes-Gen 259 Mr. Bill La Marr 260 Mr. John Billheimer 263 Mr. Greg Adams 265 Mr. Michael Eaves 267 Mr. Lee Wallace 268 Mr. Donald Nixon 273 Mr. Agustin Eichwald 275 Mr. Roye Love 277 Mr. Doug Raymond 280 Ms. Christa Cole 283 Mr. William Auriemma 284 Ms. Gery Duncan Jones 285 Ms. Debbie Waite 287 Mr. Cameron Smith 288 Mr. Tom Clifford 290 Mr. Jim Bodnar 291 Mr. John Owens 292 Mr. William L Lafield 294 Mr. John Gilbert 294 Mr. Joseph T. Yost 295 Mr. Thomas Donegan 297 Ms. Sylvia Garibay 275 Mr. David Schonbrunn 299 Mr. Jesse Marquez 301 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 vi INDEX CONTINUED PAGE Mr. Roy Peters 307 Mr. Rick Bishop 308 Mr. Clayton Miller 309 Mr. Harvey Eder 312 Mr. Ok Hwan Kim 313 Discussion 315 Vote 333 Item 03-8-5 337 Chairperson Lloyd 337 Deputy Executive Officer Schieble 337 Staff Presentation 338 Q&A 355 Item 03-8-6 356 Chairperson Lloyd 356 Legislative Director Ogelsby 357 Discussion 370 Adjournment 372 Reporter's Certificate 373 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 1 1 PROCEEDINGS 2 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Good morning. 3 The October 23rd public meeting of the Air 4 Resources Board will now please come to order. 5 Mrs. Riordan, would you please lead us in the 6 Pledge of Allegiance. 7 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Would you please rise and 8 join me in the salute to our flag. 9 (Thereupon the Pledge of Allegiance was 10 Recited in unison.) 11 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 12 The clerk of the Board please call the roll. 13 BOARD CLERK DORAIS: Dr. Burke? 14 Mr. Calhoun? 15 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: Here. 16 BOARD CLERK DORAIS: Ms. D'Adamo? 17 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Here. 18 BOARD CLERK DORAIS: Supervisor DeSaulnier? 19 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: Here. 20 BOARD CLERK DORAIS: Professor Friedman? 21 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Here. 22 BOARD CLERK DORAIS: Dr. Friedman? 23 BOARD MEMBER WILLIAM FRIEDMAN: Here. 24 Mr. McKinnon? 25 BOARD CLERK DORAIS: Supervisor Patrick? PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 2 1 Mrs. Riordan? 2 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Here. 3 BOARD CLERK DORAIS: Supervisor Roberts? 4 Chairman Lloyd? 5 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Here. 6 Before we get started, I would just like to 7 indicate that there will be no reflash item heard today. 8 I guess some people didn't get that message. So I know 9 the interpreter also wants to make sure that there's a 10 Spanish announcement of that as well. But unfortunately 11 several people came expecting for that item to be heard. 12 (Thereupon it was interpreted in Spanish.) 13 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: And I think that our 14 ombudsperson, Kathleen Tschogl, is talking to those people 15 to make sure that they get the information in the future. 16 So Kathleen is at the back. 17 Kathleen, if you could hold your hand up. 18 Thank you very much. 19 We really apologize for that uncertainty, and for 20 people coming here who didn't get the message. 21 First of all, I'd like to start the hearing today 22 by introducing our new General Counsel, Diane Johnston. 23 Diane, could you put your hand up, please. 24 Thank you. 25 Diane was appointed on October 14th, and like our PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 3 1 Executive Officer, is going to have a baptism of fire. 2 But I'm sure she's up to it, and we want to warmly welcome 3 her to the position. 4 Welcome, Diane. 5 GENERAL COUNSEL JOHNSTON: Thank you. 6 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Diane's been with the ARB for 7 11 years and has worked on several important regulations, 8 including heavy-duty truck standards, vapor recovery, 9 diesel retrofit rules, motorcycles, and 10 perchloro-ethylene. The Board members have the 11 announcement of her position at their desks, which goes 12 into Diane's background in more detail. 13 Again, welcome. 14 Second item on the agenda is I'd like to discuss 15 before we get started how we're going to work through the 16 agenda today. 17 The public notice identifies two separate items 18 related to the South Coast Plan: The statewide strategies 19 for controlling emissions under ARB's jurisdiction and the 20 District's plan itself. Since these items are so closely 21 related to each other, staff has combined those agenda 22 items into a single presentation so the Board and audience 23 can see how they fit together. We're going to take public 24 testimony in the same way after the combined presentation 25 is given by staff. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 4 1 So if you signed up for one item but not the 2 other, don't worry. We'll call on you all the same. And 3 if you signed up for both, you will just need to testify 4 one time. We think that's the most expeditious way to 5 move through what is likely to be a long witness list 6 today. 7 With that, I would like to remind also as we go 8 into the first item, anyone in the audience who wishes to 9 testify on today's agenda items, to please sign up with 10 the clerk of the Board. And if you have written 11 statements, to provide 30 copies to the clerk. 12 First item on today's agenda is 03-8-1. That is, 13 a public meeting to consider the health update. 14 This item will be an update on health effects 15 research findings. Today we will hear about the benefits 16 of air pollution control measures. Adopting regulations 17 that reduce air pollution are the Board's most important 18 function. Over the last few decades regulations to 19 control air emissions have substantially improved the air 20 quality in California. These improvements have recently 21 spawned an interest in quantifying the public health 22 benefit of air pollution controls. 23 I look forward to today's presentation, which 24 will summarize the work that addresses this important 25 issue. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 5 1 With that, I'd like to turn it over to Ms. 2 Witherspoon to begin staff presentation. 3 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Thank you, Dr. 4 Lloyd. And good morning, members of the Board. 5 This informational item highlights findings from 6 the children's health study concerned with the effect of 7 improvements in air quality, specifically on the illnesses 8 that lead to school absences. These studies are important 9 to our understanding of the health effects of air 10 pollution and also give us insight into the effectiveness 11 of control measures. 12 Today Mr. Hien Tran from the Research Division 13 will update the Board on this findings. 14 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 15 Presented as follows.) 16 MR. TRAN: Thank you, Ms. Witherspoon. 17 Good morning, Dr. Lloyd and members of the Board. 18 This morning's presentation focuses on results 19 that provide evidence for the health benefits of air 20 pollution control in terms of avoiding school absences 21 among children. 22 --o0o-- 23 MR. TRAN: Exposure to ground level ozone can 24 damage the respiratory tract, which can cause inflammation 25 and irritation. Such effects can lead to coughing, chest PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 6 1 tightness, shortness of breath, and a worsening of asthma. 2 This has raised the concern that ozone exposure may be 3 related to school absences. 4 Dr. Gilliland and colleagues at the University of 5 Southern California investigated the relationship between 6 ozone, nitrogen dioxide, and particulate matter less than 7 10 microns in diameter, and school absenteeism in a group 8 of about 2,100 fourth graders. These students were from 9 the children's health study which enrolled children from 10 12 southern California communities. 11 The investigators found that short-term changes 12 in ozone, but not nitrogen dioxide or PM 10, were 13 associated with a substantial change in school absences 14 resulting from both upper and lower respiratory illness. 15 They found that an increase of 0.02 parts per million of 16 ozone was associated with an increase of 63 percent for 17 illness-related absence rates. On any given day about 3 18 percent of students are absent. 19 --o0o-- 20 MR. TRAN: Dr. Jane Hawe from California State 21 University at Fullerton applied results from Gilliland and 22 estimated an impact of ozone exposure on school absences 23 in the South Coast Air Basin. 24 As we all know, ozone levels have drastically 25 decreased from 1990 to 1999. In a report to ARB Dr. Hawe PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 7 1 and colleagues found that 3.2 million absences were 2 avoided in 1999 in the South Coast due to the reduction in 3 ozone levels from 1990 to 1999. 4 This is equivalent to avoiding one absence per 5 year for each school-aged child in the South Coast Air 6 Basin. 7 Further, Dr. Hawe estimated that the overall 8 economic value of these avoided absences for children is 9 $15 million. For this calculation it was assumed that a 10 parent or guardian would stay home to take care of the 11 sick child, resulting in loss of productivity. 12 Moreover, if the 1999 ozone levels were reduced 13 to attain the state standard, about 900,000 additional 14 absences per year would be avoided in the South Coast. On 15 average, about 25 million absences occur annually in the 16 South Coast Air Basin. 17 --o0o-- 18 MR. TRAN: To summarize, exposure to elevated 19 levels of ambient ozone can result in increased school 20 absenteeism in children. If we can reduce the current 21 levels of ozone to meet the state standard, Dr. Hawe 22 estimates that as many as 900,000 absences can be avoided 23 in the South Coast on an annual basis, resulting in 24 greater productivity among parents. Moreover, fewer 25 absences would lead to a higher quality of education and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 8 1 potentially greater productivity later in a child's life. 2 --o0o-- 3 MR. TRAN: This finding clearly illustrates the 4 continued need to reduce ozone, not only in the South 5 Coast, but also throughout the state. Further, it 6 reinforces the benefit of conducting ozone health 7 advisories, which are provided to schools so that they can 8 restrict children's outdoor activities and, thus, limit 9 their exposure to ozone. 10 This concludes my presentation. I will be happy 11 to answer any of your questions. 12 Thank you for your attention. 13 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. That 14 clearly sets the scene very nicely for today's items. 15 Any questions from my colleagues on the Board? 16 Thank you very much. 17 We are not going to proceed with the next item, 18 which is a SIP, because we are awaiting Dr. Burke. He's 19 been caught in traffic, which is not an unusual occurrence 20 in this area. So clearly we would like to wait until Dr. 21 Burke comes. And then we will start that item. 22 Barry, do we have any more update? 23 Do we have an ETA for Dr. Burke? 24 Yeah, Rob is here. But I don't think he's 25 prepared to -- let's see. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 9 1 Three minutes. 2 Let's -- maybe what we can do is take a 3 five-minute break here. And I don't like to do this, but 4 I don't want to start this critical item with the Chairman 5 of the South Coast AQMD not here. 6 So let's take a five-minute break, start back at 7 9:30 -- 9:30 by the clock in the back. 8 (Thereupon a recess was taken.) 9 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I'd like to restart the 10 October 24th Board meeting. 11 The next agenda item -- two agenda items are 12 03-8-2, public meeting to consider a new state strategy 13 for the California State Implementation Plan, and 03-8-3, 14 public meeting to consider the 2003 South Coast SIP. 15 As I indicated earlier, we're combining both of 16 those so it facilitates getting through them and also 17 since they're related. So the people are testifying to 18 all the issues at once rather than sitting through two 19 separate proceedings. 20 Dr. Burke, I would like to thank you and your 21 colleagues again for the wonderful hospitality of the 22 South Coast AQMD. It's great to be here. It's wonderful 23 for me personally to be back at the South Coast in this 24 building where I have many happy memories of working with 25 staff and with the Board. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 10 1 Again, I was fortunate to head the Technology 2 Advancement Office our eight years as chief scientist. 3 And, as you know, in that job vigorously pursued 4 zero-emission technologies. And this program continues 5 very successfully today and I applaud the efforts. A real 6 program that we really need. 7 I brought that same commitment and experience to 8 my role as Chairman of the Air Resources Board. The zero 9 emissions is still my goal and the goal of every member of 10 this Board as every regulation comes before us. And, in 11 fact, as we begin to implement those, some of the issues 12 that we have today with on-road vehicle emissions are 13 those that would clearly be minimized. 14 I also appreciate the opportunity to focus on the 15 enormous air quality needs of this region, which I know 16 all too well. I can still remember how bad it was when I 17 first came to southern California back in the early 18 seventies. Back then the peak readings in Riverside were 19 over and approaching .6 ppm for one hour average. So 20 we've made great strides in cleaning up the air. And I 21 think it's important to remember that. 22 Clearly, however, our job is far from done. This 23 summer's ozone violations were a sharp reminder that we 24 need to be vigilant and aggressive in controlling smog 25 precursors. There were a total of 66 days over the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 11 1 federal ozone standard this year, up from 36 exceedance 2 days in 2001 and 45 days in 2002. Although in 2002, the 3 peak ozone was .17; in 2001, .19. So there was a downward 4 trend. But the last few years that has been going up. 5 This year we've also experienced the highest 6 reading since 1998, showing .22 ppm at Pico High School, 7 again which passed the Stage 1 alert level of .2. 8 Although weather conditions played a large role in what 9 happened, it's apparently not the sole reason for that. 10 So we need to find out some of the underlying reasons for 11 that and clearly address this disturbing trend of 12 reducing -- improving air quality as reduced emissions. 13 Over the years the Board has pushed the 14 development of new technology and achieved dramatic 15 emission reductions. We need to keep that focus and 16 pursue innovative strategies of all kinds. Meeting air 17 quality standards in the South Coast is a tremendous 18 challenge, but it's one that we absolutely must meet. But 19 we must meet it together. 20 There's been some question about the State's 21 commitment to this effort. And I'd like to take just a 22 few moments to set the record straight on that point. As 23 I mentioned before, we need to work together. 24 The Air Resources Board is committedto doing 25 whatever it takes to meet all the State and federal PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 12 1 standards that have been established in every region of 2 this great state. There's no question about that. That 3 is, in fact, our job. It's what the public wants and 4 expects, and it's what we fully intend to do. Every 5 member of this board shares that commitment, as does every 6 single person on our staff. And I've been disappointed of 7 people questioning that commitment. 8 This is the Board that initiated and funded the 9 multi-year children's health study in California. I 10 remember being on the Research Screening Committee at that 11 time. It was a major effort, precisely so we could 12 pinpoint what's threatening children's health and work on 13 the solutions. 14 This is the Board that invented the idea of 15 zero-emitting automobiles, that identified diesel as a 16 toxic air contaminant and went after those emissions, that 17 made gasoline cleaner than any other state, that's putting 18 catalytic converters on recreational boats and lawn 19 mowers, and that's requiring retrofit devices on every 20 engine that can accept such technology. 21 The idea that these are easy measures, that we've 22 done all the easy measures and these aren't tough 23 measures, are grossly misleading and offensive. 24 This is the Board that led its sister agencies of 25 Cal EPA towards a comprehensive environmental justice PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 13 1 policy and action plan which we are well on the way 2 towards implementing. And in fact we have a duty to 3 balance all the issues as we move ahead. 4 So don't ever think this Board doesn't care. The 5 Air Resources Board stands for clean air and stands up to 6 the people of California who can't protect themselves from 7 the adverse health impacts of air pollution. 8 People who have been following what's going on in 9 Washington need only see what happened when we adopted the 10 strict regulation for lawn mowers and how people are 11 trying to take that authority away from us. 12 But we also recognize that we have to protect the 13 health of people in California, who can't protect 14 themselves from air pollution. 15 The District's problems are our problems too, and 16 we stand side by side to solve the problems. Over the 17 past two months I've had the opportunity to meet with 18 members of the South Coast Board and with the District's 19 staff to change perspectives about where things stand 20 today and how we're going to solve the nonattainment 21 problem in this basin. Those district board members 22 graciously offered to work with us and to help us in any 23 way they possibly can. 24 That partnership is important -- no, critical -- 25 because whether we're talking about new regulations, new PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 14 1 legislation, or new funding programs to accelerate the 2 clean up of emission sources, none of them are easy. We 3 need the support of all our local colleagues and from all 4 the people represented in this room to accomplish our 5 goal. 6 We need the best minds in California. I don't 7 think -- if we combine the resources of the Air Resources 8 Board and all the air pollution control districts, we 9 don't have a monopoly on all the ideas. We need help from 10 all segments to both identify and implement these issues. 11 We can identify ways of getting to all the tons in the 12 so-called black box. But we have a responsibility to make 13 sure that those can be implemented, and not be misleading. 14 Before I turn it over to Dr. Burke, I would also 15 like to compliment the staff of the Air Resources Board 16 and at the South Coast Air Quality Management District for 17 their outstanding efforts to try to move us closer on this 18 plan. I think we've made significant progress, but 19 clearly not there as we'll probably hear today. But I 20 know that both sets of staff have worked tremendously hard 21 and there's been no lack of commitment and dedication, and 22 as I've seen Air Resources Board staff work night and day. 23 The month that we took in delaying this plan to completely 24 evaluate the South Coast proposal indicated our commitment 25 to work with the South Coast to see if the ideas put PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 15 1 forward merited inclusion in our plan. And I think of 2 what we hear today, there was some progress in that area. 3 But there's still some differences of what's assumed. 4 Now, I'd like to call on my distinguished 5 colleague from the south, Dr. Burke, to see if he has 6 opening remarks he'd like to make before staff's 7 presentation. 8 Welcome, Dr. Burke, and welcome back, good to see 9 you, from your surgery. 10 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: Thank you very much, Dr. 11 Lloyd. 12 Indeed it's a pleasure to be back on my feet and 13 back with the Air Resources Board and to welcome you to 14 South Coast District headquarters. You and Catherine both 15 are familiar with our facilities here, as you've both 16 spent a great deal of time here. I hope that the other 17 Board members get the opportunity to spend more time and 18 find out what we do here. 19 My comments this morning are framed kind of in 20 your remarks, because I have been proud for the last 21 couple of years to be a member of this Board and see the 22 progress that we have made on many, many, many issues. 23 But in the slave quarters of America in the early 24 1800's there was a saying among the slaves when there was 25 a difficult task or an impossible situation that they had PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 16 1 to face. And it was that it's a great day for getting up 2 and meeting Jesus; which meant the task may be so 3 overwhelming that they might not live through it. I don't 4 think the task before us today is life threatening. 5 Politically it may be a death knell to some people. But 6 in your life it's not life threatening. 7 I think that today's consideration of the State 8 and federal strategy of the California SIP and the South 9 Coast 2003 Clean Air Plan are the most important decisions 10 that this Board has made in probably a decade. Much of 11 California is truly at a clean-air crossroads. 12 Our CARB staff has proposed some significant 13 measures to build upon this agency's past successes. And 14 I genuinely appreciate their efforts in this regard. 15 Nonetheless, I believe that we can and we must do better. 16 Therefore, I would like to introduce a motion prior to 17 public testimony so that the witnesses have an opportunity 18 to comment on the clean air commitments that I am 19 proposing for this Board's consideration. 20 Copies of the motion are being distributed or 21 have been distributed to you. And more detailed 22 attachments can be reviewed by everyone as we proceed with 23 the testimony hearing. 24 At this time, I would appreciate if the clerk of 25 the Board would read the full text of my amendment since I PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 17 1 think my strength is used better in another way. 2 MS. MALIK: "Approve the 2003 State and federal 3 strategy for the California State Implementation Plan with 4 the following amendments: 5 "Increase the near-term state commitment by at 6 least an additional 120 tons per day ROG and NOx combined 7 in the South Coast Air Basin in 2010 through a new 8 measure, Attachment 1, to be adopted in multiple phases 9 beginning in 2005. 10 "Further increase the near-term State commitment 11 by another 66 tons per day ROG and NOx combined in South 12 Coast Air Basin in 2010 provided legal authority, our 13 public funding, is secured. Staff shall work with 14 stakeholders to obtain necessary legal authority, our 15 public funding, no later than December 2006. Only in the 16 event that the required legal authority, our public 17 funding, is not secured will such commitment be reverted 18 back to the State's long-term commitment. 19 "In addition, staff is directed to: 20 "1) Return to the Board in no later than one 21 year with explicit agency allocations at the State and 22 local level for the remainder of the long-term reductions. 23 "2) Conduct during each of the next three years 24 an annual technology summit with participation from 25 technical experts, academia, consultants, and other PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 18 1 interested stakeholders. 2 "3) Return to the Board every 13 months over the 3 next three years with explicit CARB commitments for 4 adoption and implementation of control measures to achieve 5 not less than one-third of the long-term reductions 6 contained in the approved State strategy." 7 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. Is that -- and I 8 think the attachment is here. 9 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: Yes, with further detail. 10 For those of you who are just visiting our 11 building for the first time, if any -- I think you ought 12 to know that if any member of the Board gets up and goes 13 behind this podium to either go to the restroom or use the 14 phone, that all of the hearing will be played. It is on 15 audio and video throughout the rear of the building. So 16 if you're not sitting at the dais, you don't miss a word. 17 So if somebody has to get up and leave, I don't want you 18 to think that they're missing what you have to say. 19 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Can I also point out for 20 those people who may be standing at the back, if they're 21 interested, there is an overflow room available for those 22 people unable to find a chair or if they want a chair. 23 And I think Kathleen Tschogl is available at the back to 24 direct -- help people find that overflow room. 25 Thank you. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 19 1 Mr. Calhoun. 2 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: Mr. Chairman, in keeping 3 with your comments, and as a resident of the South Coast 4 District, I would like to second the motion offered by 5 Chairman Burke. I think the staff also is interested in 6 these recommendations made by the South Coast District. I 7 think the big question is the timing and the legislative 8 authority along with the necessary financials that go 9 along with the thing. 10 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Yes, Professor Friedman. 11 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: I have some process 12 questions. 13 I'm wondering how this relates to the South 14 Coast's position paper that we've received and had a 15 chance to digest. Is this a modification or is it 16 separate? This is a -- 17 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: Doctor, I'd like to ask you 18 about page 23 since you've digest that. 19 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: I'm sorry? 20 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: The bottom of page -- no, I 21 was just kidding. Just kidding. 22 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: I've already 23 memorized all this. 24 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: Yeah, I know, I know. It's 25 written at -- this integrates into that document totally. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 20 1 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: It's integrated. In 2 other words, this really is a motion that would embrace 3 and include and implement -- it's consistent? 4 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: Right. 5 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: It's consistent, and 6 really substitutes for it? 7 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: Yes. 8 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Okay. Well, then 9 that -- 10 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: Well, it even more defines 11 it. 12 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Okay. Thank you. 13 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: It's consistent but more 14 defining. 15 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Well, thank you very much, 16 Dr. Burke. I think it's very clear, however, that we're 17 going to need to hear staff's presentation and testimony 18 to put this resolution into context and see how we can 19 move ahead there. 20 So with that, I would like to ask Ms. Witherspoon 21 to introduce these items and begin staff presentation. 22 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Thank you, Dr. 23 Lloyd. 24 The Federal Clean Air Act requires the 25 development of SIPs to demonstrate how air quality PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 21 1 standards will be attained. Federal law also requires 2 that transportation plans and air quality plans conform to 3 one another, which is the reason for the SIP before you 4 today. The Southern California Association of Governments 5 is in the process of updating its regional transportation 6 plan because SCAG's existing RTP lapses next year. 7 The South Coast 2003 SIP updates the air quality 8 side of the ledger so that the new RTP and the South Coast 9 Attainment Plan will be completely in sync and work as 10 one. 11 As part of this process, your staff updated ARB's 12 comprehensive strategy for emission sources under State 13 and federal jurisdiction. Staff took the strategy through 14 a full public review process in 2001 and 2002 with 15 workshops throughout the state. The South Coast 2003 SIP 16 incorporates the proposed State and federal strategies as 17 a placeholder, but they are not final or binding until the 18 Board itself approves them into the SIP. 19 The measures and commitments in the statewide 20 strategy represent the most fully developed emission 21 control approaches staff could identify at this time. All 22 of them are aggressive and go well beyond the existing 23 baseline of regulations. These are the measures we are 24 specifically proposing for future adoption. If the Board 25 approves them, ARB would be legally bound to follow PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 22 1 through. 2 We received comments during our workshop process 3 that some of the proposed statewide measures are too 4 aggressive and should be deferred until we know more about 5 the actual technologies and their actual costs. However, 6 we got comments from the opposite side as well, and you'll 7 hear many of them today, that the statewide strategies are 8 too conservative and should be substantially expanded. 9 As usual, staff tried to strike a balance between 10 these views using our degree of confidence as a guide. If 11 we were reasonably sure that a proposed control measure 12 would work, which for us meant more than 51 percent sure, 13 we included it in the short-term strategic plan. If there 14 was significant data gaps or we were very unsure about 15 which control technology or technique would be employed, 16 we deferred the measure for further evaluation. 17 Ideally, state implementation plans would consist 18 of finished rules, with only implementation left to do. 19 But in reality, most SIPs include a blend of adopted 20 measures, commitments for action by a future date, and 21 further study measures. 22 What staff will present shortly is a series of 23 major new SIP commitments, including both short-term and 24 longer-term measures for the South Coast 2003 SIP. These 25 strategies are essential to the region's efforts to meet PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 23 1 federal air quality standards and to the rest of 2 California's nonattainment areas as well. 3 Since the time the draft plan was published, and 4 in response to comments received, we have identified some 5 additional State measures and SIP commitments for the 6 Board's consideration. Staff will walk through these 7 proposed changes during our presentation. 8 Finally, staff will discuss why we believe the 9 South Coast 2003 SIP revision meets the Federal Clean Air 10 Act requirements and should be approved for submittal to 11 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The 2003 SIP, 12 while not perfect, is a substantial step forward in our 13 quests for clean, healthful air. The rule adoption 14 schedule in the plan along with the separate schedule for 15 completing feasibility assessments on all outstanding 16 measures are a solid blue print for moving ahead. The 17 Board can be confident in approving this plan that we are 18 on track for meeting the 2010 deadline for attainment of 19 the federal one hour ozone standard. 20 The staff presentation this morning will be made 21 by Joe Calavita of the Planning and Technical Support 22 Division. 23 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 24 Presented as follows.) 25 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 24 1 LIASON CALAVITA: Good morning, Chairman Lloyd and members 2 of the Board. 3 As Ms. Witherspoon mentioned, my presentation 4 will cover two items: The South Coast SIP adopted by the 5 District Board and ARB staff's proposed State and federal 6 strategy, which includes new SIP commitments for ARB. 7 --o0o-- 8 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 9 LIASON CALAVITA: The 2003 South Coast plan covers a 10 region that is home to about 40 percent of the state's 11 population. As shown in this map, it includes most of Los 12 Angeles County, all of Orange County, and the western more 13 urbanized portions of Riverside and San Bernardino County. 14 The South Coast has grown from a population of 15 about 10 million in 1980 to over 15 million today. 16 Unfortunately, the warm sunny climate that makes this a 17 popular place to live, together with the surrounding 18 mountains and stagnant air conditions, provide the perfect 19 ingredients for generation and accumulation of smog. 20 Our collective efforts over the years have helped 21 to eliminate thousands of tons per day of smog forming 22 emissions in the South Coast. But big challenges remain. 23 A significant quantity of new additional emission 24 reductions are needed to attain the federal one hour 25 standard for ozone by the 2010 statutory deadline. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 25 1 The plan you are considering today includes 2 specific control measures and emission reduction 3 commitments to meet this challenge. 4 The 2003 South Coast plan has been adopted by the 5 District Board and forwarded to ARB for its consideration. 6 As noted, the plan includes proposed reductions from the 7 statewide strategy as a placeholder so the public can see 8 all the plan elements in one place. Board approval of the 9 statewide strategy today would indicate the State's 10 intention that these be an enforceable part of the plan. 11 If approved by the Board, the State measures would also be 12 incorporated into state implementation plans for other air 13 pollution control districts in California. 14 --o0o-- 15 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 16 LIASON CALAVITA: The Federal Clean air Act requires that 17 the SIP be based on the most current technical data 18 available at the time the plan is developed. The SIP must 19 also include sufficient emission control strategies to 20 meet the applicable attainment deadline. 21 To determine what level of control is needed, 22 each SIP includes a model attainment demonstration to 23 define the target for emission reductions, also known as 24 the carrying capacity for the region. 25 Finally, transportation conformity emission PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 26 1 budgets must also be included in the SIP to ensure that 2 emissions from the transportation sector don't grow beyond 3 those assumed to occur in the attainment demonstration. 4 --o0o-- 5 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 6 LIASON CALAVITA: The Federal Clean Air Act includes 7 requirements that apply to control measures used to 8 demonstrate attainment of air quality standards. To be 9 credible in the SIP, the State must demonstrate that it 10 has adequate funding and legal authority to carry its 11 proposed control measures to completion. This clearly 12 applies to near-term control measures with specific 13 adoption dates for Board consideration. 14 We took these criteria into account as we 15 developed the staff proposal. This was necessary because 16 U.S. EPA can only approve a SIP if it meets these 17 requirements. 18 --o0o-- 19 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 20 LIASON CALAVITA: Notwithstanding the requirements I just 21 described, the Federal Clean Air Act allows extreme 22 nonattainment areas to describe some of their proposed 23 control measures in conceptual terms. This is in 24 recognition of the tremendous challenge faced by extreme 25 nonattainment areas and the strong likelihood that they PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 27 1 will have to come up with completely new and different 2 strategies than have been already implemented elsewhere in 3 the country. The Clean Air Act requires that these 4 long-term measures be identified by 2007. 5 --o0o-- 6 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 7 LIASON CALAVITA: The Air Resources Board is responsible 8 for overseeing all aspects of air pollution control in 9 California. ARB is also responsible for the direct 10 control of emission sources under its regulatory 11 jurisdiction, such as vehicles, fuels, and consumer 12 products. To fulfill this responsibility, ARB 13 periodically updates and expands its statewide emission 14 reduction strategy. 15 Air quality plans generally originate at the 16 local air district level. District staff, in consultation 17 with ARB modelers, determine the level of reductions 18 needed to attain the standard in their region. Once that 19 level is defined, districts work with stakeholders, sister 20 agencies, and their governing boards to develop a 21 comprehensive emission control strategy, including any 22 proposed or adopted state controls. The resulting plan is 23 adopted by the District Board and submitted to ARB for 24 review. 25 Under State law, ARB is the lead agency for all PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 28 1 aspects of the SIP and is responsible for ensuring 2 compliance with federal law. Only this Board can adopt 3 proposed revisions to the SIP. 4 Once this Board has approved the local plan, 5 including anticipated reductions from State measures, the 6 completed plan is submitted to U.S. EPA. The U.S. EPA 7 staff reviews each plan to determine whether it meets 8 Federal Clean Air Act requirements and provides one last 9 opportunity for public comment. 10 If accepted by U.S. EPA, the State and local 11 commitments become part of the federally approved SIP and 12 are enforceable by U.S. EPA and through individual citizen 13 suits. 14 --o0o-- 15 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 16 LIASON CALAVITA: The SIP you are considering today 17 updates the federal PM 10 and ozone attainment plans for 18 the South Coast Air Basin. The South Coast Air Basin is 19 required to meet the federal standard for PM 10 by 2006 20 and for one hour ozone by 2010. 21 This year the basin attained the federal carbon 22 monoxide standard for the first time. However, the 23 district has chosen to wait for an additional year of 24 clean data before making an official carbon monoxide 25 attainment redesignation request. In the meantime, the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 29 1 most current information for carbon monoxide is reported 2 in the plan. 3 The 2003 South Coast SIP also updates the 4 nitrogen dioxide maintenance plan for the South Coast Air 5 Basin and updates the Coachella Valley PM 10 attainment 6 plan. 7 The remainder of this presentation will focus on 8 the revision to the South Coast ozone SIP, which is the 9 heart of this plan and will drive the overall control 10 strategy for the region. 11 --o0o-- 12 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 13 LIASON CALAVITA: District and the ARB staff coordinated 14 closely in developing the technical foundation for the 15 South Coast plan. Many of the technical elements changed 16 significantly since the 1994 and 1997 versions of the 17 plan. 18 The mobile source inventory was a major point of 19 contention in 1997. To address those concerns, staff 20 comprehensively reviewed the mobile source inventory for 21 the whole state. This effort included on-road vehicle 22 emissions testing, updated activity data, and major 23 changes in the way we estimate emissions from cars and 24 trucks. As a result of this effort, our estimates of 25 emissions from cars and trucks throughout the south coast PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 30 1 region have increased significantly over those used in 2 prior plans. 3 These higher estimated mobile source emissions 4 don't change actual emissions. Car and truck emissions 5 continue to decline steadily, but instead provide an 6 improved understanding of real world conditions. 7 Emission estimates for off-road vehicles and 8 equipment, solvents, paints, industries, and other sources 9 have also been updated based on the latest technical 10 information. 11 The air quality modeling in this plan is based on 12 a new 1997 ozone episode at an intensive field study of 13 ozone formation in southern California. The modeling 14 approach received generally positive feedback from a 15 six-member scientific peer review panel. Most panel 16 members hope to see an even more robust model in the 17 future. 18 The new attainment target is more stringent than 19 the target in the 1997 plan by more than 100 tons. 20 Meeting this target will require significant additional 21 ROG and NOx emission reductions by 2010. 22 --o0o-- 23 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 24 LIASON CALAVITA: The carrying and capacity of the South 25 Coast Air Basin is estimated to be 310 tons per day ROG PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 31 1 and 530 tons per day NOx for attainment of the federal one 2 hour ozone standard. To reach this target, ROG and NOx 3 emissions have to be reduced by more than 1,500 tons per 4 day from the 1997 base year. The reductions will be 5 achieved through a combination of adopted regulations, new 6 near-term control measures, and a commitment to achieve 7 additional reductions from long-term measures. 8 This slide provides an overview of how we see 9 those reductions, penciling out the proposal that staff's 10 putting before you today. 11 --o0o-- 12 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 13 LIASON CALAVITA: This slide illustrates the combination 14 of adopted, planned, and still-to-be-developed emission 15 reduction strategies. As you can see, 73 percent of the 16 reductions needed for attainment will be achieved through 17 measures that have already been adopted, plus the defined 18 near-term measures in the plan. The remaining 27 percent 19 of reductions will come from the longer-term strategies 20 we're currently in the process of developing. 21 --o0o-- 22 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 23 LIASON CALAVITA: The next few slides walk through these 24 categories of control measures one at a time, starting 25 with adopted controls. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 32 1 --o0o-- 2 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 3 LIASON CALAVITA: The Board last updated the comprehensive 4 State Implementation Plan for California on November 15th, 5 1994. At that time, as we're proposing again today, the 6 plan contained a combination of both short-term and 7 long-term measures. The statewide SIP continued to evolve 8 from that day forward, as ARB, EPA, and other State 9 agencies worked on the actual control measures to carry it 10 out. 11 Some measures were more effective than specified 12 in the 1994 SIP, while others were less so. For example, 13 measures that called for the early retirement of motor 14 vehicles did not provide the emission reductions 15 originally envisioned, in large part because the funding 16 needed for such programs didn't materialize. 17 On the other hand, the Low Emission Vehicle II 18 Program provided much greater emission reductions than 19 originally expected. LEV II requires sports utility 20 vehicles to meet the same emission standards as cars 21 starting in 2004. When LEV II is fully implemented in 22 2010, new cars will be over 99 percent cleaner than 23 uncontrolled cars. 24 --o0o-- 25 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 33 1 LIASON CALAVITA: Here's what was in the 1994 SIP and what 2 got done. ARB committed to several measures for mobile 3 sources under its jurisdiction and to various consumer 4 product controls. We also anticipated U.S. EPA action on 5 mobile sources under its jurisdiction. 6 Finally, the 1994 SIP included commitments from 7 the Bureau of Automotive Repair, or BAR, to implement and 8 enhance inspection and maintenance program for motor 9 vehicles, and from the Department of Pesticide Regulation 10 to reduce emissions from pesticide use. 11 --o0o-- 12 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 13 LIASON CALAVITA: Air quality strategies are constantly 14 evolving. We don't always know at the time each SIP is 15 adopted what the future opportunities will be. This slide 16 identifies several rules the Board adopted that were not 17 envisioned in the 1994 SIP. These include new emission 18 standards for heavy-duty trucks, the gas-can rule, diesel 19 retrofits, and the small off-road engine regulations. 20 Some of these measures are very big hitters. The gas-can 21 rule adopted by the Board, for example, will reduce ROG 22 emissions by about 34 tons per day in the South Coast. 23 The punch line is that the same thing can and 24 will happen again in the future. The SIP is our best 25 prediction of what we need to work on. But good ideas and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 34 1 new opportunities can crop up at any time. And when they 2 do, we will take action. 3 --o0o-- 4 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 5 LIASON CALAVITA: Here's the net effect of these adopted 6 regulations. ARB and other State agencies will contribute 7 735 tons per day of reductions in 2010 from controls that 8 have already been adopted since 1997. 9 --o0o-- 10 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 11 LIASON CALAVITA: This chart shows the same figures for 12 other agencies. Adopted district rules for station and 13 area sources will provide almost 150 tons by 2010 and 14 existing U.S. EPA requirements will provide about 80 tons. 15 As you can see, State measures are providing 76 percent of 16 the emission reductions occurring between the last plan 17 update and 2010. 18 --o0o-- 19 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 20 LIASON CALAVITA: Now that we've covered what's already 21 been done, let me turn to the new elements in the plan, 22 starting with near-term measures. 23 Near-term measures represent the control measures 24 scheduled for Board consideration between 2003 and 2006. 25 The designation of near-term measure means that staff has PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 35 1 an understanding of how it will be achieved, has completed 2 a preliminary feasibility and cost effectiveness analysis, 3 and is reasonably confident that the projected tonnage 4 reductions can be achieved in the timeframe specified. 5 --o0o-- 6 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 7 LIASON CALAVITA: The near-term measures in the proposed 8 plan sum up to the figures on this chart. As initially 9 proposed, ARB near-term measures would have accounted for 10 86 tons per day. However, since the time the plan was 11 published staff has identified another 23 tons that could 12 be added to the short-term category. So the new total is 13 109 tons combined ROG and NOx. 14 The additional tons come from adding medium-duty 15 trucks to our existing passenger vehicle retrofit proposal 16 and an overall commitment to achieve NOx controls on 17 heavy-duty diesel engines at the same time that we are 18 pursuing toxic PM reductions through our diesel risk 19 reduction plan. This would include heavy-duty trucks and 20 construction equipment. 21 The district's near-term control measures will 22 achieve 27 tons per day of combined ROG and NOx 23 reductions. The Southern California Association of 24 Governments, or SCAG, has also committed to reduce 24 tons 25 per day ROG and NOx from its transportation control PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 36 1 strategy. 2 The plan includes no near-term commitments for 3 additional emission reductions from federal sources. 4 However, a critical piece of our long-term strategy 5 development is to obtain additional federal reductions. 6 Also, the plan does include the benefits of U.S. EPA's 7 2007 new-engine standards for heavy-duty diesel trucks. 8 --o0o-- 9 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 10 LIASON CALAVITA: The 20 new State measures include 11 standards for ever cleaner vehicles, equipment and 12 products, and innovative new strategies to reduce 13 emissions from existing mobile sources. The State's legal 14 commitment is comprised of two elements: 15 First, ARB is committing to develop the proposed 16 measures and bring them to the Board for its consideration 17 by certain dates. The Board may take any action on these 18 measures under its discretion. 19 Second, ARB is committing to fulfill annual 20 emission reduction targets through 2006 by adopting these 21 or substitute measures. In terms of some of the 22 specifics, there is a large retrofit component in the 23 strategy for both on-road and off-road vehicles and 24 engines. 25 In addition, staff proposes to evaluate remote PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 37 1 sensing as a technology to identify high emitting vehicles 2 and to reduce emissions from heavy-duty trucks by limiting 3 the amount of time they spend idling. 4 For consumer products we've already regulated 5 many of the sources -- many of the categories twice and 6 some of the categories three times. Even so, we're 7 continuing to pursue the maximum feasible emission 8 reductions, and we will be revisiting every category, 9 searching for additional emission reduction opportunities. 10 For some categories, such as fuel vapor recovery, 11 staff's proposal includes measures for sources that are 12 not currently regulated. 13 The last category shown on this slide, land-based 14 port emissions, include such things as port refineries, 15 portable equipment, cargo handling equipment, and 16 locomotives. This category represents an opportunity for 17 local, State, and federal partnership because of the 18 variety of sources that fall under different regulatory 19 jurisdictions. 20 The District near-term strategy includes 13 21 measures carried over from the existing SIP and 11 new 22 control measures for coatings, solvents, industrial 23 processes, the district's regional clean air in sensitive 24 market, commonly referred to as "Reclaim," and other 25 sources. Staff notes that the South Coast District and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 38 1 other local agencies could achieve additional emission 2 reductions from mobile sources by directing more of their 3 local, State, and federal clean air funding to accelerate 4 the turnover of the existing vehicle fleet. 5 The District has not included incentive programs 6 in its planned commitments. 7 --o0o-- 8 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 9 LIASON CALAVITA: The Southern California Association of 10 Governments has a critical role in helping achieve clean 11 air in the South Coast. As population and vehicle travel 12 continue to grow, strategies to reduce growth in the 13 transportation sector will be increasingly important. The 14 plan includes a commitment by SCAG to reduce ROG and NOx 15 emissions by 16 and 8 tons per day respectively in 2010. 16 SCAG's transportation control measures include 17 funding for mass transit, information-based measures that 18 promote ride sharing and other commute alternatives, and 19 the construction of car pooling. Transportation sector 20 emission reductions are also achieved by promoting growth 21 patterns that enhance regional jobs housing balance. 22 --o0o-- 23 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 24 LIASON CALAVITA: This slide summarizes the combined 25 emission reductions from ARB, District, and SCAG's PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 39 1 near-term measures. 2 As you can see, the near-term measures are 3 projected to produce 88 tons per day ROG reductions and 72 4 tons per day NOx reductions, or a total of 160 tons per 5 day in 2010. 6 The list of near-term measures does not constrain 7 the Board or any other agency from adopting additional 8 measures in the near term. If other promising approaches 9 are identified, staff is committed to developing them and 10 bringing them to the Board for consideration as 11 expeditiously as possible. 12 --o0o-- 13 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 14 LIASON CALAVITA: The final set of control measures in the 15 plan are long-term strategies that staff is now in the 16 process of developing. 17 --o0o-- 18 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 19 LIASON CALAVITA: The next two slides show the remaining 20 sources of ROG and NOx emissions in the South Coast in 21 2010 excluding adopted and near-term measures. These are 22 the source categories that we need to focus on. As you 23 can see, most of the remaining ROG emissions come from 24 passenger vehicles and consumer products, which are under 25 ARB jurisdiction, and from solvents and paints, which are PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 40 1 just under District authority. 2 Recreational marine, lawn and garden equipment, 3 and industrial sources are also significant sources in the 4 future. 5 The box in the lower right-hand corner of the 6 slide shows the emission baseline after adopted rules and 7 new short-term measures are applied. 8 The target level is what we have to reach. The 9 difference between those two numbers is what we're trying 10 to accomplish with our long-term strategies. For ROG the 11 remaining gap is 264 tons per day. 12 --o0o-- 13 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 14 LIASON CALAVITA: The major sources of NOx in 2010 will be 15 passenger vehicles, trucks and buses, and large off-road 16 equipment, sources under ARB and U.S. EPA authority. ARB 17 sources contribute the majority of ROG and NOx emissions 18 in 2010 and it will be this agency's responsibility to 19 achieve the majority of the emission reductions. However, 20 all agencies must work together to push technology, engage 21 the public, and capitalize on funding opportunities to 22 meet the challenge ahead. 23 As the agency with legal responsibility for the 24 SIP in California, staff believes that ARB should bear 25 primary responsibility for ensuring the success of this PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 41 1 effort. 2 Again, note the box in the lower right-hand 3 corner. The gap we are trying to fill for NOx is 159 tons 4 per day. 5 --o0o-- 6 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 7 LIASON CALAVITA: The Clean Air Act recognizes that it may 8 be necessary for extreme nonattainment areas to rely on 9 as-yet-undefined measures to attain the federal ozone 10 standard. The South Coast plan commits the District to 11 achieving 31 tons per day ROG emission reductions from 12 such long-term measures. 13 The District plan assigns the long-term 14 commitments of 68 tons per day NOx and 18 tons per day ROG 15 to U.S. EPA. However, since U.S. EPA has indicated it 16 will disapprove any plan that assigns control obligations 17 to the federal government, the District also proposes to 18 simply drop the NOx tons from the plan if U.S. EPA does 19 not come through. 20 Because we believe it is important to achieve 21 these NOx reductions to reduce particulate matter 22 pollution, ARB staff is proposing that the Board backstop 23 these tons. The District intends the remainder of the 24 long-term commitment, 306 tons per day, be assigned to 25 ARB. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 42 1 Finally, it is important to remember that 2 whatever mix of long-term strategies is eventually 3 defined, the ARB is ultimately obligated to ensure that 4 all necessary reductions are achieved by 2010. 5 --o0o-- 6 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 7 LIASON CALAVITA: The District plan includes a discussion 8 of potential long-term strategies. The Board, in its 9 adoption resolution, added an additional list of potential 10 strategies. To turn these long-term measures from 11 concepts into actual ideas, the district is proposing a 12 two-step process. 13 First, South Coast will conduct a feasibility 14 analysis by certain dates. Then if the measure is deemed 15 to be feasible and legally authorized for District action, 16 South Coast will proceed to rule making, again by a 17 specific year. These commitments are set forth in an 18 attachment to the District Board resolution. 19 --o0o-- 20 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 21 LIASON CALAVITA: Staff is suggesting a similar approach 22 for ARB's long-term measures. Specifically, we're 23 proposing to evaluate a number of concepts by specific 24 dates and, where applicable, to move forward with a 25 regulatory process. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 43 1 A key difference between the District and ARB is 2 that several of the concepts on our long-term list require 3 new funding or statutory authority to implement. 4 Accordingly, we're committing to identify what is 5 necessary to move them forward, but can't actually adopt 6 them ourselves. In many cases, action by the State 7 Legislature will be required. 8 We're proposing adoption dates for each of these 9 concepts contingent upon obtaining the necessary funding 10 and authority. 11 --o0o-- 12 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 13 LIASON CALAVITA: Many of the stakeholders in this 14 planning process have urged staff to be as specific as we 15 possibly can in communicating what it will take to attain 16 the one hour ozone standard. We agree that all parties 17 need to understand the facts so we can work together on 18 common solutions. 19 It is vitally important that the public and their 20 elected representatives also understand what's involved 21 since we will need their support in the weeks, months and 22 years ahead. 23 As you saw on the pie charts a moment ago, we've 24 identified where the largest percentage of excess 25 emissions are for ROG and NOx. The next step is to define PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 44 1 the realm of what's possible for these source categories. 2 Staff has begun to look into this realm of what might be 3 possible using existing programs as the jumping-off point. 4 We've identified strategies that potentially reduce 5 emissions in the South Coast by 66 tons per day. 6 --o0o-- 7 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 8 LIASON CALAVITA: This slide outlines our new proposal to 9 accelerate the development of long-term strategies. We 10 propose to include these strategies in the SIP contingent 11 upon receiving the necessary funding and legislative 12 authority. If we receive legislative authority, the 13 implementing state agency, for example, ARB or BAR, will 14 develop new SIP measures using the same criteria we 15 currently apply. These include cost effectiveness, 16 benefits, socioeconomic impacts and other factors. 17 --o0o-- 18 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 19 LIASON CALAVITA: I'll now turn to the major issues raised 20 in relation to the South Coast 2003 plan and other 21 significant public comments. 22 --o0o-- 23 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 24 LIASON CALAVITA: The lack of new emission reduction 25 commitments by U.S. EPA is a concern for both ARB and the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 45 1 District. That issue aggregates the second biggest 2 challenge in this plan, which is the gap between 3 reductions we can identify today and what needs to be 4 identified as part of a long-term strategy. 5 We've received numerous comments that the plan 6 does not meet federal requirements in this regard and that 7 ARB should identify additional measures for state 8 adoption. 9 There were also letters from businesses within 10 the consumer products industry and several letters with 11 suggestions on how we could reduce emissions from 12 categories ranging from recreational vehicles to energy 13 production facilities. 14 There is also an issue about who does what. 15 South Coast AQMD is recommending fixed assignments of tons 16 that do not take into account the practical realities of 17 future strategies. Staff believes it is inappropriate to 18 make a rigid assignment of emission reduction 19 responsibilities until the final attainment strategy is 20 defined. 21 Finally, there's an issue over the carrying in 22 the plan for NOx. 23 I'll now describe each of these issues in more 24 detail. 25 --o0o-- PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 46 1 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2 LIASON CALAVITA: According to U.S. EPA, states cannot 3 legally assign emission reduction responsibility to the 4 federal government. However, we can communicate what it 5 will take to achieve the standards in California and 6 pursue every available avenue to make those things happen. 7 U.S. EPA has set stringent standards for new 8 on-road engines and has recently set new standards that 9 will significantly reduce emissions from off-road engines 10 post 2010. While these federal regulations provide 11 significant cleaner benefits in the longer term, we need 12 U.S. EPA to help us accelerate emission reductions from 13 the existing dirtier in-use fleet to achieve additional 14 reductions prior to 2010. 15 Additional federal reductions could be achieved 16 either through a regulatory action or federal funding. 17 The SIP identifies several national or regional control 18 concepts we urge the federal government to pursue. We are 19 committed to working with all parties to pursue these 20 critical emission reductions on the federal side. 21 --o0o-- 22 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 23 LIASON CALAVITA: Here are some of the measures we are 24 suggesting for trains, plains, ships, interstate trucks, 25 and farm and construction equipment. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 47 1 The Clean Air Act requires the federal government 2 to reduce mobile source emissions that cause or contribute 3 to air pollution that endangers public health. Ozone 4 levels in the South Coast clearly meet that test. 5 Emission sources under federal regulatory authority will 6 contribute one-third of the South Coast NOx emissions 7 inventory in 2010. We simply can't attain the one hour 8 standard unless EPA does its full part. 9 --o0o-- 10 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 11 LIASON CALAVITA: This is the biggest issue with the plan 12 and the single biggest challenge facing ARB as the lead 13 agency for the SIP. Environmental groups, the District, 14 and several members of the public are urging the Board to 15 add more short-term measures prior to adoption. With the 16 addition staff is proposing today, we added every 17 short-term measure that could be identified as of this 18 date that meets the Clean Air Act requirements for SIP 19 measures. 20 The rest of the measures need either substantial 21 development, statutory authority, additional funding, or 22 all three to move into the near-term column. 23 The Clean Air Act allows the Board to continue 24 working on long-term strategies provided they are 25 translated into specific measures no later than 2007, PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 48 1 three years ahead of the attainment deadline. Staff is 2 proposing to use the anticipated 2006 plan revision for 3 this purpose. 4 --o0o-- 5 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 6 LIASON CALAVITA: On August 27th the South Coast District 7 provided a list of draft measures to ARB that, according 8 to District staff, could be adopted within the next three 9 years and would reduce 300 tons per day of ROG and NOx by 10 2010. ARB staff has had numerous conversations with 11 District staff to better understand the District's 12 proposals and how the emissions were calculated. 13 The proposals nearly all fall into five 14 categories, making them inappropriate as near-term 15 measures. 16 --o0o-- 17 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 18 LIASON CALAVITA: The good news is that our discussions 19 with the District did bring out 23 tons per day worth of 20 new State measures that staff is proposing to add to ARB's 21 short-term commitments. 22 We also identified an additional 13 tons per day 23 that may be achievable by the District if we're to 24 consider a spare-the-air-type program for recreational 25 boats on smoggy days. This is a change the District would PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 49 1 have to make in its plan. 2 However, the rest of District's recommendations 3 need more work before we can claim credit for them in the 4 plan. 5 --o0o-- 6 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 7 LIASON CALAVITA: Additional incentive programs beyond 8 those included in our new proposed long-term commitment to 9 66 tons should be explored. Our proposals for heavy-duty 10 incentive funding is based on what's been accomplished in 11 the Carl Moyer program, which has focused on NOx from 12 diesel engines. 13 However, other incentive programs should be 14 evaluated. And we propose to do that between 2004 and 15 2006. 16 --o0o-- 17 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 18 LIASON CALAVITA: The Clean Air Act also requires that the 19 State have a legal authority under State law to adopt and 20 implement the emission reduction measures. ARB staff 21 found that several concepts from South Coast District fell 22 into a category where we currently lack authority. For 23 example, the suggestions regarding the smog check program 24 require changes to the fundamental design of the program, 25 which is written directly into State law. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 50 1 District staff also suggested imposing a fee on 2 high polluting vehicles. This again requires action by 3 the State Legislature. 4 --o0o-- 5 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 6 LIASON CALAVITA: Some of the concepts proposed by the 7 district are appropriate for local action, such as use 8 restrictions. Use restrictions, such as prohibiting the 9 use of recreational boats with older and dirtier two-cycle 10 engines on smoggy days, would be more effective if 11 enforced at the local level. 12 Other concepts are best developed through a 13 broader cooperative effort. As an example, staff is 14 currently evaluating opportunities to reduce emissions 15 from ocean-going ships and other port-related emission 16 sources. We believe it is appropriate for the districts 17 to work closely with the ARB and ports through a 18 combination of control strategies. 19 These strategies and other strategies to reduce 20 emissions related to goods movement at rail yards and 21 intermodal facilities are necessary on a broader statewide 22 or national level, and local involvement in their 23 development is essential. 24 We encourage the District staff to work with us 25 to reassess whether these types of strategies should be PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 51 1 included in the 2007 SIP update. 2 --o0o-- 3 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 4 LIASON CALAVITA: Many of the District's proposed measures 5 and concepts are already included as part of our proposed 6 strategy. These include such things as tightening 7 emission standards on new engines and vehicles, engine 8 retrofit programs, improvements to the smog check program, 9 and reduced emissions from fuels. 10 Others were evaluated by staff and rejected as 11 technologically infeasible, such as installing catalytic 12 converters on existing lawn mowers or outboard motors. 13 For these reasons the potential reductions 14 identified by the District are vastly overstated. 15 Several of the District's proposals were already 16 on our list for evaluation and, like us, the District 17 staff was unable to quantify the range of potential 18 emission reductions. We intend to work together on the 19 analysis of how these measures could actually be done as 20 we move through the rule evaluation and development 21 process. 22 --o0o-- 23 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 24 LIASON CALAVITA: We selected the most promising concepts 25 and are committing to complete evaluations by specific PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 52 1 deadlines and to develop the measure for Board 2 consideration if it is found to be feasible. 3 --o0o-- 4 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 5 LIASON CALAVITA: Staff considers the long-term measures 6 somewhat fluid since we don't know how many tons U.S. EPA 7 will ultimately provide, when the State Legislature will 8 act, what level of public funding can be achieved, or how 9 various technical studies will come out. 10 The District on the other hand is insisting on a 11 31-tons-per-day assignment for South Coast, and no more, 12 to be locked in at this date. 13 --o0o-- 14 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 15 LIASON CALAVITA: In some respect this debate is academic 16 since ARB is ultimately responsible for all the missing 17 tons as the lead agency for the SIP. But staff thinks 18 there is more at stake in this debate, namely, the need 19 for ongoing cooperation at all levels of government to 20 close the 423 tons per day gap in the SIP. 21 Locking in now does not achieve that objective. 22 --o0o-- 23 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 24 LIASON CALAVITA: Another part of the District's proposal 25 that staff objects to is the notion that the target level PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 53 1 of NOx reduction should change based on what U.S. EPA does 2 or doesn't do. No other SIP in the history of this Board 3 has contained optional carrying capacities for ozone. 4 Typically, there's just one target for each pollutant, and 5 it applies to all source categories and to every 6 responsible agency. 7 As I mentioned earlier, we're proposing that ARB 8 backstop the NOx reductions in order to preserve the 9 particulate reductions benefits. There is general 10 consensus in the public comments that the Board should do 11 everything in its power to solve the South Coast 12 nonattainment problem and protect public health. However, 13 there's less consensus about what the Board should do 14 today. 15 Some commenters will urge you to delay based on 16 the expectation that more near-term strategies can and 17 will be added to the plan in the interim. 18 Based on all of staff's analysis to date, we are 19 not hopeful about finding more tons in the immediate term. 20 But you certainly have that option and, if you direct 21 staff to do so, we will try again. 22 Other witnesses will urge you to adopt this plan 23 as the best that can be achieved at this moment in time 24 and to get on with the more difficult task of cleaning the 25 air. Staff shares that point of view. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 54 1 --o0o-- 2 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 3 LIASON CALAVITA: Since 1990 the partnership between ARB, 4 South Coast AQMD, SCAG, and other agencies has cut the 5 ozone-forming emissions in the South Coast by 40 percent 6 and the number of days exceeding the federal one our 7 standard by half. 8 The proposed SIP provides both the road map and 9 the enforcement mechanism to ensure that the controls we 10 need to achieve clean air are adopted. The SIP 11 establishes the near-term commitments for the next round 12 of defined measures and initiates the development of a 13 long-term strategy. 14 The proposed SIP meets all applicable Clean Air 15 Act requirements and is the most technically sound plan 16 ever developed for the South Coast Air Basin. 17 Staff recommends the Board approve the proposed 18 State and federal strategy as modified with specific 19 commitments for the South Coast. Staff also recommends 20 that the Board approve the local control strategy and 21 technical elements of the South Coast plan. 22 Finally, ARB recommends that the Board approve 23 submittal of the South Coast plan with the State 24 commitments for the region to U.S. EPA for its 25 consideration as a revision to the California SIP. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 55 1 This concludes my presentation. And I will now 2 be happy to answer any questions you may have. 3 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 4 Any burning questions from the Board at this 5 time? 6 With that, I'd like to begin the public 7 testimony. 8 And leading off today I would like to welcome 9 Senator Martha Escutia, who has got a distinguished record 10 of legislation to protect public health, both SB 25, and 11 the most recent one, SB 352, to create buffer zones for 12 children and has received national recognition for her 13 work to protect public health for children from air 14 pollution. 15 Welcome, Senator. 16 SENATOR ESCUTIA: Thank you very much, Mr. 17 Chairman, and other members of the Board. Frankly, if I 18 got the national recognition on SB 25 it was because of 19 your efforts, Mr. Chairman, in jump starting the Board's 20 efforts in identifying, you know, the toxics that impacted 21 children the most. So I thank you and your Board members 22 for helping California become a leader in this and a role 23 model for the rest of the nation. 24 Good morning. I am Senator Martha Escutia, and I 25 represent the 30th Senate District in Los Angeles County, PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 56 1 which is literally on the other side of these hills, 2 including the communities of Whittier, Norwalk, Southgate, 3 Highland Park, and the bulk of East Los Angeles. 4 My constituents and I are particularly concerned 5 about the health impacts of air pollution and toxic 6 emissions on our children as well as the rest of our 7 communities. As you indicated, I am the author of Senate 8 Bill 25, which was the first law in the country to require 9 a reassessment of air quality standards to ensure that 10 they protect not only adults but also infants and 11 children. 12 And as you and I have spoken, you know, in the 13 past, Dr. Lloyd, you know that I come to this issue from a 14 very personal perspective. 15 Being a child of East Los Angeles, having 16 literally, you know, been born and reared in front of the 17 Pomona Freeway, right in front of the East L.A. 18 interchange, I lived and I played in front of that smoggy 19 interchange as a child. 20 As a State legislator, I saw firsthand the 21 environmental threats that continue to plague the children 22 in many of these low-income communities. 23 I listen to teachers of the junior high school in 24 my district who were complaining of miscarriages or 25 parents who were complaining that their kids were getting PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 57 1 bloody noses or were just, you know, fainting because of 2 some potential environmental hazards of a chrome plating 3 plant that was right next to the school in Bell Gardens. 4 And obviously as a mother and also as a 5 legislator, I could not just sit there and watch and do 6 nothing. So in 1997 I began my almost four-year effort to 7 get Senate Bill 25 signed into law. You know, it 8 sustained three vetoes by a Republican governor and then 9 finally was signed by Governor Davis in his first year in 10 office. 11 So as you can tell from my presence here today, 12 urging you to adopt new enhanced emissions control 13 measures, you see that my fight surely continues. And, 14 yes, I will acknowledge that we have made significant 15 progress in improving air quality these last two or three 16 decades. I'm a native Los Angelino. I have seen that the 17 air has gotten a little bit cleaner. Yet much I think 18 remains to be done to clean air to southern California 19 and, in particular, in those heavily impacted areas that I 20 represent in the 30th Senate district. 21 Not too long ago the AQMD completed the most 22 comprehensive study ever of urban toxic air pollution ever 23 undertaken. And the Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study 24 II, more simply known MATES II, show that the areas with 25 the greatest risk levels for airborne carcinogenic PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 58 1 emissions are in south central and the east side of Los 2 Angeles County. And I'm not surprised. That's my 3 district. And those are my constituents. That is where 4 my children live and reside. That's where they go to 5 school and that's where they play all day around. So to 6 still see that carcinogens and environmental hazards still 7 play a threat to my constituents is something that's very, 8 very important to me. 9 But I also called to your attention, Dr. Lloyd, 10 the study's other findings. And that was that, you know, 11 motor vehicles and other mobile sources of air pollution 12 are responsible for 90 percent of the cancer-causing air 13 pollutants in the south land. And yet only your Board and 14 U.S. EPA have control over the emission sources. 15 Let me further point out that while the study 16 only analyzed cancer risk, some of the pollutants studied 17 are known to cause other health problems, ranging from 18 asthma to developmental disabilities. And as you well 19 know, the science of environmental health is still 20 evolving. But there's more and more research being done 21 on that. And as the State gets more involved in 22 identifying, you know, environmental health hazards and 23 doing more research, I think we can finally find the 24 linkage between environmental hazards and health problems. 25 And we're hoping that, you know, soon enough we will come PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 59 1 with that kind of research to the Board, if not sooner. 2 So obviously the clean-up task is a formidable 3 challenge. But the burden should not fall unfairly on the 4 shoulders of, you know, either the local agencies or local 5 businesses. The AQMD and local businesses have worked 6 hard and long to reduce air pollution and to bring clean 7 air to their residents. I think now it's time for the 8 State and also for the federal agencies to step up to the 9 plate and to shoulder their fair share. And I stand 10 committed to help you get there. I still have three more 11 years in the State Senate. So use me. 12 (Laughter.) 13 SENATOR ESCUTIA: Your Board and U.S. EPA have 14 the sole authority over 80 percent of the ozone-forming 15 emission sources in the basin. And these are outside the 16 influence or authority of the AQMD or local businesses. 17 It is my understanding that AQMD has outlined 12 new 18 control measures with additional concepts that your Board 19 should consider for emission reductions. Many of these 20 benefits -- measures will benefit our low-income ethnic 21 minority communities that reside in these heavily polluted 22 areas. 23 I urge your Board to take a proactive stance. 24 And I know that you will because you have that type of 25 history. I still urge you to take a proactive stance to PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 60 1 commit to further pollution control measures. Without 2 such additional reductions of mobile source and area 3 source emissions, the clean air challenge will go 4 unfulfilled and our residents, particularly those who live 5 in areas of high pollution, will continue to suffer the 6 disproportionate health consequences. This is not 7 acceptable to me as a legislator, and it should not be 8 acceptable to you as an agency entrusted to protect our 9 public health from air pollution. 10 What is further troubling to me as a legislator, 11 and within the context of California in near bankruptcy, 12 is the possibility of losing federal highway funds should 13 we fail to meet the federal clean air standards in a 14 timely manner. 15 This puts in jeopardy funds that are badly needed 16 by the State to provide services to the community we 17 serve. And, again, this is not an acceptable outcome. So 18 I think that if we lose those funds, it would definitely 19 put the State in a position where we would have to find 20 somehow money to make that up. And I don't care what Mr. 21 Schwarzenegger says, there's no money tree out there, you 22 know, to find the funds to do everything he wants to do. 23 So obviously the possible loss of federal 24 funding, the recent increasing number of unhealthy air 25 days, and this year's Stage 1 smog episode, the first ever PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 61 1 since 1998, I think should sound a warning alarm to all 2 policymakers at the local, State, and federal level. Our 3 work is not over. I strongly urge you to adopt the 12 new 4 control measures recommended by my local agency, the AQMD. 5 And before I conclude, I'd like to make just one 6 final point. I would just like to respectfully suggest to 7 you that before any new enhanced control measure is 8 adopted, you must take into account its implementation and 9 its impact on minority and low-income communities. Many 10 times in pursuit of a worthwhile goal, we end up, you 11 know, doing more harm than good. 12 As you mandate the scrapping of older passenger 13 vehicles, will you have a buyback program and other 14 alternatives so that poor Latino, Asian, and black 15 families still have a means of transportation? That's 16 very important right now because we are in the midst of a 17 transportation strike. 18 Secondly, what incentives will be created so that 19 small Latino, black, and Asian businesses retrofit their 20 older heavy-duty trucks and buses to reduce smog forming 21 agents? We need to make sure that they can participate in 22 this program fully. Everybody believes in clean air. 23 We're just going to have to make sure they are able to 24 participate. 25 And, lastly, I notice that you had something PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 62 1 about gardeners and trying to get them into using, you 2 know, electric, you know, tools for their trade. And many 3 years ago we were all heavily involved in that fight, you 4 know, involving the jardineros, the gardeners, many of 5 them who are my constituents. 6 I would just have to ask you: How will gardeners 7 who rely on these tools of their trade to support their 8 families by tending to our lawns, because we do hire them, 9 how will they be assisted to transition over to zero 10 polluting electric models? Is there going to be some kind 11 of a subsidy to help them out? I mean are they going to 12 be receiving this equipment for free or at a very heavily 13 subsidized price? I mean that to me is very important. 14 So I would just caution that before we jump 15 towards these type of conclusions, that we take into 16 consideration perhaps the unintended consequences of what 17 is obviously very, you know, worthy goals, but we just 18 have to make sure that everybody becomes part of the 19 solution and not, you know, part of the problem. 20 So I close by urging you, as always, to show the 21 leadership that you have always shown, and to support for 22 the clean air costs for all of our residents by adopting 23 the AQMD recommendations through a thoughtful and a 24 phased-in approach that recognizes the impacts on 25 low-income communities. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 63 1 Again, I stand available to help you out in the 2 Legislature in whatever you may need to reach your goals. 3 Thank you very much, Dr. Lloyd. 4 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much, Senator 5 Escutia. 6 (Applause.) 7 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Again, we look forward to 8 continuing to work with you in the Legislature. And I'm 9 also delighted in your latter points there, because that's 10 precisely why, in fact, it's easy to write down on paper 11 where we get these tons from. It's the implementation to 12 make sure we protect all people that is very important. 13 So that's why what we've been directing staff and staff 14 has been working very closely with the AQMD staff to see 15 how in fact these programs are implemented. And that's 16 why we want to make sure that as we in fact gain some 17 precision there, we in fact protect those small 18 communities, small businesses, and those communities. 19 So -- 20 SENATOR ESCUTIA: Well, Dr. Lloyd, see -- well, 21 no, it's about finding a collective vision. It's not a 22 matter of implementing my vision, like a former governor 23 stated. But it's really more a matter of finding a 24 collective vision among all players and then working 25 together to try to implement that vision. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 64 1 So the players here are at different levels. You 2 know, it's not only policymakers. It's businesses, it's 3 the community, it's environmental advocates. And it's 4 just a matter of bringing everybody together. And I'm 5 sure that we can get there. 6 So, again, I stand committed to helping you out 7 in that endeavor. And I thank you very much for hearing 8 my comments. 9 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: We're committed to that. 10 Dr. Burke. 11 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: Your comments to me were 12 kind of moving because I sat on this very dais with one of 13 your fellow senators. Her husband was dying of cancer, 14 from what she felt was a life of living by freeways all 15 their life. And he was a legislator himself. 16 SENATOR ESCUTIA: Oh, yes, I know who you're 17 talking about. 18 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: And her worry was about him, 19 but also about her two children, who she feared were 20 raised in those same conditions. So there are those of us 21 who know that this is not a ten-year-from-now problem; 22 this is a 10-year or 20-year-ago problem. 23 SENATOR ESCUTIA: That's correct. 24 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: And in the implementation, 25 as you were speaking of the transition of like gardeners PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 65 1 for their equipment, we here at South Coast, as well as 2 other districts, I'm sure, had a heavily subsidized 3 electric lawn mower program where we had lines outside of 4 stadiums because there were so many people who wanted to 5 get these electric lawn mowers. And we plan on continuing 6 to do that. And that kind of transition in a subsidy I 7 think is a mandate on us. 8 SENATOR ESCUTIA: Thank you, Dr. Burke. Again, I 9 commit myself to helping both AQMD as well as the Board in 10 whatever efforts you may need in order to attain these 11 clean air goals. 12 Thank you so much. 13 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you for coming, 14 Senator. 15 Now we have four members from the South Coast 16 Board, the first whom is the Vice Chair, Dr. Roy Wilson, 17 also supervisor. 18 After that I've got down Jane Carney, Supervisor 19 Antonovich, and Cynthia Verdugo Peralta. 20 But if the Board wants to change that order, feel 21 free. 22 Welcome. 23 DR. WILSON: Chairman Lloyd, members of the 24 Board. I, too, want to welcome you to Diamond Bar. And 25 thank you for holding this very important hearing here in PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 66 1 southern California. 2 As you pointed out, I serve as Vice Chair of the 3 AQMD Governing Board, and also as Vice Chair of the 4 Riverside County Board of Supervisors. 5 Riverside County is a receptor county. Thanks to 6 the ocean breezes, we get much of the contaminants that 7 are generated in Orange and Los Angeles County. They blow 8 into our mountains and into our deserts. And they affect 9 the health of many of my constituents. 10 In fact, my constituents, many of them -- many of 11 them are elderly and many are young -- feel that I and you 12 are not doing enough to clean up the air. However, we 13 know that that isn't true. The State Air Resources Board 14 and local air districts have a long history of success. 15 Smog levels are greatly reduced from 20 years 16 ago. This has been accomplished through actions at the 17 federal, State, and local levels. The remarkable past 18 success provides a basis to be optimistic about the future 19 as long as our policy boards continue to push aggressively 20 for innovative pollution controls. 21 However, the South Coast Air Basin is at a 22 crossroads in this war on smog. In spite of the past 23 successes over the past five decades, the downward trend 24 in smog has leveled out and potentially has increased over 25 the last two years. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 67 1 Chairman Lloyd, you mentioned some of the figures 2 that we've experienced the past summer. 3 The mobile source control and air quality 4 management plan revisions that we are -- that we propose 5 set the course for our agency for the next three to five 6 years. At this critical juncture we must continue the war 7 on smog with a spirit of partnership, with each agency 8 doing everything within our abilities to reduce air 9 pollutant emissions. 10 The so-called low hanging fruit has long been 11 harvested, relative to emission controls for both mobile 12 and stationary sources. As we ask your Board's continued 13 assistance, we recognize that the cheapest and most easily 14 achieved pollution controls have been implemented. 15 Nonetheless, significant further reductions in pollution 16 must be achieved to attain clean air. 17 The South Coast Governing Board is committed to 18 do its fair share of the heavy lifting, and wants to work 19 with CARB and the U.S. EPA to ensure that all feasible and 20 cost effective measures are implemented in a timely 21 manner. The State component of the SIP must be revised to 22 minimize the size of the black box or long-term emission 23 reductions. 24 A huge and growing black box is an unintentional 25 invitation to delays. We believe that CARB can readily PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 68 1 address concerns about the size of the black box by 2 including more aggressive control commitments from the 3 list of measures provided by South Coast and others. 4 We understand that CARB is proposing 23 5 additional tons per day of short-term controls, of which 6 20 tons are NOx. We believe this amendment is a 7 meaningful start in the right direction, but ultimately 8 falls short of what is feasible and necessary to clean the 9 air in southern California and elsewhere in the State. 10 The South Coast Governing Board asked me to ask 11 for a number of amendments. But I believe, as I read 12 through the motion that Dr. Burke has provided, they have 13 been incorporated into this motion. And so I will spare 14 you of repeating those remarks and just urge you to please 15 adopt the motion that is before you at this moment. 16 To iterate, we need your help if southern 17 California is to achieve clean air, and time is of the 18 essence. Our backs are up against the wall. And we will 19 continue to regulate everything from shoe repair glue to 20 refineries where it is cost effective and feasible to do 21 so. 22 We respectfully request that CARB match that 23 intense level of efforts and accelerate State focus on 24 mobile source emissions. 25 Today you have an opportunity to again PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 69 1 demonstrate your commitment to public health by showing my 2 constituents in Riverside County and all of the 3 constituents in southern California that you care about 4 cleaning up the air that we see and breathe. 5 And to maybe paraphrase the Governor-elect, let 6 me say, "Please save California." 7 Thank you. 8 (Applause.) 9 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thanks, Supervisor. Thank 10 you very much. 11 And thank both of you, Jane and Roy, for coming 12 up to Sacramento and meeting. 13 MS. CARNEY: Thank you. 14 Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the 15 Board. Thank you for allowing the testimony this morning. 16 I'm Jane Carney. I'm the Senate Rules Committee 17 appointee to the South Coast Air Quality Management 18 District Governing Board. 19 I would like to begin by thanking you for the 20 children's health study. The results that have come in so 21 far, even though they're interim results, have already 22 made a big difference in how we view our task. It's 23 changed our policy. It has helped us focus funds in 24 certain directions and on certain programs. And it's been 25 very informative to us. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 70 1 And so I thank you for that and the many 2 courageous steps that your Board has taken over the past 3 many years. 4 I have to say, before I was on the South Coast 5 Air Quality Management District Board, and being a 6 Californian, one of the proudest things was the 7 accomplishments of the Air Resources Board. You really 8 have shown the nation that a regulatory program can work. 9 But the difficulty we now face of course is that 10 despite all the progress, the task we have ahead of us is 11 huge. And if from South Coast some of our suggestions 12 have sounded strident, it's only out of our sense of 13 urgency. The task ahead looks so big. 14 So I encourage you to adopt the most rigorous 15 AQMP that's reasonable. This is not just an academic or a 16 bureaucratic exercise. This is the road map for how we're 17 going to get to clean air. And I encourage you to include 18 all feasible short-term measures. 19 I also encourage you to commit to a definite 20 schedule to review black box measures so that you stay on 21 top of this, your staff stays on top of this, members of 22 the public have a chance to be involved, and that we 23 really address the black box measures because of course 24 that in itself remains a very scary item. 25 I would also like to reiterate that we look PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 71 1 forward to working together with you, even more 2 effectively than in the past. There are legislative 3 efforts that we should jointly sponsor. There are things 4 we need to do: Incentive funding programs for retrofits, 5 for fleet turnover. And we look forward to working with 6 you on those. 7 Thank you very much. 8 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 9 Supervisor Antonovich, and then Cynthia Verdugo 10 Peralta. 11 MR. ANTONOVICH: Mr. Chairman, members. It's a 12 different perspective speaking from this side of the 13 podium. 14 (Laughter.) 15 MR. ANTONOVICH: But I see one familiar face up 16 there. 17 Anyway, we appreciate you having this hearing in 18 our facility. As you know, I'm Mike Antonovich. I'm 19 Supervisor of Los Angeles County. And appreciate your 20 views and coming together. I especially want to thank the 21 ARB for holding this hearing. 22 In August the AQMD Governing Board adopted the 23 2003 quality management plan. And in this proposal we 24 outlined our region's air pollution control strategies to 25 meet the federal health standards for ozone by 2010 and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 72 1 the fine particulates by 2006. 2 We also demonstrated how the federal standard for 3 carbon monoxide, achieved for the first time at the end of 4 last year, will be maintained. 5 Our 2003 AQMP clearly identified 24 pollution 6 control measures to be adopted by our board designated to 7 further reduce emissions from business, industry, and 8 paints. But we also identified 29 measures to be adopted 9 by CARB and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to 10 further reduce pollution from cars, trucks, construction 11 equipment, aircraft, ships, and consumer products. 12 And it's no surprise to anyone here that ozone 13 and fine particulates are two of our region's worst 14 pollutants, responsible for a wide range of health effects 15 including slowed lung growth in children, worsening of 16 asthma symptoms, increase of susceptibility to respiratory 17 infections, increased hospital emissions, and increased 18 death rates. 19 To reduce emissions we need to be proactive and 20 creative, to pursue market-based incentives such as 21 reclaim emission trades, and be sensitive to the economic 22 impacts any rule or regulation would have. However, we 23 can't do it alone. And this is where we need your help as 24 a state environmental agency to initiate emission 25 reduction programs for mobile sources that bring pollution PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 73 1 into our basin. 2 There are many areas in which we can do a better 3 job in our efforts to achieve these necessary reductions. 4 We need to focus attention to the ports and surrounding 5 communities with creative and visionary projects, which 6 are key. We should encourage our ports to extend their 7 hours, like other ports across this world have done, to 8 enable trucks to operate on non-peak hours and explore 9 programs to bring freight from ports on natural-gas-fueled 10 locomotives to remote distribution facilities. 11 We had one proposal that was given to me relative 12 to a facility to be located in Antelope Valley via natural 13 gas locomotives. 14 Extending port hours will also reduce the traffic 15 congestion and pollution by eliminating the thousands of 16 idling 18-wheel diesel trucks at the ports and the same 17 trucks that are jamming our freeways, the 710, and if you 18 had the opportunity, you had the opportunity of driving on 19 the 16 to experience that. 20 It is also a very severe safety problem. And, as 21 you know, about two weeks ago we had a severe fatality on 22 the 710, which is compounded by the fact that the ports 23 are trying to jam all their operations into a fixed 24 timeframe instead of operating on a 24-hour basis as other 25 major ports do in the nation. Across the seas as well. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 74 1 The Air Resources Board can be instrumental in 2 significantly impacting air quality in our region by 3 reducing emissions from mobile sources. Along with ports, 4 we need to examine impacts from major developments. 5 Recently I attended an AQMD town hall meeting in 6 Santa Clarita where we looked at the air quality impacts 7 of a gravel pit operation. And it's quite disturbing to 8 learn that nearly 1,600 truck trips, 18-wheel diesel 9 trucks, will be associated with this one project alone, 10 having a significant impact on the surrounding community. 11 CARB needs to examine the truck issue and look to 12 promote clean fuel alternatives, particulate traps, and 13 off-peak delivery schedules to mitigate impacts. 14 We can and must do more to clean up older 15 polluting vehicles and continue our efforts to promote 16 clean technologies such as natural gas and hydrogen fuel 17 alternatives. 18 By 2010, pre-1998 cars will account for 25 19 percent of the miles driven by -- but 80 percent of the 20 air pollution from cars, according to your own studies. 21 And, again, that's 25 percent of the miles driven but 80 22 percent of air pollution from cars. And those are 23 pre-1998 vehicles. 24 In fact, your latest data shows that emissions 25 from cars, trucks, and other vehicles, particularly the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 75 1 older cars, are significantly higher than previously 2 estimated. For the year 1997, your Volatile Organic 3 Compound emissions from on-road vehicles are 533 tons per 4 day, 20 percent higher than you had previously estimated. 5 On-road vehicle emissions of oxides of nitrogen are 841 6 tons per day, again 39 percent higher than previously 7 estimated. 8 Now, the higher estimates are due to a number of 9 factors, including better quantification of emissions from 10 pre-1998 cars. But pre-1998 cars have higher emissions 11 because they were subjected to less stringent emission 12 standards when manufacturers -- and their emission control 13 systems may deteriorate over time. And that's another 14 reason why you need programs such as the buyback programs 15 that will allow these vehicles to get off the road and 16 have cleaner operating vehicles replacing them. 17 So in summary, I would urge you to look seriously 18 at heavy-duty trucks, other mobile sources, and ports as a 19 means to achieve our clean air goals. 20 And thank you very much. 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you, Supervisor. 22 (Applause.) 23 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Again, I'd like to reiterate 24 your concern with some of the heavy-duty vehicles. And 25 having been down to the port, seeing that progress has PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 76 1 been made. But the enormous task before us on that is 2 significant and it's going to need the help of everyone. 3 I guess -- I think we had a question. 4 Professor Friedman. 5 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: I have a question 6 for staff that was triggered by the last speaker comments. 7 Who has jurisdiction over the hours of operation 8 of the ports? 9 GENERAL COUNSEL JOHNSTON: That would be local, 10 either the Port Authority or the Port Authority in 11 conjunction with a local district. 12 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: We have -- as a 13 statewide board, we have no authority over that, do we? 14 GENERAL COUNSEL JOHNSTON: Not over hours of 15 operation, no. 16 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: And the idling 17 though of the trucks, whenever they may be there or 18 whenever the port's operating? 19 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: The Board has on 20 its calendar for consideration a regulatory measure that 21 would restrict idling of in-use vehicles. And then next 22 year a device for the new trucks being built that also 23 turns them off so they idle less. But until that's 24 adopted, we can't simply compel them to stop. You have to 25 do the regulatory action first. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 77 1 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: And getting the 2 older vehicles that are more -- higher emitters off the 3 road or having them tested or buying them back, is that 4 something we have any authority over? 5 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: That is a major 6 feature of the Air Resources Board's control plan and of 7 this SIP. 8 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: But I understand 9 that takes legislation and funding. 10 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Pieces of it do. 11 We have a series of regulations for the Board's 12 consideration for every kind of fleet type that there is, 13 and move ourselves eventually to private owned of 14 individual vehicles. And we believe by the time we reach 15 that segment of the community, we're going to need 16 incentive funding to help us accomplish the kinds of 17 emission reductions that are necessary. 18 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: Unless you go the other way. 19 You see -- I wanted to speak about Supervisor Antonovich's 20 gravel pit concern. 21 But if -- you can do something to incentivize 22 them to reduce the emissions and in a given length of 23 time, or you can penalize them in a manner which doesn't 24 cost you money if you get to legislation, so that they 25 have to spread their hours of operation over a time. So, PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 78 1 you know -- 2 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: You're back to the 3 ports? 4 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: I'm back to the -- you know, 5 I'm all over the place. You know me, Professor. You 6 know, can't keep this -- 7 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: But when you say, 8 "you" -- does the ARB have any authority to impose 9 penalties on a port, an autonomous state political 10 subdivision, such as the Port of Los Angeles, and its 11 decisions as to when it will operate and when it won't 12 operate? 13 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: No, not without 14 expressed statutory authorization. 15 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: But does a local 16 district have that authority? 17 GENERAL COUNSEL JOHNSTON: The local district as 18 a source in the district could look at the port and the 19 emissions associated with the port. 20 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: And assess 21 penalties? 22 GENERAL COUNSEL JOHNSTON: Based on their 23 regulations and rules, yes. 24 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: So is that part of 25 their plan? Is that what -- is that in what they're PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 79 1 proposing that we're asked to review and approve? 2 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: The district has 3 a future measure for evaluation in 2004 how to accomplish 4 a reduction in hotelling emissions from vessels. I don't 5 believe they have a separate emission for a bubble over 6 the port land side, which is what we're talking about now. 7 We have both categories sort of wrapped up in our future 8 study measure, which we're going to do at the same time as 9 the Disrict's evaluation. So I think all of it is fair 10 game for evaluation. 11 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I think on this issue also it 12 will be helpful when Mr. Mark Pisano comes up from SCAG, 13 who's probably addressed some of these issues. I know 14 he's going to testify. Maybe that's an issue that could 15 be addressed then. 16 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: The Port 17 Authority is here today too also, I think. 18 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: I can't wait to see them. 19 (Laughter.) 20 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: But what about his question 21 as it related to the gravel pit and -- how many truckloads 22 of stuff do they -- 23 MR. ANTONOVICH: Sixteen hundred a day. 24 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: A day? 25 MR. ANTONOVICH: Be seven days a week. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 80 1 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: Does ARB have any way that 2 they can look into controlling that? 3 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: The principal 4 measure for controlling indirect sources, you know, any 5 source that draws a great deal of traffic to it, be it 6 trucks or vehicles, is district indirect source authority 7 to set up permit conditions for such sources. They're 8 also addressed very often through CEQA and proposed 9 mitigation measures that would restrict the number of 10 trucks that can come at any time, change the fuel the 11 trucks are run on, change the location of the entry point 12 so that it doesn't go by houses but comes through a more 13 remote corner, things of that nature. They are -- 14 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: So we can do that? We, 15 being ARB. 16 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: No, South Coast 17 can do that. 18 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: South Coast can do that? 19 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: And the Air 20 Resources Board could comment on CEQA documents as well 21 and suggest these mitigations to local land-use 22 authorities, whoever's the lead agency for CEQA. The Air 23 Resources Board's regulatory authority is over the trucks 24 themselves as they roll off the assembly or as they are in 25 fleets, instructing fleets to retrofit, modernize, PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 81 1 accelerate retirement of older fleets. But it's not tied 2 to individual points at which those trucks congregate. 3 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: Have we ever in the history 4 of ARB done demonstration projects or to try and go get 5 legislative authority to do that to see how effective it 6 is? 7 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: To do what, to 8 have an indirect source rule that addresses trucks? 9 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: Yes, or a location. For 10 example, a port, a gravel pit, something like that, if it 11 is a major problem. Okay? You know, I was just chatting 12 with Mr. Calhoun, who travels on the 710. He says, you 13 know, it's horrible. Have we ever said, you know, let's 14 go after legislative authority to control something that 15 is -- the Alameda corridor has changed the whole 16 complexion of this area, we should look at it as a 17 demonstration project and say this is how we deal with 18 this; have we ever done that? 19 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: The Air Resources 20 Board recommended to the Legislature as part of the 21 California Clean Air Act back in 1988 that it include 22 indirect source control measures and reasonably available 23 transportation controls, which at the time were deemed to 24 be ride sharing -- mandatory ride sharing and other 25 things. And at that time we also produced guidance PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 82 1 documents that talked about how one would go about doing 2 it, mostly focused on passenger cars. 3 Since then we have worked on more detailed 4 analysis of warehousing and truck concentrations. And in 5 the land-use guidance document we're working on right now 6 under the Environmental Justice Program, it would be one 7 of the supplements we're providing to local governments: 8 These are the kinds of emissions you can expect from a 9 facility that draws truck traffic. These are the source 10 of mitigation measures that could be employed. 11 And so information is available. 12 In answer to the last part of your question, no, 13 we haven't done anything on the Alameda corridor as a 14 defined source of pollution with a bubble over it and how 15 we would go about accomplishing -- 16 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: Have you ever talked about 17 it, thought about it? 18 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Oh, we've talked 19 about it a lot. And we're taking tours. Allen's first 20 year -- the Chairman's first year, he had a helicopter 21 tour of the Alameda corridor. 22 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: Yeah, he flew over the 23 pollution. But -- 24 (Laughter.) 25 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: And we've had -- PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 83 1 -- you know, what we wanted to do here is 2 breaking down into the real problem. 3 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Well, we've also 4 had the toxics tour on the ground. 5 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I think that's a little bit 6 unfair, Dr. Burke. We had a town hall meeting that night. 7 We were -- a tour, sir. 8 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: No, I was just kidding. 9 Alan, don't take it personally. I was just kidding. 10 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: No, we've looked 11 at it a lot. 12 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: No, I wasn't. 13 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: But the District 14 does have the authority to do it now under indirect source 15 control authority. 16 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: And I just wanted to 17 finish my questions. 18 It appears to me -- and this is early on and a 19 lot of testimony that will follow. But in having read the 20 voluminous submissions we've received from the 21 environmental community and its representatives from the 22 district -- the local district and the testimony of the 23 distinguished board members thus far, it appears to me 24 that there have been identified -- some would quantify it 25 specifically as 12 or -- a certain number of control PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 84 1 measures that apparently are not included at this time, 2 fully or at all, in the staff proposal for us to adopt 3 now, which some say are feasible and should be included. 4 And only -- I assume only we can do it or it's important 5 that we play a prominent role in adopting such measures. 6 And which others and the staff is indicating are not 7 currently feasible, either because -- or at least we can't 8 commit except conditionally to work toward that goal 9 because we don't have the funding source or have the 10 authority. It's not something we can effect and 11 implement. 12 And as we go forward I'd appreciate it if we 13 could identify the respective positions here so we can try 14 to -- I mean everybody wants to clean up the air and 15 everybody wants to do it from any source that's feasible 16 and practicable. And we can talk all day long about our 17 common aspirations. But until we -- in my view, until we 18 can get down to the nitty-gritty of what can now be 19 committed to for purposes of this SIP, by the county -- by 20 the local district; and where is it, if at all, deficient; 21 where can it do more; should do more, do we think? Where 22 can we do more realistically? And if not, why not? 23 And then of course we really don't have much 24 leverage with the Feds. And a lot of the problem is with 25 interstate matters that we don't have much authority over. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 85 1 But collectively we can cooperate, and everybody wants 2 cooperation and we're going to cooperate. Hopefully, 3 there will be workshops and dialogues continuing as they 4 have in the past. 5 So my hope is that as we hear these speeches -- I 6 mean presentations, that we will be able to come closer to 7 getting a sense of where are we apart, and then try to 8 resolve that gap. 9 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: The Professor always hits 10 the nail on the head. He always hits the nail on the 11 head. There is only one thing I would add to that. When 12 they identify what's theirs, what's ours, what we might 13 do, what we could do, what we shouldn't do -- 14 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: What could we do 15 together, how we can help each other? 16 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: You should also add to that 17 list what they'd be willing to turn over to South Coast if 18 South Coast could find the money. You know, don't tell me 19 that we don't have the money. Say we don't have the money 20 to do this. But if South Coast could go find the money to 21 do this, you could go do it, and we'd authorize this -- 22 I'm sure we'd be very appreciative of that. 23 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Yeah, I certainly 24 accept that. 25 Thank you for -- PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 86 1 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 2 Another point with Supervisor Antonovich, you 3 brought up there, which I think was an important one. It 4 was just more of an aside, but the importance of looking 5 at fine particles. And while this is an ozone plan, fine 6 particles is important. That's why you heard staff -- we 7 couldn't understand why, in fact, there was just this 8 willingness to just say, well, let's increase the carrying 9 capacity for NOx and let's get rid of those tens of nearly 10 hundred tons of NOx. Because those were in the air and 11 people are breathing those. So there's, again, some -- at 12 least I'm waiting to hear that explanation if in fact 13 you're pushing to get down to one ton and yet all of a 14 sudden you can throw out NOx tons because in fact EPA's 15 not going to implement that. We either have a rigorous 16 modeling program, a rigorous commitment or we don't. And 17 throwing that aside -- throwing NOx aside, all those tons 18 of NOx, doesn't make any technical sense. 19 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Yes, Mr. McKinnon. 20 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: Yeah, I think it's real 21 important as we work through this today that we don't 22 muddle in issues that can be resolved other ways. And I 23 want to go to the gravel pit example. 24 I'm real familiar with a cement plant in another 25 part of the state where the land-use agency is the county PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 87 1 supervisors. And the county supervisors worked with that 2 cement plant to implement a transportation plan that mixed 3 rail and trucking and minimized the trucking by maximizing 4 the rail. 5 And there's all sorts of notions that can be 6 worked out. And it's very clear to me that when you're 7 talking about that many truck trips, that it's really a 8 land-use planning strategy. Not to discount that we need 9 to clean up diesel. We understand that and I think the 10 record of this Board is that we've moved heavily in that 11 direction. 12 So I think it -- I've heard, you know, both in 13 reading documents that have come towards us and sort of in 14 testimony today, there's sort of this, "Well, you're not 15 doing enough and the feds are not doing enough." And, you 16 know, frankly, we need to sort out where that's reality 17 and we need to make sure that we don't include things 18 where that isn't reality. 19 And, frankly, you know, while we're at it, the 20 federal control of locomotives, jet airplanes, and ships 21 is really, really a concern to me. Because as we work at 22 making the air cleaner, the percentage that comes from 23 federal sources grows because we're shrinking the local 24 and the state. But as we get our job done, that piece 25 that is federally controlled grows. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 88 1 And I have a lot of respect from my sort of 2 background in life that those areas that are regulated by 3 the feds are going to be the most difficult to get at. 4 They're going to take a long time. Trains don't get 5 engines very often. Airplane engines and airplane 6 development is very costly and it takes a long time to 7 develop them. 8 And I'll just say it, it is irresponsible for the 9 federal government not to have a slow careful plan that 10 moves through those sources, because what it's going to 11 end up turning into is, as we do our job and South Coast 12 does their job, that federal piece of this is going to get 13 so big it will be a crisis. And then someone will be 14 forced into doing something outrageous to control 15 emissions from ships and airplanes and locomotives. It's 16 something that's going to take time, and they need to get 17 started on it. 18 Thanks. 19 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 20 Thank you. 21 Thank you, Supervisor. 22 After this last Board member from the South Coast 23 AQMD we've now got nearly 100 witnesses. So I'm going to 24 have to limit those after this one to three minutes. 25 Otherwise, we're not going to get through the witness list PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 89 1 today, let alone this evening. So I hope you understand 2 that. 3 So I think I would reiterate Professor Friedman's 4 point, to highlight here some of the differences between 5 what you think that we could, what's feasible, and how we 6 might go about that. Because, as you say, I think you've 7 heard today from all of us on this side and in the 8 audience, there's a dedicated commitment to work together 9 to get cleaner air. And we certainly recognize the need 10 for that. 11 With that, Cynthia. 12 Welcome. 13 MS. PERALTA: Thank you, Dr. Lloyd. It's been a 14 long time since I've seen you. 15 I'd like to add my words of welcome to all of the 16 CARB Board members today. We are very happy to have you 17 here in South Coast and be able to listen to the comments 18 from the public that is very concerned about what's going 19 on in South Coast. 20 I did want to add one bit of information in 21 regards to the gravel pits. They are beginning to be 22 something that we are looking at very closely due to the 23 fact that there's a problem with the fugitive dust that 24 they create. There are not only some in the Santa Clarita 25 Valley, we have six in the San Gabriel Valley, in the San PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 90 1 Bernardino area, and I believe two that border the Orange 2 County / Riverside area. And they are becoming more of a 3 problem. We have issued four notices of violation on four 4 of the facilities. So I just wanted you to be aware of 5 that. 6 I am here today in hopes that we can come to a 7 resolution which will be in the interests of the 8 constituents we both serve, the people of the South Coast 9 AQMD. You may have already seen our MATES II study, 10 especially the map indicating the emissions of diesel 11 particulate 2.5 -- PM 2.5. However, if you were to 12 overlay the map of our freeways, you would see that the 13 concentration of particulates follows the path of the 14 freeways. Except for the particulates that extend out 15 over the ocean; that is, where the ports are located. 16 In addition, these paths of diesel particulate 17 emissions also border the neighborhoods of low-income and 18 minority residents, who are disproportionately impacted by 19 air pollution. You will hear from people today about the 20 health effects of air pollution our residents are 21 suffering from, including asthma, emphysema, and other 22 respiratory ailments. 23 I know this problem all too well, as all three of 24 my immediate families members are asthmatics, including my 25 husband, who is the most chronic and has suffered with PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 91 1 this disease all his life. They are the three reasons I 2 originally became involved with the AQMD ten years ago. 3 We at the AQMD have been working hard with our 4 local businesses to reduce emissions in our basin. 5 However, it is becoming increasingly difficult to balance 6 the need for a robust economy and the need for cleaner 7 air. We are squeezing many businesses to the point that 8 we are squeezing them out of the basin. 9 CARB needs to develop strategies to reduce NOx 10 emissions from on-road and off-road heavy-duty engines and 11 older model light-duty vehicles. CARB needs to 12 incorporate truck modernization programs as well. 13 In addition, there needs to be an adoption of 14 more stringent regulations for cleaner gasoline and diesel 15 fuels as well as lowering the sulfur content. This is 16 especially important given that that in 2006 federal 17 requirements will result in diesel fuel with a lower 18 sulfur content than current gasoline. 19 With respect to diesel fuel, new technologies 20 have been developed which enable the production of 21 ultra-low emission diesel fuel production from both 22 natural gas and renewable feed stocks. The gas-to-liquid 23 technology is capable of producing the adoption of new 24 fuel regulations in time to achieve needed emission 25 reductions by 2010. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 92 1 I, along with my fellow Board member, Len 2 Paulitz, serve on the California Fuel Cell Partnership 3 Steering Team on behalf of AQMD. Along with your 4 Chairman, Dr. Lloyd, we are trying to bring hydrogen fuel 5 cell vehicles to commercialization, resulting in reduced 6 emissions and reduced dependency on foreign oil. In 7 addition, we at AQMD are trying to develop a network of 8 hydrogen refueling stations for fuel cell vehicles as well 9 as hydrogen internal combustion engines. 10 While I fully support these worthy goals, they 11 are not going to help us reduce emissions in the 12 short-term, nor help us reach attainment by 2010. 13 While we are waiting for these advanced 14 technologies to enter the market, CARB must do much more 15 to reduce emissions by developing other short-term 16 technologies such as plug-in hybrids as well as off-road 17 and off-peak strategies. 18 As a 28-year energy efficiency specialist, I am 19 particularly interested in the potential of electric-drive 20 propulsion, both on and off road. The electrification of 21 forklifts, airport ground service equipment, golf carts, 22 truck stops, and truck refrigeration is a great source for 23 emission reduction. 24 In addition, I don't think the full potential of 25 off-peak charging has been looked into as a business case. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 93 1 There is tremendous savings to a business if they contact 2 their local utility to negotiate a lower KWH rate during 3 off-peak hours. In some cases it may be as low as 7 cents 4 per kilowatt hour, which is a far cry from 19 cents per 5 kilowatt hour and up. 6 California's ports and railroads must also do 7 their fair share to reduce emissions, and it is up to CARB 8 to make this happen. 9 CARB should introduce regulations to accelerate 10 the use of electric power by ships docked at California 11 ports. This is consistent with similar commitments by 12 other Pacific Coast states. In addition, there should be 13 a requirement for them to use cleaner diesel fuel or other 14 ultra-low emission diesel fuel for ships while in 15 California coastal waters. 16 We also have many railroads throughout the South 17 Coast Basin. There should be better utilization in an 18 effort to reduce on-road truck emissions from the ports. 19 They should also be required to use cleaner fuels in 20 engines in all ozone nonattainment areas. 21 There should be a stronger effort to find the 22 best mix between electrification and the use of 23 low-emission diesel fuels. 24 Expanding the use of solar energy and other 25 renewable technologies to achieve NOx reductions and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 94 1 expanded use of zero and near-zero electric power 2 production is very important. 3 Substituting solar hot water heaters in new 4 residential and commercial buildings is increasingly cost 5 effective and also quantifiable. 6 CARB should develop and adopt an air quality 7 element for the State's energy plan to ensure that by 2010 8 California is achieving the lowest possible emission 9 levels from its electrical power system through increased 10 energy efficiency, ultra-clean distributed technologies, 11 renewable resources, and ultra-low emission combined cycle 12 power plants. 13 Despite the promise of near-zero combustion 14 control technologies like ScoNOx, these technologies have 15 received limited support and recognition from CARB. I 16 would encourage CARB to look into them more thoroughly. 17 CARB also has the ability to demand action by the 18 California Independent System Operator to revise 19 electricity dispatch procedures so that the lowest 20 emission rate and most efficient electric units are 21 dispatched ahead of dirtier, less efficient units. 22 We look to the California Air Resources Board as 23 the lead agency to point the State in the right direction 24 for statewide ozone attainment and to bring necessary 25 attention to the critical policy issues. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 95 1 The South Coast Air Quality Management District's 2 AQMP is the first of several similar plans that will 3 ultimately rely heavily on new statewide mobile source 4 measures to demonstrate attainment. 5 However, if CARB cannot develop and implement 6 these needed measures, we at South Coast AQMD are asking 7 for the authority to implement them ourselves. While we 8 would prefer to do it in cooperation and partnership with 9 CARB, it must be recognized that we are in dire straits 10 here in the South Coast Basin. It is adversely affecting 11 our economy and the health of our residents. The 12 situation is only getting worse and the air is only 13 getting dirtier. We very much need your help. 14 Thank you. 15 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much, Cynthia. 16 Joe, you have a question. 17 Mr. Calhoun. 18 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: Yes, Mr. Chairman. 19 I'd like to go back to the previous discussion 20 that we had a few moments ago regarding the federal 21 government, not so much of you. But have we ever had any 22 success in getting the federal agencies involved in trying 23 to pick up their share of the responsibility for clearly 24 those items that have fallen -- that fall within their 25 area of responsibility? PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 96 1 CHIEF DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER CACKETTE: Yes. 2 We have had considerable success in the '94 SIP. The 3 Board approved measures that were essentially, not 4 legally, assigned to the federal government to implement, 5 one of them -- 6 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: What'd they do about it 7 though? 8 CHIEF DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER CACKETTE: One of 9 them was the much tighter emission standards for 10 particulate and NOx from heavy-duty trucks. We set out 11 what -- in the plan what we expected the emission 12 reductions to be, and federal government adopted 13 regulations that met those. 14 They did the same thing for off-road vehicles. 15 We had a specific number of tons in the SIP. We went and 16 negotiated with them. And that's an important area, 17 off-road diesels, because we are preempted from 18 controlling part of that group of engines. And we managed 19 to negotiate with EPA and the industry a program that got 20 exactly the number of tons that was in the '94 SIP. 21 So we did have success in those areas. 22 They also came through on locomotive emission 23 controls which were consistent with the '94 SIP. 24 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: The places we've 25 had less successes is where EPA itself is heavily PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 97 1 constrained by other issues like safety and aviation or by 2 international law as they try to negotiate marine vessel 3 changes through the International Maritime Organization. 4 And we've had discussions with EPA about their 5 ability to adopt measures that would apply in California 6 only, that are not necessary in other nonattainment parts 7 of the country. The diesel rules in fact helped 8 everywhere, so they had an easier time moving that through 9 OMB and their regulatory process. They're more concerned 10 about the ability to adopt regulations for California 11 alone. 12 And what we've talked to them most recently about 13 is, "Well, if you can't regulate in our state, can you 14 bring more dollars to our state?" so that we can 15 accelerate the turnover of existing diesel engines that 16 they would have regulated. And, again, we're in sort of a 17 deficit situation at the State and federal level, but 18 they're open to the idea. They have a very small 19 downpayment of $5 million for school buses nationwide. We 20 want them to expand that substantially and we want more 21 dollars to come to California. 22 CHIEF DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER CACKETTE: And I 23 gave you three success stories where it has worked in the 24 past. But I think it's fair to acknowledge that aircraft 25 emissions, which is one of the only sources that is a PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 98 1 growing source of emissions -- jet aircraft, commercial 2 aircraft -- is one that's very difficult. While EPA I 3 think is quite enthusiastic and energetic about trying to 4 get reductions, they have to get concurrence with the 5 Federal Aviation Administration, who then represents the 6 United States on an international treaty organization that 7 makes the final decision. 8 And I can tell you, quite frankly, that the kind 9 of approach we would take would be technology forcing to 10 reduce emissions by substantial numbers, like 50 percent 11 or more, and that international organization typically 12 looks for 10 percent reductions based on off-the-shelf 13 technology. So there's a huge gap there between what we 14 at the local level, State level, would like to do and what 15 these combined federal and international agencies are 16 willing to do. 17 So that's not a success story. And we're still 18 fighting for that, but it's much more difficult than the 19 other three cases I commented on. 20 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: Thank you. 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you, Cynthia. We have 22 copies of your statement? 23 MS. PERALTA: I can provide that. 24 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Great. Thank you very much. 25 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: One quick comment? PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 99 1 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Yes. 2 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: Mr. Chairman, I'm glad that 3 the Board finally got to meet some of our best board 4 members from South Coast. I know I fail to represent them 5 properly from time to time on ARB. But at least you know 6 that behind me are people who are reasonable and lucid and 7 not emotional and all those other things. So I am glad 8 that they're all here this morning because they are a fine 9 representation of our board. 10 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: You can be all of those 11 things, but it's not at the same time. 12 (Laughter.) 13 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: I'm working on it. 14 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Next we have a special 15 request. Jonah Ramirez. 16 JONAH RAMIREZ: My name is Jonah. I am 7-years 17 old. This year I was diagnosed with asthma. "Why?" I 18 asked. No one in my family has asthma. No one in my 19 family smokes. I swim, skateboard, play soccer, and I 20 play roller hockey. 21 How did I get asthma? A recent study showed that 22 kids who play three or more sports in smoggy areas like 23 where I live are three times more likely to develop 24 asthma. So the reason I got asthma is because I'm a 25 healthy athletic 7-year old who loves to play outside. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 100 1 Something is wrong here. 2 Why am I forced to breathe the air that makes me 3 sick? I can't get away from it. It is always there, and 4 I have to breathe. My question is: Why is it okay for 5 the air I breathe to be so unhealthy that it makes me 6 sick? We have laws protecting jumping rats, yet we allow 7 our air to become so unhealthy kids are forced to eat 8 their lunch inside while at school. 9 I am a victim of crime. Yes, of a crime. I 10 believe it is air that makes a crime that when people 11 including kids are forced to breathe air that makes them 12 sick. 13 Today, I ask you to help me, to help all 14 children, to help all people. Change the law. Change the 15 guidelines. Change our air. Isn't it about time? 16 (Applause.) 17 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much, and 18 thank you for coming. And, rest assured, we are committed 19 to work with you. I realize it won't probably come fast 20 enough for you, but we are committed. And thank you so 21 much. And, thank you, it was great reading. 22 Now, I say I'm going to have to implement the 23 three minutes, or Paul is, on that because we really, like 24 I say, have close to 100 people. 25 Josef Kekula, Mayor Pro Tem Margaret Clark, and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 101 1 Dee Allen. 2 If you could come up. 3 Ophelia Hernandez, Jackie McHenry. 4 MS. CLARK: Dan Arguello, Councilman from 5 Alhambra, had to leave. 6 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Oh, okay. 7 MS. CLARK: So I'm Margaret Clark, Mayor Pro Tem 8 in Rosemead. And since Dan and I represent a similar 9 constituency of approximately 85 percent minority, we have 10 similar issues. 11 I'm frankly torn on this issue because, as a 12 member of SCAG, we need the plan adopted so that we don't 13 lose federal funding. But the frustration is the federal 14 government has jurisdiction over so much of this 15 pollution, that it's kind of a Catch 22 here. 16 I do appreciate Dr. Burke's amendment and am in 17 support of that. And I do hope that there is revisiting, 18 as he says, of these issues. 19 Probably my biggest frustration is I serve on the 20 AQMD Local Government Small Business Advisory Group. And 21 the issue that we are having to clamp down on is the 22 stationary sources when the huge amount of pollution is 23 coming from the mobile sources and the trains, planes and 24 ships. It's just very frustrating to think that we have 25 to clamp down on the shoe repair glue. Now, that's fine PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 102 1 to be doing that. But when we have this huge elephant out 2 here, it's like what I consider one of the greatest 3 philosophers that ever lived described it as choking on a 4 tiny, tiny gnat and swallowing a camel. And the camel is 5 this huge amount of pollution that the South Coast Air 6 Quality Management District does not have jurisdiction 7 over. 8 So I would beg of you to continue -- I appreciate 9 Mr. McKinnon's comments on this, that we need to keep very 10 vocally, screaming and yelling, if you will, on these 11 issues. Because this little boy that's suffering asthma, 12 it's very sad. But we have to keep after the governments 13 that have the jurisdiction over this. 14 But, again, I do support Chairman Burke's 15 amendment and hope that we will be able to work through 16 these issues. And I thank you for your time. 17 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 18 Next. 19 Sorry, I'm not sure of your names. 20 MS. HERNANDEZ: Ophelia Hernandez. 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Oh, okay. Thank you. 22 MS. HERNANDEZ: And I wanted to start with 23 thanking members of the Board for this meeting and for 24 this opportunity for our communities to share their 25 concerns. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 103 1 It is very sad. I'm a mother. And in my 2 community we have a school problem. Every school has more 3 than 4,000 children. They have to play outside. They 4 have to breathe the air. 5 I belong to the district that Martha Escutia 6 spoke. 7 You don't know to either cover your nose or 8 really breathe. When you wake up in the morning you smell 9 this terrible smell from our factories on one side. 10 On the other side the heavy traffic and Alameda 11 corridor. And we are surrounded by the freeways at the 12 south. And then the factories and the power plants. We 13 are right there in the middle. 14 What can you do? We have a big percentage of our 15 residents that suffer of asthma. It hurts to see our 16 children when they're not able to breathe. When I saw the 17 pie at the demonstration, I don't think it's enough. It's 18 not enough because for -- if that was -- if it was some 19 improvement years ago, in our community it didn't show. 20 Our buses are so old, this is smoke -- more smoke and how 21 they can advance when they're driving. 22 On 4th of July our celebration for a great 23 nation, because of the low income families, they don't 24 have money to buy those nice fire works. They buy the 25 cheap smoke bomb because that's all they can afford. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 104 1 So I ask you to please pay more attention. Help 2 us improve the quality of the air that we breathe. 3 Thank you. 4 (Applause.) 5 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. We're 6 acutely aware of that since I went down to Huntington Park 7 early in my tenure. Unfortunately, progress hasn't been 8 as rapid as we would like. But I have full sympathy with 9 what you're facing. 10 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Welcome, Dee. And thank you, 11 by the way, for your service on our Environmental Justice 12 Task Force. 13 MS. ALLEN: Thank you. I'm here today actually 14 representing Councilwoman Jan Perry. She's the 15 Councilwoman from the 9th District for the City of Los 16 Angeles. She could not be here today. But she did ask me 17 to come and read a letter that she's presented to your 18 Board regarding this issue. And so I'd like to do that 19 now. 20 "Dear Board members: As the California Air 21 Resources Board considers the South Coast Air Quality 22 Management Plan on October 23rd, 2003, know that the City 23 of Los Angeles is supportive of the proposed 2003 AQMP and 24 strongly believes that the achievement of clean, healthy 25 air is vital to Los Angeles and the entire southern PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 105 1 California region. 2 "The City also believes it is very important that 3 the State and federal governments commit to assisting our 4 region in meeting these air quality requirements. 5 "The South Coast Region experiences the worst air 6 quality in the state and the country. Stationary sources 7 in our region are subject to strict AQMD controls. All 8 sources, especially mobile sources and consumer products, 9 need to make significant reductions to reach our 10 attainment. 11 "The State and federal governments have 12 jurisdiction and resources that need to be put to use for 13 the benefit of the South Coast Air Basin. Potential 14 control of emissions from these sources must be evaluated 15 and all feasible cost effective measures adopted in an 16 expeditious manner. 17 "Additionally, CARB has a role in approving the 18 AQMP and rule making. CARB should expeditiously review 19 all submittals from AQMD implementing the AQMP. 20 "Finally, CARB has grant money that can assist 21 the air district and local governments with air quality 22 studies, emission monitoring, and technology development. 23 CARB should designate sufficient resources to the South 24 Coast to assist in this effort. 25 "I, therefore, urge CARB to evaluate and adopt in PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 106 1 an expeditious manner all feasible cost effective measures 2 for sources under your jurisdiction. 3 "Thank you very much. Councilwoman Jan Perry." 4 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much, Dee. 5 Now we have -- oh, sorry. 6 MS. McHENRY: I think you called my name. Jackie 7 McHenry? 8 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Yes, sorry. Yes. 9 MS. McHENRY: My name is Jackie McHenry. And I 10 am a councilmember from the City of Claremont. And as a 11 councilmember from the City of Claremont, our mayor has 12 sent a letter to your Board supporting the AQMP and hoping 13 that you will also. 14 I think that not only does the responsibility lie 15 with the AQMD, with your Board, and with the EPA, but I 16 think it also -- and we encourage you to support those 17 stringent measures that the AQMD is proposing -- but I 18 think it also lies with elected officials at the local 19 level to make sure that their own cities are enforcing 20 land-use ordinances that do not permit polluters in our 21 cities; that are stringent about things like gravel pits, 22 which we have on our border with our city and San 23 Bernardino; that we look at fugitive dust concerns in our 24 own city, with all the kind of building that we're doing 25 and the increasing building that we are being encouraged PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 107 1 to do by the BAA, and by just trying to provide housing 2 for the increase in population that we are going to see. 3 We need to make sure that our own vehicles and 4 our own cities are energy efficient. I voted "no" on two 5 SUVs that our city wanted. I was overruled. But we've 6 got them. Sorry to say that. 7 We need to be vigilant that we are doing the 8 kinds of things that you are going to help us do by 9 passing the AQMP. 10 But also as individuals we need to look at our 11 own lifestyles. Do we really need that SUV? I looked out 12 in the parking lot, and I got here at 7 o'clock -- I'm 13 directionally challenged and I wanted to make sure I got 14 here on time -- and saw that a quarter to a third of the 15 parking lot was filled with SUVs. I'm going to assume at 16 7 o'clock in the morning these are employees of AQMD, but 17 I'm not sure. 18 So we need to look at our own lifestyle and say, 19 are we making the most effective choice -- cost 20 effective -- and also are we cognizant that this is 21 contributing to the very thing that our agency -- that 22 your agency is trying to prevent? 23 In our own personal lifestyles, in our own ways 24 that we do things with our children, are we setting a good 25 example? I have a son who's a cross-country runner. And PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 108 1 in our family we don't smoke, we don't allow anyone to be 2 in our house that smokes, and my son and all of us don't 3 smoke and we try to stay away from that. 4 However, as a cross-country runner running 10 5 miles a day, he comes home -- and I didn't realize for 6 awhile why he had tightness in the chest. The doctor 7 said, well, it was because of the strain of running. I 8 didn't know why he had a continual cough until I came here 9 and talked to some of the experts in health and who have 10 dealt with people who do exercise a lot, and especially 11 children, and found out that it was because of the air 12 that he was running in. 13 We talk about the kinds of things we can give our 14 children. My city of Claremont is a wonderful city. We 15 have a lot of amenities for our people. But wouldn't the 16 greatest gift we can give our communities and our children 17 be the gift of clean air? 18 Please adopt the AQMP for all of us and for our 19 children. 20 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 21 Now we have Hank Kuiper and Mark Pisano, Southern 22 California Association of Governments. 23 Then after that Marsha McLean and Laurene Weste. 24 MR. KUIPER: Mr. Chairman and members, thank you 25 for allowing us to speak here today. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 109 1 To say that Southern California Association of 2 Governments has a small role in this would be an 3 understatement. I think we've had a big role in this 4 process. 5 Just as an observation regarding your concern 6 about the ports and the hours it operates, I would 7 suggest, it would be just my personal opinion, you've got 8 a big meet and confer labor issue perhaps, too, along with 9 other issues. That would be my personal opinion. 10 Staff is to be commended on the presentation that 11 you gave this morning. It was a great presentation. 12 SCAG recommends the California Air Resources 13 Board adopt the 2003 South Coast SIP. 14 If I'm speaking a little slurry, I had a surgery 15 on my neck and it affected a nerve, so bear with me. 16 It is essential for establishing conformity 17 budgets in order to avoid a potential conformity lapse in 18 the region. That could result in the loss of billions of 19 dollars of federal funding for transportation projects. 20 As the Metropolitan Planning Organization for 21 Southern California and a co-producer of the 2003 South 22 Coast Air Quality Management Plan, SCAG is strongly 23 committed to mitigating the air quality impacts from the 24 transportation sector and population growth in southern 25 California. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 110 1 SCAG strongly supports the collaborative efforts 2 of its sister agencies, the California Air Resources 3 Board, the South Coast Air Quality Management District, 4 and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, to move the 5 region into attainment with the air quality standards. 6 SCAG has historically worked for the 7 sub-regional, city, and county governments to generate 8 emission reductions from transportation activities and has 9 continued its commitment from emissions reductions for the 10 2003 South Coast SIP. 11 Air quality has been a priority for SCAG in the 12 development of the 2004 Regional Transportation Plan. 13 Over the past couple years there's been an 14 increase in air pollution, with the basin experiencing its 15 first Stage 1 alert in recent years. The region's road to 16 clean and healthful air has begun to turn uphill and 17 difficult choices lie ahead of us. 18 The majority of the emission reduction strategy 19 for the 2003 South Coast AQMP is allocated to the black 20 box, which relies on the long-term measures that 21 anticipate the development of new control techniques or 22 improvement of existing control technologies. 23 With only a few years remaining until the 24 attainment dates for ozone and for particulate matter, we 25 must move firmly and with a conviction to identify and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 111 1 implement the steps remaining in our journey toward clean 2 air for all. 3 SCAG's Regional Council looks forward to working 4 with the ARB and SCAQMD and U.S. EPA in continuing to 5 develop regional air quality planning programs and 6 policies for the southern California area. 7 Just as a side note, I'm a county supervisor in 8 the County of Imperial. And it's a little bit of a drive 9 to get up here today. And, in fact, if they moved the 10 fence, I'd live in a foreign country. 11 We recently, because of some judge to the north 12 of us -- and recognizing everything's to the north of 13 us -- lost our "But for" status because the judge fails to 14 recognize that the Mexicali Valley, that has well over a 15 million residents, doesn't affect a county that has 16 140,000 residents. So we have a little problem down 17 there, too. We may be seeking help, too. 18 With that, I'd like to introduce our Executive 19 Director, Mark Pisano, for some remarks also, Mr. 20 Chairman. 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 22 MR. PISANO: Thank you, Supervisor; and members 23 of the Air Resources Board for conducting this hearing in 24 the south land on our air quality plan that we have been 25 partners with you. This is the sixth plan that we've PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 112 1 been -- that we have prepared under the Lewis Clean Air 2 Act. And I also had the opportunity as an EPA employee in 3 Washington to work on the first plan for the South Coast. 4 So we've made much progress and I'd like to reiterate a 5 few of those observations in my comments. 6 First of all, I just want to note that we do need 7 an attainment -- we do need an emission budget by November 8 if we're to meet our schedule for adopting the 9 transportation plan that we proposed yesterday as a draft. 10 And we're scheduled to adopt that in April. We will start 11 the conformity hearing review process in February. And we 12 will need a new budget if we're to meet that schedule. 13 Failing to meet that schedule will cause the lapse of 14 federal funds. 15 I'd like to note that the plan that we put out in 16 draft yesterday has in it 63 percent of $201 billion of 17 proposed investments going to transit. And that is a 18 change from the first plan that we participated in, over 19 34 percent of the total budget going to transit. One of 20 the reasons you saw 24 tons on our table is that this 21 region has made the move towards transit in a major way, 22 showing that there can be long-term change occurring even 23 in the south land, our automobile-dependent society. 24 I also would like to note that 50 percent of all 25 the emission reductions that are in the proposed plan come PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 113 1 from land-use measures that we will achieve by 2 coordinating the land-use and development plans within 3 this region. Local government -- and you've had many and 4 will have additional speakers -- are making the commitment 5 to take the actions that are difficult politically to get 6 improved quality of life, reduction in congestion, and 7 also air quality emissions. 8 The plan that we put forward yesterday also has 9 10 percent of that 201 billion dedicated specifically to 10 goods movement, namely trucks and rail improvements. 11 I want -- I note that investment activity for 12 several reasons. One, we have been working with the ports 13 and our members to in fact have the ports open 24 hours a 14 day as well as the intermodal centers that will receive 15 those goods. It is a bi-party negotiation between the 16 city and its conditional use permit. 17 The labor agreements that are occurring within 18 those facilities and the willingness of the operators and 19 the labor to participate in 24-hour operations, it impacts 20 local communities because there will be noise and other 21 interferences in the intermodal facilities that receive 22 those goods. So it's a multi-party negotiation process. 23 I note that specifically because there is a role 24 for the regulatory agencies to be part of those 25 negotiations. You're now attending -- the air district is PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 114 1 now attending our Goods Movement Committee. ARB is 2 welcome to participate so that we can establish the kind 3 of negotiated agreement that allows for both the 4 regulation, the management, and the competitiveness in the 5 movement of goods. 6 Let me conclude by noting that in all the plans 7 we have done the easy things over the last several 8 decades. And we have the very difficult things remaining. 9 I will suggest that those remaining emissions cannot be 10 achieved solely through regulation, either by you, by EPA, 11 or by the District. It's going to be -- it will need to 12 be a negotiated agreement among all of the various 13 parties. And let me be very specific. 14 If the federal government says that they won't 15 allow us to specify more emission reductions that they 16 have control over, then there's nothing preventing us from 17 taking those areas that we do have control over and 18 suggesting that we enter into -- even if it requires 19 source trading among the different sectors, to go further 20 than what EPA is proposing. That option is in front of 21 us. We had those concepts in the first AQMP that was 22 presented by EPA to this region. There's no reason why we 23 can't go back and explore some of those notions in the 24 future. 25 And the same thing is true with respect to our PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 115 1 airplanes. There's no reason we can't negotiate -- hire 2 the Stage 4 aircraft requirements if we're going to in 3 fact enter into the kind of development activities 4 necessary to expand airports. Those kind of -- those 5 types of negotiated agreements are certainly there for the 6 taking if we're willing to work between the regulatory 7 sector, the transportation sector, and the users of the 8 system. 9 We've made many innovations by undertaking that 10 type of creative thinking in the past. And I see no 11 reason why if in a cooperative effort -- and we would need 12 the support of all of the interest groups within this 13 basin to take those kinds of steps in the future. 14 The kinds of action plans laid out by your staff 15 indicates the kind of analysis that we need to go through. 16 I strongly urge that you in fact take the portions of the 17 District's resolution that state let's have a regularized 18 annual type of convenience so that we can review the 19 progress made on the sources that we need to make progress 20 on. 21 That kind of visible scheduled activity with the 22 other sectors that I'm mentioning, many of those that we 23 bring to the table, local government, the transportation 24 agencies, the airports, the ports, I'm convinced will 25 yield the results necessary to flesh out the long-term PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 116 1 strategy. And that we do that in such a way where they're 2 legally defensible. We need an attainment strategy that 3 is defensible as much as we need an attainment budget in 4 order to conduct conformity. 5 So I urge that we undertake the intergovernmental 6 and interest group negotiations necessary for us to keep 7 this region moving and transportation dollars flowing. 8 Thank you. 9 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 10 Marsha McLean, Laurene Weste. 11 MS. McLEAN: Good morning. 12 My name is Marsha McLean and I'm a Councilwoman 13 for the City of Santa Clarita. We're located about 26 14 miles north of Los Angeles, next to Magic Mountain. 15 I'd like to thank Chairman Lloyd and the CARB 16 members for inviting our city here to speak with you this 17 morning and also for sending a representative to the 18 August South Coast Air Quality Management District town 19 hall meeting that we had in August. And we appreciate 20 very much the District's commitment to initiating the 21 Santa Clarita Valley Subregional Air Plan. 22 I appreciate so much Mr. McKinnon's comments 23 regarding alternate transportation methods. And we as a 24 community are faced with one of the nation's largest 25 gravel mining facilities, which is going to be devastating PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 117 1 to our community. And yet when we asked for a mitigation 2 measure for them to consider rail haul, they refused to do 3 so. So perhaps we can get some help from your Board on 4 that. 5 Our air quality in southern California, as you 6 know, has been improving for several years. And we 7 appreciate CARB's role in this progress. However, we are 8 alarmed that more recently our air quality has worsened 9 for our area simply because of our geographical location 10 where the pollution blows into our valley from other 11 areas. 12 The citizens of the Santa Clarita Valley are 13 increasingly concerned with the quality of our air and the 14 health associated with bad air quality. The City of Santa 15 Clarita has been a strong air quality supporter in the 16 South Coast AQMD area and we have taken many steps, often 17 at great cost, to do our part to improve the air quality 18 of our valley. 19 We have adopted an air quality element of our 20 general plan, provided incentives for developers to build 21 green buildings through the community energy efficiency 22 program, expanding our dust control requirements for large 23 grading projects, and successfully sited three commuter 24 metrolink stations within our city. 25 We operate one of the fastest growing municipal PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 118 1 bus systems in the country. We've developed 36.2 miles of 2 bicycle trails that provide the residents with a 3 non-polluting means of transportation. We have planted 4 more than 43,000 trees since our city incorporated. 5 The City has also approved development projects 6 that have added an average of 1,500 new jobs per year to 7 the city, with many more jobs being created in the 8 unincorporated portions of our valley. And these are not 9 merely service jobs. These are good paying jobs that 10 allow our residents the opportunity to live and work 11 within our valley. 12 We want to thank CARB for your efforts to address 13 air quality in our state. And specifically we want to 14 acknowledge the following CARB actions: 15 Your efforts to address the health impacts of air 16 pollution on our children and ways to promote a clean 17 environment. And since the early 1990s your agency has 18 made a major commitment to assess the impacts of air 19 pollution on children's health by preparing in-depth 20 studies on air pollution and childhood diseases such as 21 asthma. 22 We are grateful that your agency has committed to 23 further protect our children by implementing new measures 24 to evaluate and reduce those health risks such as a recent 25 air toxic control measure to reduce school bus idling near PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 119 1 schools where children play. 2 And in conclusion, we recognize your efforts to 3 improve the quality of life in our state. And we offer 4 any assistance that we can provide to meet both your goals 5 and our goals for the City of Santa Clarita. 6 I'd also like to state that we have a technical 7 expert on hand if there's any questions that you might 8 ask. 9 And we respectfully oppose the staff 10 recommendation, but do support the motion by Dr. Burke as 11 presented today. 12 And I thank you very much. 13 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you for those comments. 14 And I have Laurene Weste. And then we'll have 15 Maria Lopez with the 4th grade class. 16 MS. WESTE: Good morning. 17 Laurene Weste, City of Santa Clarita. It is nice 18 to see you and the members this morning, Chairman Lloyd. 19 The City of Santa Clarita has contacted the 20 SCAQMD regarding the proposed transit mixed concrete 21 mega-mine in the Santa Clarita Valley. 22 And to share some basic facts with you about the 23 TMC proposal: It's a 56 million ton aggregate mine with a 24 20-year lease, and will add more than 1,160 big-rig truck 25 trips every day on Soledad Canyon and State Route 14. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 120 1 That's one truck every minute to minute and a half, 24 2 hours a day. 3 I would like to compliment Member McKinnon on 4 asking us to do more local land-use things to implement 5 clean air. I don't think you'll find many cities in 6 southern California more willing and having done more 7 projects than the city of Santa Clarita. 8 One frustration we have with that is we did ask 9 for rail haul. We did ask for mitigations. We were 10 flatly denied that. And an even greater frustration, our 11 county diligently worked on this. And so when they went 12 to implement those land-use regulations that would clean 13 up the air, they were promptly sued in federal court. The 14 same government that mandates you to clean up the air in 15 California is hampering our ability to do land-use things 16 that would actually clean up the air in the basin and 17 support you. It's very frustrating for Californians and I 18 know it's very frustrating for you. 19 At the August SCAQMD town hall meeting Barry 20 Wallerstein made two comments that are very important to 21 our valley. SCAQMD committed to reevaluate its 22 consistency and conformity analysis of the TMC project, 23 including the adequacy of the data and the appropriateness 24 of the assumptions. The SCAQMD committed to work with the 25 citizens of our valley to develop a Subregional Air PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 121 1 Quality Plan. 2 Congresswoman Solis and Congressman Waxman 3 recently released a report they initiated which found a 4 serious lack of data in monitoring of mining projects 5 across the country. Those reports suggested that new 6 mining operations must not be approved until the federal, 7 State, and local governments can gather the data and 8 ensure that mining operations will not cause harm to the 9 health of nearby citizens. 10 While we commend the SCAQMD for instituting Rule 11 403, related monitoring of mining activity in the 12 Irwindale area, our understanding is that this monitoring 13 addresses only one of the potentially significant mining 14 pollutants, PM 10. 15 Given the lack of good information on mining 16 emissions, we would urge monitoring and study to establish 17 the full spectrum of mining-related emissions, including 18 air toxics and truck-related NOx emissions, and to 19 correlate emissions with the size of mining operations so 20 that the impacts of sand and gravel mining could be more 21 accurately predicted. 22 The CARB and the SCAQMD must work together to 23 institute aggressive monitoring programs to ensure that 24 health impacts are prevented. We support measures which 25 would impose additional emission control measures on PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 122 1 aggregate and cement plant operations like the BCM-08. 2 But even more controlled PM 10 impacts are needed. 3 We are concerned about the SCAQMD's AQMP allowing 4 a conformity finding for the TMC mega-mine and believe 5 this loophole must be addressed before the next AQMP 6 update. We acknowledge the CARB's efforts, and encourage 7 you to continue to look out for the health of citizens of 8 California which we know you're so committed to. We would 9 encourage a more detailed study of mining emissions. 10 We would like to go on record again opposing the 11 staff recommendation as it is. But we would like you to 12 know we strongly support the amendment just introduced by 13 Dr. Burke. 14 We look forward to working with the SCAQMD on 15 their reevaluation of the TMC project's conformity with 16 the AQMP and in their efforts to develop a Santa Clarita 17 Valley Subregional Air Plan. Your time is greatly 18 appreciated and we look forward to working with you and 19 your staff. 20 Thank you. 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 22 Just one question. Have you had a chance to 23 evaluate the resolution introduced by Dr. Burke today in 24 detail? 25 MS. WESTE: Our staff has looked at it and we are PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 123 1 supporting it. 2 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: So you've had a chance to 3 look at it, but we just received it today. Thank you. 4 MS. WESTE: Thank you. 5 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Please. Welcome. 6 MS. LOPEZ: Good morning. 7 My name is Maria Lopez. I am a 4th grade teacher 8 at 20th Street Elementary School in Los Angeles. These 9 are my students. And these are two 4th grade classrooms. 10 We are very concerned about the health impacts 11 caused by the air pollution and air toxin emissions in our 12 area. Although we have made great progress in improving 13 our quality over two or three decades, much remains to be 14 done to bring clean air to southern California. 15 I am particularly concerned about the trend of 16 increasing unhealthy air days over the last couple of 17 years. Many of our students live in the most impacted 18 areas and belong to low income ethnic minority groups who 19 need to be protected. 20 Your Board and U.S. EPA have sole authority over 21 80 percent of the ozone-forming emission sources in the 22 basin. And these are outside the influence or authority 23 of the AQMD. 24 It is my understanding that the AQMD has outlined 25 12 new control measures with additional concepts that your PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 124 1 Board should consider for emission reductions. Many of 2 these measures will benefit low-income ethnic minority 3 communities that reside in heavily polluted areas, like my 4 school, 20th Street Elementary, which is located in the 5 heart of downtown L.A. 6 I urge your Board to commit to further pollution 7 control measures that will support the recommendations 8 made by the AQMD staff. Without such additional 9 reductions of mobile sources and area source emissions, 10 the clean air challenge will go unfulfilled. As a result, 11 we will continue to suffer the health consequences of high 12 pollution and poor air quality. 13 I urge you to show leadership and support for the 14 clean air cause by committing your staff to further 15 emission reductions from mobile and area resources. 16 Thank you very much. 17 And I also have two students who would like to 18 say something? 19 ALBERTO RESPAR: Hi. My name is Alberto Respar. 20 I have asthma. I take medicine every day so I could get 21 rid of it. 22 LISA: Hi. My name is Lisa and I have asthma 23 too. It's because when I run, my chest hurts a lot. And 24 when I keep on running and my chest hurts a lot and won't 25 stop and -- and that is it. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 125 1 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much indeed. 2 MS. LOPEZ: Thank you very much. 3 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you for coming. We 4 appreciate it. Got the message. 5 (Applause.) 6 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: We have Fransiska Cahya, John 7 Parsons, Fred Trueblood. 8 Just an indication, we are going to take a half 9 hour lunch break at approximately 12:30 by that clock up 10 there. And I recognize that clock's a little bit fast. 11 But that's about 20 minutes time we'll take a half hour 12 break. 13 Good morning. 14 MR. PARSONS: Good morning. 15 My name is John Parsons. I'm a councilmember of 16 the City of Redondo Beach. And I'm here representing the 17 South Bay Cities Council of Governments. I want to thank 18 you for coming today and giving us a chance to appear 19 before you representing our constituents. 20 The South Bay Council of Governments is located 21 in the southwest portion of L.A. County. It includes 16 22 cities. Our subregion is between the L.A. International 23 Airport and the ports of L.A. and Long Beach, which 24 sandwiches us between two very large causes of mobile 25 source pollution. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 126 1 We are concerned that the region is losing its 2 ability to sustain air quality gains that have already 3 been made, and request that you do take action to approve 4 the South Coast State Implementation Plan, the SIP, so 5 that emission reduction strategies can be implemented. 6 With the adoption of the SIP and the federal and 7 State strategies adopted in Item No. 2, we note that State 8 and federal clean air agencies need to do more, however. 9 You've heard the vast -- the huge number that is outside 10 of the control of AQMD because State and federal agencies 11 have sole authority over pollution sources responsible for 12 80 percent of ozone forming emissions in the basin. We 13 strongly urge both CARB and EPA to move expeditiously in 14 developing programs under your purview and that will 15 address this very significant issue. 16 We are concerned that both -- the Air Quality 17 Management District continues to implement its programs 18 that have been very successful, that they're only going to 19 continue to be successful for the air quality in the 20 region if both the State and federal agencies step up and 21 do a bigger portion. 22 The South Bay City Council of Governments 23 believes that economic growth and clean air are not 24 mutually exclusive. We cannot do this alone. We need the 25 commitment of both State and federal agencies towards PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 127 1 meeting the objectives of clean, healthful air for 2 southern California. 3 Additionally, we point out that southern 4 California is a forerunner of problems that have become 5 national issues. Clean air is not just a southern 6 California problem or a national problem. As we heard 7 just a few minutes ago, it's an international problem. 8 This issue won't go away. It will become more important 9 as time passes if strategies to clean the air become more 10 thorough and innovative. 11 No level of government can avoid their 12 responsibilities. Our cities have a great working 13 relationship with AQMD; and as proposals have come 14 forward, they've worked with us very well in crafting 15 those programs so that they are not an inordinate impact 16 on our businesses or on our cities. Our cities are very 17 large employers also impacted by these rules. And I think 18 as we move forward and continue having a close 19 relationship with AQMD and with CARB, we need to pressure 20 on EPA to work with us too because they're obviously, as 21 we've heard, a big impact on all of this. 22 We do not want to institute measures that would 23 make us uncompetitive, especially when the entire country 24 has the same concerns regarding clean air. We all need to 25 have an even economic playing field on both the State and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 128 1 national level. Therefore, we urge you to adopt the SIP, 2 but to strengthen the commitment of both CARB and EPA to 3 further the emission reductions from sources under our 4 control. 5 Today's the first day that I'm aware that anybody 6 has seen Dr. Burke's proposal. In our review this 7 morning, it looks like it does support our position. 8 However, I do have some concerns about where the funding's 9 going to come from to accomplish some of this. But 10 certainly I think it's a step in the right direction. 11 So thank you very much. 12 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 13 Fred Trueblood, Barbara Park, and Dr. 14 Wallerstein. 15 MR. TRUEBLOOD: Thank you, Chairman Lloyd and 16 distinguished Board. Thanks for the opportunity to speak 17 this morning. 18 My name is Fred Trueblood. I'm the district 19 representative for Assemblyman Dr. Keith Richman, 38th 20 Assembly District. 21 Dr. Richman fully supports the San Clarita 22 Subregional Air Plan and appreciates the South Coast Air 23 Quality Management District's recent movement towards this 24 important and essential task. 25 Secondly, on a particular matter, Dr. Richman PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 129 1 urges the State Air Resources Board or the District, 2 whoever ends up taking responsibility for the mobile 3 source emissions from that site, however that works out, 4 whichever regulatory body is going to do that, to take a 5 more aggressive posture in addressing these significant 6 mobile source impacts that this proposed C-mix, 7 transit-mix concrete project would have in the Santa 8 Clarita Valley. It's very, very onerous and very, very 9 important to the people who live in the 38th District. 10 Thank you very much. 11 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much indeed. 12 Barbara Park, Dr. Wallerstein, Lynne Edgerton. 13 Looks as though, Barry, you're next. I think it 14 doesn't look as though... 15 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 16 Presented as follows.) 17 DR. WALLERSTEIN: Okay. Thank you, Chair Lloyd, 18 members of the Board. It's a pleasure to see you all. 19 I'm going to try to adhere to my three minutes. 20 I've cut down my talk, but I want to hit some important 21 points. 22 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: No, we understand, Barry. 23 DR. WALLERSTEIN: Dr. Lloyd, you had referred to 24 the air quality trend. And we've all seen the good news 25 when we show the 20-year chart. But I wanted to highlight PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 130 1 the 7-year chart. 2 Shown in the blue is number of days of violation. 3 The line shows the peak concentration. 4 We're not alone in this problem and dilemma that 5 we're asking you to continue to partner with us on today. 6 --o0o-- 7 DR. WALLERSTEIN: Here's a similar chart for the 8 San Joaquin Valley. And as you can see, the progress 9 really has flattened out or maybe even reversed itself in 10 both areas over the period of time that we're dealing 11 with. 12 --o0o-- 13 DR. WALLERSTEIN: There's been some discussion of 14 this. And this shows the emissions inventories from the 15 '94 plan, the '97 predecessor plan, and then the plan that 16 we have here today. 17 And as shown here, within our jurisdiction is 18 about a third of the VOC emissions and only about 12 19 percent of the NOx omissions. The State and federal 20 authorities have jurisdiction over the rest of the 21 emissions. And that's in large part why we're here today 22 making the plea. And we are fully committed to the 23 partnership on sources under our jurisdiction as well as 24 helping in any way we can on sources under the State 25 Board's jurisdiction. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 131 1 --o0o-- 2 DR. WALLERSTEIN: I've cut out charts for 8-hour 3 ozone, which showed very much like the one 1-hour ozone. 4 I have a chart that shows that the portion that's the 5 black box has grown over time and is now 80 percent. And 6 I've also cut out a chart that I included to highlight the 7 great work of the State Air Resources Board and the many 8 advances from catalytic converters to modern electronics 9 on engines, et cetera. 10 We have provided to the Board staff and had a 11 good dialogue over the last few months about potential 12 additional measures that could be incorporated into the 13 plan, either enhancements to some of the measures defined 14 by your staff or new measures. When we started the 15 dialogue we had estimated that maybe as much as 220 plus 16 tons could be moved from long term into the short term. 17 And through those discussions, we've sharpened our pencil, 18 refined our calculations. I don't think we've made 19 miscalculations. I think we've come to a better 20 understanding of a potential overlap between some of your 21 staff's assumptions and our assumptions and things of that 22 nature. 23 In the last few weeks we've been diligently 24 working at this. And let me say that we've utilized some 25 outside technical experts that we employ on a regular PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 132 1 basis. And that there are a number of staff here at the 2 district, like myself, who started our careers with the 3 State Air Resources Board drafting mobile source 4 regulations. And collectively as we've gone through this 5 we've listened carefully to your staff. We've reduced our 6 estimates of what could be done down to the level that is 7 in Dr. Burke's motion. 8 I need to point out that the amount we're 9 proposing we believe is within your legislative authority. 10 It doesn't require Moyer funding. It's something that 11 could be done through your typical rule-making and policy 12 procedures. There are clearly additional tons that could 13 occur with the additional authority and funding. 14 We have divided the measures into measures that 15 would affect the light- and medium-duty vehicle fleet, the 16 heavy-duty fleets, the recreational marine engines, 17 construction equipment, the residential lawn and garden. 18 And consumer products is a huge source of VOC emissions 19 contributing to smog. 20 We believe that your staff could move forward 21 with the direction from your Board in these areas that 22 we've identified and do much better than the 23 tons that 23 have been identified. 24 And I would point out again that we started at 25 over 200 tons. Your staff is now proposing 23. I think PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 133 1 our -- frankly, our abilities to do the analysis, we 2 weren't off by 90 percent. One can argue about whether 3 it's precisely 120, 140, or 115. But clearly there is 4 much more that could be done than the 23 tons. And given 5 the magnitude of our air quality problem, we're here in 6 partnership asking you to move forward. And we're asking 7 you also to move forward in a manner which we believe is 8 consistent with the framework that we use for bringing 9 measures to our board in terms of available information as 10 the foundation of the measure that can be used at this 11 point in time to specify it in the plan. 12 Lastly, I'd like to point out two things, if I 13 just could quickly: In the South Coast plan, unlike any 14 other plan, there is an automatic substitution measure 15 within the plan. So if we fall short on one item, we can 16 make it up on another item or substitute any other item 17 in. And I think that that's an extremely important 18 consideration for your Board. 19 And so we believe before you is doable short-term 20 work. And we are committed -- the other point I want to 21 make is that we are committed to help you in terms of 22 additional areas of authority and funding. In fact, our 23 board sponsored legislation this last year to get 24 permanent funding for the Moyer program. 25 And then just lastly, on this issue of the NOx, PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 134 1 we didn't know your staff would commit to the lower 2 NOx-carrying capacity. If we had known that, we would 3 have gladly recommended to our board that we just have the 4 lower NOx, carrying capacity number. This was kind of new 5 news for us in the last week or so. 6 The reason we put in the -- start with the lower 7 number and fall back to the higher NOx-carrying capacity 8 number was we wanted to assure the public in terms of the 9 administrative process that if EPA bounced the plan, we 10 wouldn't have to come back to a hearing at the State level 11 and a hearing at the local level. 12 If they refused to do their fair share, we would 13 simply force them to do that on the record and then go 14 with the higher number. But we're pleased to support your 15 staff committing to the lower carrying capacity number. 16 But we would point out that the additional 68 tons -- our 17 total NOx inventory for all sources under our jurisdiction 18 is only around 90 tons. So clearly it means that from the 19 mobile source side we're going to have to do much more in 20 the way of controls. 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thanks very much, Barry. 22 Questions? 23 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Mr. Chairman? 24 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Yes, Professor Friedman. 25 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Can I ask you a PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 135 1 couple quick questions just to clarify my understanding. 2 And maybe I should be directing this equally or more to 3 staff. 4 But as I read -- as I understood the staff's 5 recommendation and proposal, the staff's plan, the new 6 near-term strategy measures would -- the new State 7 measures would be 109 tons per day. Your new measures 8 would be 27 tons short term. And then later on in our 9 presentation by the staff we were told the good news that 10 they had with your help identified 36 additional tons per 11 day that could shift to the short-term category, of which 12 23 -- I think that's your reference -- 23 by ARB and 13 13 more by SCAQMD. 14 And even another 66 additional tons that could be 15 claimed if funding or legal authority, a legislation, is 16 obtained. And according to the staff proposal as 17 reported, they were proposing to add those measures to the 18 SIP. That would be an additional 23 short-term tons and 19 an additional 66 longer term conditionally. 20 So I guess -- I'm confused. And then when you 21 propose 120 more in this blue sheet that we just received 22 this morning -- apparently some of the other communities 23 had it sooner. But in any case, we're going -- in my 24 opinion, we need -- as I mentioned earlier, we need to 25 address this seriously and go through each of these PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 136 1 proposals or at least have the staff tell us whether 2 they're feasible or not and to what extent they've been 3 woodshedded with you and others and that had previously. 4 But does your 120 -- are those on top of what the 5 staff has recommended and already included as another 23 6 tons found? Or what are we dealing with? 7 DR. WALLERSTEIN: Specifically, you're dealing 8 with 97 tons per day more than what your staff has 9 identified the staff would be willing to do. 10 And let me -- if I could just briefly -- 11 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: So that's a 12 different number than the 120 in this -- 13 DR. WALLERSTEIN: Professor, if I could just for 14 a moment clarify. 15 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Please. 16 DR. WALLERSTEIN: There's no debate or argument 17 over the short-term measures identified by your staff. 18 Everyone wants to see those go forward. 19 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: I'm sorry. I'm 20 having a little trouble hearing you. 21 DR. WALLERSTEIN: The staff proposal has a series 22 of short-term measures. There's no disagreement over 23 proceeding with those. The discussion here is how to 24 augment and get additional emission reductions beyond 25 those. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 137 1 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Sure. The search is 2 always for more. We understand that. 3 DR. WALLERSTEIN: Right. And in this chart here, 4 on the far right shows that 80 percent of the required 5 emission reductions are in the black box. So the whole 6 effort is to switch it from the black box into short-term 7 measures. 8 The blue document you received this morning, Dr. 9 Burke's proposal, was not given to anyone before Dr. Burke 10 introduced it. But what it does is it refines the 11 calculation in the materials that we had provided to your 12 staff and to other members of the public. So when Dr. 13 Burke said it was consistent, it is consistent. But we've 14 continued to refine the numbers that we would recommend. 15 And we've done it in a very -- what we think's a 16 conservative way. 17 We didn't pick 120 tons as being an optimistic 18 estimate. We felt it was a realistic estimate that had 19 been discounted as we went through conversations with your 20 staff and our own internal analysis from a number that 21 started at over 220 tons. And we believe it is within 22 your authority and we believe it is without additional 23 financing. And we've adjusted the measures to account for 24 such things as Senator Escutia raised. But we don't 25 assume all lawn and garden equipment becomes electrified. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 138 1 We've assumed that there'd be a larger portion, for 2 example, that the common homeowner would use that is 3 electric, not the landscapers. 4 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: But I'm not sure I 5 heard the answer to my question. The 120 tons in Dr. 6 Burke's proposed resolution of near-term or short-term 7 State commitment -- and it's as per the attachment, which 8 then lists, as I count them, 12 categories of sources of 9 emission that could be included along with any others that 10 are -- I understand the flexibility within them and so 11 forth. But is this 120 tons in addition to what the last 12 most recent staff proposal is that we heard this morning? 13 DR. WALLERSTEIN: It is -- 14 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Or does it include 15 some of these changes they've already made? 16 DR. WALLERSTEIN: The 23 tons that the staff 17 proposed this morning for the short term is embodied in 18 that 120. The second element in Dr. Burke's motion is the 19 66 tons that your staff has identified. 20 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: That's another 66. 21 So before we get to that, 120 minus 23 is you want to -- 22 you're proposing that we -- the staff's already apparently 23 proposed to increase 23 of the 120 tons you've -- or I 24 guess this is your district's proposal. So you're 25 proposing an additional -- PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 139 1 DR. WALLERSTEIN: -- 97. 2 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: -- 97 in short term? 3 DR. WALLERSTEIN: That's correct. 4 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: And then an 5 additional 66 in near term? 6 DR. WALLERSTEIN: As identified by your staff, 7 contingent on legislative authority and funding, with the 8 difference being that we would recommend that this Board 9 say that those measures will be in the short-term, unless 10 you are unable to get the authority in funding, so that 11 the emphasis is on us all working together to make it 12 happen. 13 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Well, that's 14 helpful, because then I -- there may be some disagreement 15 here, but it seems to me we're narrowing the gap, which is 16 always my goal. I hope we are. We'll hear from staff 17 eventually. But I wanted to clarify as the discussion 18 continues. And I appreciate that. 19 Thank you. 20 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Ms. D'Adamo, Supervisor 21 DeSaulnier, and Mr. McKinnon. 22 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 23 I appreciate Professor Friedman's questions 24 because I, too, am a little confused. And hopefully we 25 can start to hone in on the remaining areas where we can PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 140 1 make some additional progress. I think that we're on the 2 right track though. I want to underscore that, because I 3 think in the last week staff has worked hard, and I know 4 that the District has as well, to find some additional 5 reductions. 6 And I'd like, if we could, to go back to that 7 chart that you keep -- yes. 8 Do we have a copy of this? Because I can't find 9 it in any of my materials. 10 DR. WALLERSTEIN: No. But we'll be happy to have 11 this photocopied and provide it to the Board. 12 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Okay. So it seems that 13 that is a more detailed version of the screen presentation 14 of estimated further reductions. And if I lined that up, 15 you have here 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 -- 6 different categories. 16 But if I compare that to Dr. Burke's motion, he goes 17 further in that he includes ships and trains. Those have 18 been taken off? 19 DR. WALLERSTEIN: Actually, let me explain the 20 attachment to Dr. Burke's motion. I think it'll give good 21 clarity here at this point in the hearing. 22 We wanted to try and make it the easiest manner 23 possible for the State Board to have the greatest amount 24 of flexibility. So our concept was, rather than having a 25 series of specific measures for the various source PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 141 1 categories that are covered, let's have one catchall 2 control measure that commits to the 120 tons over a 3 specified timeframe, and then list a series of control 4 areas that will be evaluated and pursued. But then allow 5 any other item to be substituted as would be able to occur 6 under the plan's current language anyway. 7 So it was just meant, that attachment, as an easy 8 way to move forward. 9 So the real question which you're all asking me 10 of course is: Where's the 120 tons coming from? 11 And we have provided the staff the same sets 12 of -- 13 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Do me a favor. If 14 I'm right, if I heard you -- sorry, but let's not talk 120 15 anymore. Apparently, we're in agreement on 23 of them. 16 So we're talking 97. I just -- I don't want to keep 17 setting the bar higher than we have to jump. 18 BOARD MEMBER WILLIAM FRIEDMAN: Barry, tell me of 19 the 97, how many are estimated to come from ships and 20 trains? 21 DR. WALLERSTEIN: In the case of this -- 22 BOARD MEMBER WILLIAM FRIEDMAN: Of your 97. 23 DR. WALLERSTEIN: Zero. 24 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Where do they end up -- 25 where did ships and trains end up then? PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 142 1 DR. WALLERSTEIN: There's -- 2 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Because he has it in his 3 -- Dr. Burke has it in his motion. 4 DR. WALLERSTEIN: Yes. We've listed it there 5 because we believe there are some potential emission 6 reductions in the category. But in terms of our 7 discussion with your staff and our ability to document our 8 calculations, we went ahead and just excluded that as a 9 conservative gesture. And that's why we think we could 10 actually do better than the 97 tons. But we've gone ahead 11 and lowered our number down to one that we have great 12 confidence in. 13 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Okay. And then my other 14 question -- and this is for both you and staff to answer. 15 The remaining list that you have, the one that you have up 16 on the screen now, the issues with regard to that list 17 have to do with feasibility. I mean I can pick out a 18 couple where it seems that it could be quite feasible, 19 such as residential lawn and garden. I don't know to what 20 extent. 21 But then there may be others that we just don't 22 have the answer right now. So I'm wondering about the 23 ability for us to move things over from long-term to 24 short-term strategy if we don't have the -- I understand 25 on the legal argument and funding. But if it's not -- if PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 143 1 we determine that we don't know whether or not it's 2 feasible yet, whether or not that would be appropriate to 3 shift over. I'm curious about both perspectives, yours 4 and staff's, on this. 5 DR. WALLERSTEIN: The basis we used is the same 6 level of information and knowledge that would be necessary 7 for us to include a short-term control measure for 8 stationary sources under our jurisdiction. So we believe 9 that there's enough information available in each of these 10 categories to, at this point in time, specify a control 11 measure. And, of course, as you go into the rule-making 12 process, you gather more information, refine it, and then 13 you decide what your final proposal is. 14 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Staff? 15 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thanks. 16 I think Supervisor DeSaulnier. Then, Barry, with 17 all due respect, I think this is -- not due respect 18 actually -- with respect to you, this is such an important 19 item, what I'd like to do is address Supervisor 20 DeSaulnier's questions. And then maybe, Mr. McKinnon, if 21 it's okay with you, to hold over and to come back after 22 lunch when maybe we also have a copy of that in front of 23 us. 24 DR. WALLERSTEIN: Sure. 25 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: That would be great. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 144 1 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: Mr. Chairman, I'd be 2 happy to wait until after lunch as well. It seems like we 3 can do a lot of work in the lunch break to further answer 4 these questions. So I'd be happy to wait. 5 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: If that's okay, we can get 6 copies of that. 7 Mrs. Riordan. 8 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Yes. I think it's very 9 important, because I'm having real difficulty reading 10 either on the screen or on the screen before me this 11 document. 12 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Yeah, we can't see it, even 13 on here. And clearly, I mean what we are boiling stuff 14 down to maybe is some differences of technical opinions 15 here. And it's helpful to be able to isolate this. This 16 is a very helpful conversation. 17 So if you come back, Barry, after lunch. 18 Now I guess we'll -- oh, we've got that. Well, 19 we can study it. 20 So let's get back at 1 o'clock. That's 5 after 21 1:00 by that clock up there. 22 (Thereupon a lunch break was taken.) 23 24 25 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 145 1 AFTERNOON SESSION 2 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank, Barry. And thanks for 3 providing the chart. 4 Supervisor DeSaulnier had a question. But he 5 says it's a little bit off track here. So I don't know. 6 Mr. McKinnon, if you're -- 7 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: I don't think I'd put 8 it that way, Mr. Chairman. 9 (Laughter.) 10 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: It was a different line 11 of questioning. So maybe if we wanted to spend some more 12 time on the numbers. I know that you feel like a lot of 13 my questions are off track all the time. But -- 14 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Sorry. You're very quick on 15 that. 16 Now, Mr. McKinnon, I know you had some questions. 17 I don't know whether they relate to the numbers or 18 something else here. 19 And we will come back to you, Supervisor. 20 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: Okay. I have a comment 21 initially. And then I have some questions. 22 And the comment is this: Yesterday just before I 23 headed to southern California I met with a representative 24 of CIOMA. And in that meeting, which was about a number 25 of other issues, he pulled out a settlement agreement to a PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 146 1 lawsuit where we, in the process of approving the SIP -- 2 the '94 SIP, made some commitments that were more than a 3 stretch, I think is a fair way to put it. And when we 4 didn't make it there -- and I use the "we" as all 5 inclusively. A number of us were not here. 6 But I think the Board tried to be aggressive, 7 possibly overly aggressive. And what occurred is that 8 some of the -- some of the actions turned out to not be 9 possible. Then a lawsuit was brought -- citizens' lawsuit 10 was brought and there was a negotiated settlement with a 11 whole bunch of new regulations. 12 And I think -- I heard it from business, but we 13 could just as well hear it from environmentalists or from 14 some citizens. I mean essentially what happened is 15 regulations were negotiated in a court settlement with -- 16 you know, and a court settlement is not a good place to 17 get public input. It doesn't happen there. 18 So we're in a hearing here to get public input on 19 how we proceed. And I want to tell you, I'm very, very 20 concerned. And I'm going to want to hear from witnesses. 21 Anything that is close to being overly aggressive that we 22 might not be able to attain, I think we need to know about 23 that. And I think we need to be cautious not to set 24 ourselves up, as we did in the South Coast SIP, '94, '97, 25 for something that is a process that takes the process PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 147 1 away from the public. 2 I don't think anybody intended to do that, but 3 that's what happened. It happened that way then, I'm sure 4 with the best intentions of being aggressive. 5 But we now know better. And it's clear to me 6 that there are certainly elements of the business 7 community that would have liked to have been part of a 8 public process to talk through some of these items. 9 So that's sort of my first comment. 10 Now, I'm real concerned that we saw an amendment 11 today -- and I see a Santa Clarita city councilperson 12 that's not only seen it, you know, before we saw it, but 13 her staff has reviewed it. And in looking at it, there is 14 something good about it. And that positive in it is that 15 there's a paragraph that conditions some of the measures 16 on whether or not they're possible and whether or not 17 we're able to obtain funding or authority to do them. 18 That's a good thing because I think that helps with the 19 lawsuit problem I just spoke with -- spoke about. And 20 certainly this is a public process and this is a good 21 place to sort of address the issues. 22 Now, Barry, I have sort of grown impatient in the 23 last little while here with graphs that identify 80 24 percent of the measures as being not addressed. And there 25 were some slides in the presentation today -- and I'm PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 148 1 going to ask for those slides to come back up that deal 2 with what this Board's role is in this SIP. Because my 3 recollection is that about 60 percent of the problem rests 4 with the State Board. And my recollection is about 69 5 percent of the actions are being taken by this Board. 6 And I don't think it's helpful -- if we're in 7 this together to get this air cleaned up for this state, I 8 don't think it's helpful to finger-point State versus 9 local, throw land-use decisions on this State Board. I 10 think what the public deserves is a fair, straight 11 representation of where things are at, not an 80 percent 12 blank if that 80 percent is being worked on by existing 13 measures of the State Board, or proposed measures of the 14 State Board. 15 Can we -- there's some slides that were shown 16 this morning at the beginning. 17 DR. WALLERSTEIN: Mr. McKinnon, can I just take 18 the chart there? 19 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: Sure. 20 DR. WALLERSTEIN: Again, I do want to stress that 21 our purpose here today is partnership working with the Air 22 Board and for our two agencies to collectively address the 23 severe air pollution problem here in southern California. 24 This is the 2010 baseline inventory after all 25 rules and regulations that are on the books today are PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 149 1 implemented. And it shows in the blue that we have a 2 significant portion of the VOC emissions -- 31 percent. 3 The State and federal portion is the 16 and 53, with the 4 16 representing consumer products and the 53 being all 5 other source categories, really the mobile on- and 6 off-road sources. 7 On the oxides of nitrogen side, as shown there, 8 we have 12 percent of the emissions within our 9 jurisdiction after we implement all the existing rules. 10 And 88 percent falls on the State and federal government, 11 with the federal government having a significant share of 12 that 88 percent. And so that's all we've said. 13 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: Thanks. 14 Can we see the slide that goes there? 15 And can staff explain this slide one more time. 16 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Well, this slide 17 represents the baseline from 1997 to the target we have to 18 reach in 2010. And of that amount, how much has already 19 been accomplished with adopted regulations, that's the 20 bright yellow, how many more tons will be achieved by the 21 short-term commitments in the plan; and then the blue is 22 what's left to figure out the gap in the long-term 23 commitment. 24 And I think, Mr. McKinnon, you were referring to 25 representations in the press that of the blue, only 20 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 150 1 percent -- or the blue and light yellow, only 20 percent 2 was already identified. But what's been left out of the 3 public discussion is how many adopted controls are on the 4 books and are playing out between now and 2010 and how 5 aggressive they themselves are. Some people take for 6 granted that the existing regulations will stay in place. 7 This Board fights every day to preserve the regulations it 8 has adopted, in Congress with respect to the lawn mower 9 rule. Here in the Board room with respect to light-duty 10 auto rules, we are continuing to receive requests to roll 11 those back, which your staff does not intend to do. 12 But the yellow piece of this chart is a big part 13 of what we hope the public understands that we are moving 14 aggressively and attainment is in sight. 15 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: There was an early slide 16 in the presentation that showed the set of regulatory 17 actions that the Board had taken. I don't know, it was in 18 the first four pages. 19 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: It's a couple 20 more after this one. 21 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: Yeah, I don't -- I don't 22 know. There's sort of an indication in the presentation 23 here that we -- you know, we've done a couple of things, 24 catalytic converters or whatever. And, I don't know, I've 25 only been on the Board since '99, and I remember a lot PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 151 1 more. And -- yeah, that looks a little more like what I 2 remember. 3 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: And then there's 4 another slide of what wasn't in the SIP, but the Board did 5 anyways which was a substantial amount of tonnage 6 reductions. 7 And then there's a summary slide of percent of 8 achieved control. 9 One more. Joe, can you go one more. 10 One more. 11 There. That of the adopted measures, 76 percent 12 of them are provided by State action -- of the adopted 13 tons. 14 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: The 76 percent of the 15 tons -- 16 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: -- coming from 17 adopted rules. 18 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: -- came out of the State 19 Board's action? 20 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Right. Ours and 21 the Bureau of Automotive Repair working in tandem with us 22 on smog check. 23 BOARD MEMBER WILLIAM FRIEDMAN: Catherine, let me 24 make sure I understand something. I know where the 160 25 tons come from. And that again you showed a slide new PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 152 1 State measures, new district measures, and so forth and so 2 on. 3 But help me understand the -- does that include 4 the additional 26 or 27 that just came forward then very 5 recently, 23? 6 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Yes, it does. 7 Joe, could you flip forward to the short-term 8 measures. 9 BOARD MEMBER WILLIAM FRIEDMAN: But it doesn't 10 include the so-called 97 that are being proposed? 11 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Right. This is 12 the short-term ready-to-go, ready-to-adopt control 13 measures that we have -- we've got to bring them to rule 14 making. But we think that the concepts are well defined 15 enough. 16 The 109 you see there includes the 23 additional 17 tons that the Air Board and South Coast identified since 18 the time the plan was first published. 19 BOARD MEMBER WILLIAM FRIEDMAN: Now, of the newly 20 proposed near-term 97 tons, how many of those were in our 21 long-term, sort of -- 22 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: All of them. 23 BOARD MEMBER WILLIAM FRIEDMAN: Okay. Now, is 24 Matt not correct that if we put them in near term and 25 promise to accomplish them, we create a liability for PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 153 1 ourselves to do so? 2 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: That's absolutely 3 correct. You create two risks: One, that EPA finds the 4 plan not specific enough and rejects it if we can't 5 articulate where we expect to get the tons and that we 6 have the authority; and if we need it, we have the 7 funding. 8 The second risk is that if we're not able to 9 deliver on those tons and on the first milestone that they 10 were due, we're subject to litigation. And then we go 11 into a SIP settlement process such as Mr. McKinnon was 12 referring to. 13 Of course the optimistic view is we rise to the 14 challenge and we get all the tons. And we'd like to 15 believe that we would. But staff -- as I indicated in my 16 opening remarks, we use kind of a decision rule of we 17 needed to be at least 51 percent sure before we put it in 18 the short-term category that we knew what we were talking 19 about, we knew how to do it, and we could bring a rule to 20 you. And if we weren't 51 percent sure, we left it in 21 long term for future evaluation. 22 And in the attachment to the proposed resolution, 23 Attachment A, we have a schedule set out for you by which 24 staff would work through all of the concepts that the 25 South Coast has proposed and more that we have come up PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 154 1 with by dates certain. And all of these dates for 2 feasibility studies are legally binding if you adopt them. 3 So we could be sued for not finishing them, that it's a 4 firm commitment. And then we've also added after the 5 feasibility study dates by which we would adopt if there 6 deemed to be feasible and any other barriers have been 7 overcome such as statutory authority. 8 So we have a path for working through these -- 9 the 97 tons. But the South Coast is proposing you move 10 them now to short-term and lock them in now. 11 BOARD MEMBER WILLIAM FRIEDMAN: And clearly there 12 are reasons why we have them in our long-term category 13 rather than in our near-term? 14 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: That's correct. 15 And I'd like to ask Tom Cackette to go through those 16 reasons now one by one using the chart that South Coast 17 distributed just before lunch with the specific categories 18 of measures identified. 19 CHIEF DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER CACKETTE: All of 20 the items listed on the chart that Barry passed out we 21 think have merit. And in fact we have to be able to do 22 some of this in the long term if we're going to attain air 23 quality; that simply we've got a lot of tons out there, 24 and these kind of measures will have to be successful to 25 one degree or the other if we're going to achieve the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 155 1 clean air standard. So we're optimistic that there are 2 tons here that can be achieved. 3 The question really falls down to: What 4 threshold of proof, what threshold of sound science, what 5 threshold of knowledge do we need to have in order to put 6 one of these in a short-term measure? Which basically 7 means that it's kind of ready for prime time, it's ready 8 within a short period of time to bring to you as a 9 regulation, and it passes all the criteria that we 10 normally would have to show you -- demonstrate to you, 11 prove to you it makes it a good regulation, things like 12 viability, feasibility, cost effectiveness, impact on the 13 link on people, impact on specific communities and 14 businesses, all of those kind of things. 15 And we went through all of these measures -- 16 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Tom, could I just 17 pause there if you -- I don't want to lose your thought. 18 But I heard from Mr. Wallerstein -- or Dr. Wallerstein 19 that this -- they applied a similar feasibility test, but 20 more specifically they analyzed these mobile source and 21 other reductions that are within our province that they're 22 proposing to get additional tons of lowered emissions -- 23 they analyzed it based on what the criteria for 24 feasibility if they were imposing stationary source rules. 25 That's what I understood. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 156 1 Are those apples and apples analyses? I mean is 2 that -- what you just described that our staff is going 3 through or has gone through, is that the kind of thing 4 that they should have done? 5 CHIEF DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER CACKETTE: I 6 believe the criteria for adoption of a rule at the local 7 level and the State level are basically the same. We're 8 not going to -- we're not going to implement things that 9 will cause, you know, tremendous harm upon people that are 10 not feasible to do, that result in failure as an 11 application of technology. And I don't think South Coast 12 would do so either. So we have to overcome those hurdles 13 before we could -- 14 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: And a cost benefit 15 analysis of the cost effectiveness -- 16 CHIEF DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER CACKETTE: Costs 17 can't be unreasonable. It can't cause products to not be 18 available where they're required to be available under law 19 like some consumer products are required to be. We can't 20 run up -- you know, have a shortage of gasoline as a 21 result of doing certain things. 22 So there's these basic practical pragmatic 23 aspects that have to pass a straight-face test. And, you 24 know, I've been in front of your Board for a long time and 25 other boards, and I know how you look at us if we say PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 157 1 something that doesn't pass the straight-face test. So 2 you know what these criteria are, the law lays out these 3 criteria, we know what they are. And I can't comment 4 on -- specifically on what Dr. Wallerstein brings to his 5 board. But I'm presuming that it's basically the same 6 criteria. 7 And so if there's a difference in numbers, it 8 lies in the assumptions and then perhaps it lies in the 9 fact that they're suggesting things that we have to do to 10 bring to you -- and perhaps they're more optimistic, more 11 risk -- willing to take risks than maybe we are. But I 12 want to go back to the point, is that it just has to do 13 with which bin we're in. Are we in the short-term bin or 14 are we in the long-term bin? We've got to do all this 15 stuff one way or the other. 16 And it just has to do with the legal risks that 17 Catherine said. And if it's in the long-term bin, you 18 know, we are going to try to do it to the best of our 19 ability and as aggressively as we can. We would expect 20 that you would be holding us accountable each year to say 21 whether these long-term measures turned into programs that 22 we can anticipate bringing to you. And if it was 20 tons 23 that was expected, are we going to bring you one that's 10 24 or 30? You're going to want to know that because we're on 25 a line towards attainment of the air quality standards, PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 158 1 and we can't deviate from that line over the next half 2 dozen years. 3 So, again, just which category it's in and what 4 legal liabilities it costs us of putting it in the 5 short-term is what is at stake here. So, you know, I can 6 go over these and tell you why we picked what we did 7 without trying to go into too much technical detail. I 8 can tell you what changes we made and what were the logic 9 behind those, where they came from, that add up to the 23 10 tons. But I can tell you, and as a summary, to start off 11 that discussion, should you wish to have it, is that we do 12 not believe that most of the things on this list pass that 13 threshold at this time. And so they need additional 14 valuation, they need additional thought, they need 15 involvement of the stakeholders. 16 For example, you know, Senator Scutia made the 17 comment -- she said, you know, "We want you to consider 18 these 12 measures and recommendations." But she said, "Be 19 cautious of the impacts on the low-income people," you 20 know, "be cautious about retrofits and electric equipment 21 for gardeners and scrapping when people can't afford to 22 buy a newer car." Those are some of the pragmatic issues 23 that we have to take into consideration. The very first 24 item, the light- and medium-duty vehicles, you know, one 25 of the issues -- we're doing a pilot study on this. We're PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 159 1 testing hundreds of cars -- 2 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: Wait a minute. I don't want 3 to interrupt, but I've got to. 4 I'm 64 years old. And this is not a racist 5 statement. This is just how I feel about this. 6 All my life white people have been telling me 7 they've got to study my problem longer. And I've still 8 got the problem. Believe it or not, before I started 9 buying expensive suits, I wore very cheap suits. I got a 10 few dollars now. 11 But when, you know -- how we get to this, you 12 know, we've got to further study this impact on low income 13 people, we've been studied to death. Our neighbor -- and, 14 you know, our colors didn't change, you know. Used to be 15 poor white people lived in that neighbor and then poor 16 black people came in and now poor brown people live there. 17 We've been studied to death, and literally death. 18 So -- I know I'm not supposed to get emotional 19 about this, but that -- you know, that don't get it. I'm 20 willing to go along with studies. I'm willing to be 21 rational about it. But don't keep telling me you've got 22 to study it. My problem is real and today. There are 23 kids dying today. You live in a nice house in a nice 24 neighborhood in a nice city. You don't need to be studied 25 and they don't need to be studied. They need help. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 160 1 (Applause.) 2 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Dr. Burke, if I 3 might. 4 I think what Mr. Cackette was referring to was 5 not studying the air pollution and not studying health 6 effects on residence. We have plenty of evidence that 7 those things are occurring and need to be remedied as 8 quickly as we can. 9 What Mr. Cackette was referring to is the fact 10 that these older light-duty vehicles that we need to clean 11 up, many of them are in the hands of fixed-income senior 12 citizens, low-income persons, both of color and otherwise. 13 And the control costs that we are talking about are in the 14 order of 400 to 500 per vehicle. 15 And we have heard repeatedly from the Legislature 16 every time we have ventured into the old car segment, that 17 we need to be extremely cautious. They've put cost caps 18 on us of no more than $35 per retrofit device. They've 19 instructed us to have low-income subsidies, which we 20 believe are necessary. And so part of this problem will 21 be coming up with a subsidy package that enables us to 22 clean up the older cars without taking them away, taking 23 away modes of transportation for the lowest income 24 residents of California. That's the problem we're trying 25 to solve. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 161 1 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: And that was the problem 2 when we started this 10 years ago, and that will be the 3 problem 10 years from now unless we do something about it. 4 That's not a new problem. That's the same problem. 5 Poor people don't have money. If you knew that 6 the pollution was there and you knew that that was the 7 kind of stuff we need to do, we should be further down the 8 road. 9 Now I mean, it's easy to throw bricks. I'm not 10 doing that. I work real hard here for a hundred bucks. 11 But, you know, you get paid more than that, all of you 12 sitting up there. And so, you know, it's time for the 13 rubber to meet the road. 14 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Well, I think one of the 15 things, as you know, and you were supportive of -- move 16 ahead to these super clean cars. That's exactly what's 17 going to help us. But unfortunately it takes time to 18 rotate those through. 19 And when we look at cars on the road for 30 20 years, now these are things we have to address. But we 21 cannot wait, I agree with you. We cannot wait until we 22 get free turnover. We have to do something there. And I 23 think that's what we're trying to address. 24 The other part, Mr. Cackette, I would like -- you 25 might address those. But I'm particularly also interested PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 162 1 in -- I know this is not your area of expertise, but it is 2 your colleague behind you. 3 Mr. Scheible, vis-a-vis, are we ready to move 4 ahead to put Phase 4 gasoline or new reformulated gasoline 5 into the short-term measures? And can we quantify four 6 tons a day of VOC and two tons a day of NOx? Knowing, 7 again, I think the great potential of getting a fuel out 8 into the fleet with immediate reductions, but also knowing 9 there are major ramifications if in fact that comes up 10 short in fact or people don't have fuel that they can 11 actually drive, they have drivability problems, et cetera. 12 DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER SCHEIBLE: We assessed 13 last time we did the reformulated gas regulations how far 14 we could go and what the impacts would be. We took the 15 South Coast's suggestions and assessed them. I think our 16 feeling is that getting six tons of reduction in the South 17 Coast from reformulated gas is technically feasible. You 18 can change the formulation of the gas so that you'll get 19 that type of emission reduction. The problem comes in to 20 when you do the economic analysis of what is the cost 21 effectiveness of that. It comes out to be something in 22 the order of a hundred thousand dollars a ton or $50 a 23 pound. 24 So it would be moving on a measure that would set 25 a new standard for what we've done for smog controls. And PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 163 1 that's the straight costs. That's the cost of the 2 capital -- retiring the capital investment and paying for 3 more expensive components. It doesn't include a second 4 cost, which was to the extent that we isolate the 5 California's market somewhat more than it currently is 6 where we see greater fluctuation in gas prices. 7 So our assessment is not that it's technically 8 infeasible, but that it's an extremely expensive measure. 9 And the reason why it's so expensive is by 2010 the other 10 side of the program -- I mean we have a dual program that 11 combines fuels and cars -- has gotten to be very 12 effective. So there's very few tons of reduction over 13 what you have to -- to appreciate a very large cost. 14 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Have we begun any discussions 15 with the industry on this possibility? 16 DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER SCHEIBLE: Not recently 17 over the cost. I mean it's an internal assessment cost. 18 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: No overform -- over 19 additional reformulation? 20 DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER SCHEIBLE: No, no. And 21 we have to come back and revisit this issue as it is, 22 because we're doing the current study on the impact of 23 ethanols in fuels. And if we continue to have ethanol in 24 fuel, we may have a permeation impact that we'll have to 25 make up. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 164 1 So this is one where it's not a technically 2 infeasible thing. It's not we'd like to see some of the 3 specifications be improved. But when you do the economics 4 of it, it turns out to be a very expensive proposition 5 that the public will have to pay for. 6 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Yeah, what we're seeing is a 7 pattern here that in fact I think both staff seem to see 8 that these are measures which need to be done. And the 9 question is -- or may need to be done, because some cases 10 we need that additional study to see whether they can 11 quantify that or whether it's in short or long-term 12 measures or whether they will be there at all. 13 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Dr. Lloyd, one of 14 the other impacts we identified was a 16-percent loss in 15 in-state refining capacity because of the extra refining 16 that would have to be done to each barrel of oil. So we 17 would be changing the rate of imports into the state. And 18 we hadn't yet gone on to quantify the impact of more 19 vessels, more tanker, more whatever, and how much of it 20 could have arrived through pipeline. And this is one of 21 the things we want to look at in detail with the Energy 22 Commission. 23 We have put this on the list for evaluation. 24 We're not walking away from it based on this preliminary 25 assessment. We've scheduled it for 2004 evaluation and a PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 165 1 thorough white paper with the input of all the different 2 knowledgeable groups on whether we can get something here 3 at a reasonable cost. 4 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I'm also aware that as we 5 look at the light-duty fleet, if in fact -- if and when 6 they're able to meet the light-duty standard for diesel, 7 then you've got additional issues you have to look at in 8 terms of in-state refining and how much maybe goes to 9 diesel and how much gasoline, et cetera. So it's a 10 complex issue. 11 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: It is. And just 12 to put a hundred thousand per ton in perspective, most of 13 the rules we bring to the Board are on the order of $5,000 14 to $10,000 per ton. We have gone as high as $30,000 in 15 the past. The beginning of selective catalytic reduction 16 in the power plants was that expensive, but nothing has 17 approached a hundred thousand a ton yet. 18 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you, Tom. Did you want 19 to -- I know we've got to move on here. But do you want 20 to summarize or -- I think Supervisor DeSaulnier had some 21 additional questions. 22 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: No, as it turns out I 23 wasn't as far off track as I thought in terms of what 24 everyone has gone to. 25 But, Tom, are you finished? PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 166 1 CHIEF DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER CACKETTE: Yeah, I 2 don't need to go any further on the discussion, unless you 3 wish me to, about the specific items on the South Coast 4 list. 5 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: My comments were 6 actually directed at Barry, who's been standing up there 7 for awhile. 8 This has been a great discussion. I think the 9 spiritedness of it is just all of our desire to do more. 10 So I take it in that kind of spirit. 11 I did want to congratulate Dr. Burke and Barry on 12 the civility of the hearing as opposed to the Bay Area's 13 hearings. 14 (Laughter.) 15 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: Representing the Bay 16 Area, we have children who are well behaved here, local 17 elected officials who make sense, no street theater. I'm 18 not being burned in effigy. I'm sort of -- I'm 19 experiencing district envy. I wish you were being beaten 20 up more. 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Supervisor, before you go -- 22 remember, this is being web cast. 23 (Laughter.) 24 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: That's okay. 25 Everyone's unemployed in the Bay Area. They'll be PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 167 1 watching anyways. 2 (Laughter.) 3 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: And my interest here is 4 consistent I think with -- you know, in my time on the 5 Board, regardless of the administration, it has not been 6 unusual for the Board to go above and beyond and push 7 staff and stakeholders to do more than is recommended. 8 Now the question I think we're struggling with 9 here is the statutory maze of what the right thing to do 10 is. And I will agree with Matt, that I'm a little 11 concerned about, as Senator Escutia said, bringing 12 everyone together as opposed to placing jurisdictional 13 responsibility on others. And that would include the 14 metropolitan planning organization of SCAG. 15 So, anyways, Barry, with that little editorial 16 comment, knowing we have a couple hundred more speakers, 17 when we met last week -- and I know we're going to hear 18 some comments from environmental interests later in the 19 hearing -- we talked a little bit about a 60- or 90-day 20 delay as opposed to this suggestion. 21 Now, this suggestion off the top of my head just 22 looking at it has the benefit, I assume, for you and for 23 the environmental community of just some of the things 24 that we may look at as a disadvantage in its specificity 25 of placing responsibility. But on the other hand given PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 168 1 that we're not sure about how to do that correctly -- and 2 I go back to Mark Santos' comment about the balance 3 between doing something that's legally defensible, because 4 it will be challenged most likely -- and this is coming 5 from the Bay Area -- we get challenged one way or the 6 other no matter what -- and also the issues, the time 7 issues that we're concerned about, the threat of a federal 8 conformity freeze or, more concerned, a lapse. 9 So I came to the hearing inclined to say that I 10 wasn't going to -- I wasn't prepared to vote for staff's 11 recommendations. But I would actually go along with what 12 you had suggested and what the environmental community has 13 been suggesting, that we delay a decision for 90 days. 14 And part of that is off of my experience in the Bay Area. 15 Now, granted, it's world's apart in terms of the public 16 health challenges. But when we did that, when this Board 17 pushed the local agencies and ourselves, that not just 18 included the air district but also included a local 19 government on land-use decisions -- and I know you're 20 doing a lot down here -- we managed to get quite a bit in 21 a short period of time, to the point where today I've been 22 told we're actually going to be told by Region 9 that we 23 are in attainment again and we'll be the largest 24 metropolitan area in the United States to reach that 25 status for everything. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 169 1 So knowing that they're very different areas -- 2 and those comments maybe, Barry, you can help me with, the 3 idea of delaying it for 90 days, maybe getting these 4 numbers more refined, more specific and be able to push, 5 as opposed to -- or maybe a hybrid of what Dr. Burke has 6 suggested with some modification there. 7 So I can continue to talk, and I have a whole 8 list of Yogi Berra jokes that my Board members know I can 9 try to reclaim from my memory if you've got a long time to 10 caucus. 11 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: That was a question? 12 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: Well, do you want to 13 hear Yogi Berra jokes? It's a World Series. 14 DR. WALLERSTEIN: Of course I lean to the Vice 15 Chairman of the Board. The Chairman of the Board is -- 16 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: Yeah, the question 17 specifically is give me some background between what 18 happened between our discussion last Friday and what Dr. 19 Burke has suggested today, and the pluses and minuses in 20 your mind over those two, in addition to the comments 21 we've just heard between our staff and my colleagues. 22 DR. WALLERSTEIN: Okay. Be happy to answer those 23 very specifically. But let me just say that we analyzed 24 all the same factors that your staff has talked about. 25 And we just have very different views of this list of PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 170 1 items. 2 The positive news is -- since we met last week, 3 your staff is now proposing another 23 tons in the short 4 term. And a gap that was 220 tons is now 97 tons. We've 5 come down; they've come up. We're still not obviously 6 where we would all like to be. 7 I think that the difficulty here that I know 8 you're all grappling with is just earnest, good people 9 having differences of opinion in how you all decipher all 10 of this and make your judgments. 11 On one hand I think it's critical for you to act 12 today if it's at all possible for you to act. And the 13 reason for that is when we talk about 2010 attainment and 14 we talk about the distance we are today from the ozone 15 standards, not just in South Coast, but San Joaquin, 16 Sacramento with its impending dates, it's important that 17 that road map be in place as quickly as it can be put into 18 place. And of course it helps us here in South Coast in 19 terms of the revision of the transportation plan. 20 The downside is that if you make a decision that 21 says we're only going to move 23 tons into the short term, 22 and we're going to take several years to move the other 23 tons, and if the measures that are going to be required 24 take time to not only adopt those rules and go through 25 some additional analysis and thoughtfulness on the factors PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 171 1 that your staff and I am telling you you need to do, and 2 then some of them require turnover of the fleet, how do we 3 tell the public that we're going to go from a Stage 1 4 episode in 65 days, a violation, to zero days in 2010, 5 which is right around the corner? 6 When I've worked on these plans for 20 years, we 7 used to be able to look at the attainment date as being so 8 far off that we had time to really run hard. I think now 9 we're at a point where we have to be in an absolute dead 10 sprint to the finish line. 11 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: I guess my response is 12 I appreciate that answer. And I'll just finish up with 13 this, Alan, because I know we've got a long public 14 hearing. And as I said during the break, if we continue 15 the way we're going, you'll be in a conformity lapse by 16 the time we finish the hearing, given the length of these 17 discussions. 18 But if we've moved so much in the last few weeks 19 and given what you term the importance of going ahead, 20 just intuitively the way I'd respond to that is another 90 21 days might get us at least a little bit closer, maybe a 22 lot closer. And it's been my experience that that's 23 usually when these kind of gaps tend to close, during the 24 last period of time. And it won't happen today, I don't 25 think. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 172 1 Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 2 Thanks, Barry. 3 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. Thank you very 4 much, Barry. 5 We're going to have to go back to the three 6 minutes again. But that was a very important -- 7 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: Can I get my three minutes 8 now? I know I've had more than my share. But I'd like to 9 comment on the comment. 10 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Okay. 11 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: You know, my father was not 12 a business man. He taught me one thing that I will never 13 forget as long as I live. He said, "Everybody you meet in 14 your life will know at least one thing that you need to 15 know." Made sense all my life. I got a fairly big 16 company. And the guy who made like one one-hundredth of 17 what I made came up to me one day and told me something 18 that was so brilliant, that I couldn't figure out why I 19 didn't think of it, because I was the guy getting the big 20 bucks. 21 What I can't understand is, if South Coast has 22 air quality management experts and CARB has air quality 23 management experts on these issues that we disagree on, 24 what makes theirs so smarter than ours? If in their 25 considered opinion these issues are not possible, these PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 173 1 attainments are not possible, what makes them the expert 2 more than ours? Is it because they have the big job and 3 we have the small job? I don't think so. 4 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: I hope you didn't 5 misinterpret what I was saying, because I'd also like to 6 be respectful to your position as you were when we had the 7 Bay Area. I wasn't trying to intimate that either side 8 had more expertise in my comments. But my father was a 9 politician, so I'm not sure. I never know what I'm 10 wondering. And I've spent thousands of dollars on therapy 11 and I still don't know. 12 (Laughter.) 13 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Well, what I would say to 14 that, I think -- and I'll cut it short there -- is that I 15 agree with you, Dr. Burke. We've got tremendous staff in 16 both places. But having worked at both places, I think 17 there's a depth and a breadth of expertise in the various 18 agencies depending on their areas of specific controls. 19 And I think the record on both sides speaks for 20 themselves. And I don't want to pit one against the 21 other. That's why I said at the beginning we need the 22 best minds of both. 23 And I'm inclined to -- well, I certainly support 24 Supervisor DeSaulnier's comment that maybe if you lock the 25 staff in the room for a necessary time, we'll come out in PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 174 1 agreement. And certainly with our presenter today, I like 2 our chances. As you see, Joe is about what, six eight, 3 six nine. 4 But on the serious side, I think there's areas 5 where -- there are areas where I think there are 6 significant disagreements. And one of the things I think 7 I did like about your proposal, Dr. Burke, and I think 8 we'll be continuing no matter what we do today, is that we 9 need to get the best minds in this state and we need to 10 continually update that. We also need to -- not only the 11 best minds in academia, industry -- where anybody who has 12 ideas. So I share that desire with you very much because, 13 you're right, we don't have all the answers. We 14 demonstrated that. 15 But, again, I don't think it's going to be 16 pitting the staff together. But I do think that there's a 17 depth and breadth commensurate with the obligations. 18 With that, we're delighted to welcome a former 19 Board member back before us. 20 Lynne. 21 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you. Thank you, Chairman 22 Lloyd and members of the Board. It's a pleasure to be 23 back with you. 24 At the distance of four and a half years away 25 from the Board, it's interesting to come back and find PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 175 1 that it's equally difficult for all of you as it was 2 during the period I served as one of Governor Wilson's 3 appointees from 1993 to 1999. 4 I respectfully request the Board to defer 5 approval of the proposed 2003 SIP, because it's not yet an 6 adequate planning document for California to use to 7 achieve clean air standards as required by the federal 8 law. 9 I respectfully ask the Board to direct the ARB 10 staff to return to the drawing boards and rewrite the 11 plan, whether by themselves, with you locked up, or locked 12 up with the South Coast. In fact, anybody can be locked 13 up with anybody they want to be. 14 (Laughter.) 15 MS. EDGERTON: Most important is for them to 16 return with a plan that is complete, one that contains 17 sufficient state -- specific State measures and 18 contingency measures to permit the entire state to achieve 19 federal clean air standards by applicable federal 20 deadlines. 21 There are legal risks no matter which direction 22 you go. If you adopt this today, I dare say someone will 23 sue you because it doesn't reflect -- it does not contain 24 a clean air -- let me put it -- a persuasive clean air 25 attainment demonstration, as is required in the 19 -- in PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 176 1 the 1990 Federal Clean Air Act amendments. Not to mention 2 the fact that it doesn't appear to satisfy the California 3 Clean Air Act requirements either. 4 At one point in the document the ARB staff admits 5 outright that the proposed 2003 SIP is deficient. Here's 6 the quote: "The defined State measures will provide 7 sizable benefits, but not enough to meet existing SIP 8 attainment needs in the South Coast and San Joaquin." 9 Well, I say to you, if not you, then who? If not 10 you, then who? You are the State agency that has the 11 obligation to create the vision for how we're going to 12 have clean air. There's nobody else here. And we rely on 13 you. 14 So -- we've been here before. We were here in 15 1994. I believe some of the people here were threatening 16 to sue me when I was on the Air Board as a Governor Wilson 17 appointee. We sat down and we came up with a program with 18 measures that would demonstrate attainment. And it was 19 the first one approved in the history of the State of 20 California. It was approved by the U.S. EPA. And it -- 21 and also when we left, the last measure we adopted, LEV 22 II, which some of us on this Board gave an arm and a leg 23 to have adopted, closed -- well, had sufficient additional 24 unexpected emission reductions to close the black box. In 25 my heart and mind, although I may be wrong, but in my PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 177 1 heart and mind my calculations were that when I left the 2 Board in 1999 that SIP was whole. 3 And so I say at this stage of the process, a mere 4 six years before areas such as the South Coast Air Basin 5 must be in attainment, it's of questionable legality for 6 the State to adopt a SIP which relies on unidentified 7 technological advances and programs to demonstrate 8 attainment. 9 By now, in my view, respectfully, Congress 10 intended for the State to have adequate measures at least 11 identified to reach clean air, even if not adopted or 12 implemented yet. The staff in my view should come back to 13 you in 60 to 90 days, including Dr. Burke's measures and 14 whatever other measures they can come up with which would 15 make this SIP whole, and then the Board should proceed to 16 adopt that and work hard from there. 17 I'm concerned about the staff's recommendation to 18 rename and renumber all of those 1994 SIP measures as if 19 they were 2003 SIP measures. I know I'm not -- I am not 20 pre-eternal -- is that what you said? I'm not quite 21 pre-eternal. Although maybe I am and that's why I don't 22 understand it. But it makes it harder for the public in 23 the community to follow. 24 You know, the proposed redesignations make it 25 really hard for someone who's interested and affected to PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 178 1 tell what progress has and has not been made. It 2 undermines the public trust in the process, because it 3 reminds one of a shell game. I thought it was a shell 4 game. If I thought it was a shell game, imagine what 5 people who are coming to it for the first time thought it 6 looked like. What businesses and communities need are 7 transparency, not obfuscation. 8 It's confusing that the SIP -- the current SIP 9 fails to compare in any clear way the overall tonnage the 10 ARB needed to cut in the 1994 SIP with the overall tonnage 11 needed to be cut in 2003 SIP. 12 Finally, with respect to -- I know my time's 13 running out. But with respect to the idea that you can't 14 have measures in a planning document that don't have 15 adequate funding or don't have statutory authority, I can 16 only refer you to our 1994 SIP program. Jackie Schaefer, 17 who was the Chairwoman at that time, and working together 18 with the staff, this wonderful staff, pulled together a 19 set of proposals that -- some of which, as Board Member 20 McKinnon quite rightly pointed out, did not end up being 21 adopted as the regulations. But others did, and others 22 did with more -- that were more aggressive and did attain 23 -- get more emissions reductions. 24 Take, for example, the Carl Moyer program, one 25 that is very clear -- I mean it is very dear to Dr. Lloyd, PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 179 1 to all of us here who knew Dr. Moyer. And bless him. 2 When that was on the books, there was no funding and there 3 was no authority. There was nada, nada. Just an idea. 4 You know, we need to get these emission 5 reductions from the worst polluting trucks. If we don't 6 get it, we're going to get slammed with a FIP and we're 7 going to be a goner. We're going to get, you know, all of 8 these terrible consequences. 9 So I encourage you to defer and to come back to 10 us with something that shows us -- gives us our plan, it 11 really gives us a blueprint, so we can have clean air. 12 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 13 MS. EDGERTON: And thank you very much for your 14 hard work. 15 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 16 (Applause.) 17 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Michael Mendez, Steve Veres, 18 and Doug Quetin. 19 MR. MENDEZ: Good afternoon. 20 It's a pleasure to be here today representing my 21 boss, Assemblymember Cindy Montanez. 22 I will be reading a brief statement that she has 23 written. 24 "On behalf of the 39 Assembly District, I 25 strongly advocate that you strengthen your staff's PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 180 1 proposed State and federal policy approach for the 2 California State Implementation Plan. 3 "Southern California has endured the worst air 4 quality in the state for decades. The California Air 5 Resources Board and the U.S. Environmental Protection 6 Agency has sole authority over pollution sources 7 responsible for 80 percent of ozone-forming emissions in 8 the South Coast Region. 9 "The vast majority of this pollution is emitted 10 from mobile sources and consumer products. As a result of 11 lenient regulations, residents in my district who live 12 next to the congested 405 freeway through the San Fernando 13 Valley are at least twice as likely to develop cancer from 14 breathing vehicle exhaust than those who live next to 15 highly industrial areas, according to cancer risk 16 assessments by AQMD. 17 "The assessments estimate that life-long 18 residents of the 405 freeway corridor face a 1,000 to 19 1,500 in a million risk of developing cancer from inhaling 20 the diesel, Benzene and formaldehyde found in the exhaust 21 of the half a million cars and trucks that travel through 22 the thoroughfare each day. 23 Accordingly, as Chair of the Assembly Select 24 Committee on Environmental Justice, I have taken the 25 approach to encourage policy based on the belief that a PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 181 1 protecting environment is essential for the quality of 2 life of current and future generations. The strengthening 3 of your plan can provide a step forward to assist in 4 enduring and ending the ongoing polluting of risk 5 populations and communities. 6 "Moreover, a strong and enhanced mobile source 7 control element other than currently proposed is a 8 rational next step to facilitate attainment for this 9 region and achieve enhanced air quality for all residents 10 in the state. 11 "Furthermore, more stringent regulations can also 12 establish the opportunity toward developing an automotive 13 industry that can efficiently produce zero-emission 14 vehicles. Stricter regulation can spur innovation and 15 action in the industry, whose beneficiaries are not just 16 consumers but all Californians. 17 "Therefore, I respectively request that your 18 Board strengthen CARB staff's proposal by integrating 19 additional short-term control approaches, including those 20 recommended by AQMD staff, as well as explicit long-term 21 commitments by CARB to achieve the maximum feasible 22 reductions from sources under State and federal 23 jurisdiction. 24 "Thank you for your attention. And I look 25 forward to your response to these significant issues. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 182 1 "Sincerely, Assemblymember Cindy Montanez." 2 Thank you. 3 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 4 Got Steve Veres, Doug Quetin, and then Karen 5 Wilson. 6 Please, if people can keep their comments focused 7 on -- you know, there's a lot of background here. We've 8 all heard now how much we need to move ahead. But if you 9 could focus on specific comments that you could add to the 10 previous dialog. 11 MR. VERES: Good afternoon. 12 My name is Steve Veres, and I'm a Councilperson 13 for the City of San Fernando. 14 It's actually with great pleasure to have me here 15 with you today. I think my timing for getting here 16 actually allowed me to witness a very unique dialogue with 17 Dr. Wallerstein and yourselves. 18 So having said that, in the past few years our 19 city has been very willing to work with AQMD on doing 20 whatever we can to improve air quality, whether it's 21 alternative fuels for a fleet or -- I know recently we 22 were -- I was here with the Board to discuss an asphalt 23 recycler and its enclosures to really improve the air 24 quality of our residents. 25 In recent years we've also of course implemented PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 183 1 a reforestation project. We've joined clean cities. So 2 these are all things at the local level we very much are 3 committed to, to helping with and supporting whatever we 4 can do. 5 Now, I think it's been mentioned a few times, and 6 I saw a lot of neighbors here, there was a headline 7 article in the local newspaper talking about the impact of 8 freeways, in particular the 405. 9 San Fernando is situated about two miles away 10 from the 405, but completely surrounded by the 118, 5 and 11 210 freeways. So it is certainly a huge concern for us. 12 And as we are doing everything in our power to clean the 13 air and make things better for our constituents, first of 14 all we want to lend you our support and let you know that 15 we are supportive of any type of increases or greater 16 goals, greater objectives that you have. 17 And we certainly want to see that progress in a 18 very strong way. When constituents come up to me and talk 19 about the newspaper article or air quality, we certainly 20 want to be able to address them in a very positive way 21 that there are a number of good things going on for the 22 state. 23 A few weeks ago -- and there was a letter 24 submitted to you -- we discussed this at our city council 25 meeting and unanimously -- we actually discussed the issue PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 184 1 and agreed to send a letter urging CARB to accept stronger 2 measures, and particularly a number of the ones that are 3 discussed by SCAQMD. 4 So I wanted to take a moment to read a couple of 5 excerpts. And that's all the time I'll take. I 6 understand sometimes when you sit up there it can get -- 7 these hearings are difficult. We do them once a week. 8 So, you know, I can certainly understand you there. 9 On behalf of the San Fernando City Council I urge 10 you to significantly strengthen your staff's proposal -- 11 proposed State and federal strategy for the California 12 State Implementation Plan. Local businesses and 13 industries have reduced emissions. And we at the city 14 certainly are doing what we can. And we are doing this 15 actually as time comes in a very aggressive manner. We 16 look -- we believe the time is right to look to sources in 17 the region that are not currently contributing their fair 18 share of emission reductions, specifically those which are 19 under your jurisdiction and also that of U.S. EPA. 20 We urge the Board to strengthen the CARB staff 21 proposals. I think the addendum that's proposed in the 22 motion here is certainly in the right direction. And in 23 listening to this dialogue, I sincerely hope that there is 24 some space to move towards a common ground to get what we 25 all deserve, which is clean air. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 185 1 So thank you very much. 2 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much indeed. 3 Doug Quetin, Karen Wilson, and Jonah Ramirez. 4 No, I think we've had Jonah Ramirez, I think. 5 Gail Feuer after that, after Karen Wilson. 6 Hi, Doug. 7 MR. QUETIN: Good afternoon, members of the 8 Board. You're going to have a very long day ahead of you, 9 and I will be brief. 10 I'm Douglas Quetin, President of the California 11 Air Pollution Control Officers Association. Appreciate 12 the opportunity to speak here today. 13 CAPCOA urges your prompt attention -- your prompt 14 action to achieve additional necessary emission reductions 15 from mobile sources and consumer products in the State 16 Implementation Plan. Emissions from these categories of 17 sources are clearly the most significant component of the 18 ozone precursor inventory in California. Shortfalls and 19 emissions from these categories currently threaten the 20 ability of the South Coast and several other air districts 21 to achieve compliance with the health-based standards. 22 CAPCOA's very concerned about possible delays in 23 the identification and implementation of these measures to 24 reduce emissions from these categories. In our 25 experience, these kinds of measures require long periods PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 186 1 after they are adopted before technology or formulation 2 changes can be implemented. And even longer for the 3 cleaner vehicles and the products to be used widely enough 4 to cause measurable improvements in emission reductions in 5 air quality. 6 If ARB delays the identification of and 7 commitment to emission reduction measures, actual air 8 quality improvements will be pushed many years into the 9 future. We believe that ARB can identify and commit to 10 substantial emission reduction measures now. 11 We clearly support the intent of the motion of 12 Dr. Burke. If the measures are implemented vigorously, 13 they will yield air quality improvements in the timeframes 14 needed for local districts to attain the standards, not 15 just in the South Coast. 16 We request that ARB work with CAPCOA to 17 aggressively pursue a long-term and robust funding program 18 to incentivize emission reductions from heavy-duty diesel 19 engines and other similar sources. 20 The next several years are critically important 21 for California to fully implement all the current SIP 22 commitments, achieve additional emission reductions, and 23 attain the federal standards. Any emission reduction 24 opportunities we forego now will make future attainment of 25 these new standards exponentially more difficult. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 187 1 In closing, we strongly urge you to take the most 2 expeditious and aggressive steps possible to reduce 3 emissions from mobile sources and consumer products. 4 And, again, thank you for the opportunity to 5 comment. And local districts, as always, look forward to 6 working with you and your staff in this effort. 7 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you, Doug. In your 8 previous comment, has there ever been occasion when the 9 ARB staff did not work with CAPCOA? 10 MR. QUETIN: Not to my knowledge. 11 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 12 Karen Wilson, Gail Feuer, Tim Carmichael. 13 MS. WILSON: Good afternoon, members. 14 My name is Karen Wilson and I'm with the 15 Sacramento Air District. And I came today to speak to the 16 new state strategy for California State Implementation 17 Plan. But because if it doesn't happen here in the South 18 Coast, it isn't going to happen for us. We're speaking on 19 the South Coast Plan as well with these remarks. 20 Our region has an attainment deadline, as you 21 know, of 2005 for the federal one hour ozone standard. 22 And I'm here today on behalf of the six counties in our 23 nonattainment region to request that you adopt all of the 24 measures in this plan with the earliest implementation 25 dates possible. And those include the measures in Dr. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 188 1 Burke's proposed amendment today, which had a lot of good 2 ideas for our region, emission inventory as well. 3 Our inventory has recently been updated in 4 preparation for an update of our region's SIP. We're 5 anticipating a conformity lapse about a year from today. 6 It's not surprising the revised emission inventory data 7 show that if we're to have any hope of meeting our 2005 8 federal one hour attainment goal, let alone our state 9 goal, we have to achieve more mobile source emission 10 reductions from the fleet that's on the road today. 11 I say it's not surprising, although it's 12 discouraging because this is essentially the same position 13 that our region was in ten years ago. At that time, we 14 bumped up from serious to severe nonattainment because the 15 mobile source inventory was so high that we couldn't model 16 attainment by 1999. 17 State and federal measures were supposed to kick 18 in in time to help us reach attainment by 2005. So our 19 region very reluctantly agreed to accept more severe 20 regulations on our stationary sources in the short-term in 21 exchange for reductions to come from the on- and off-road 22 light- and heavy-duty vehicle fleet in the future. 23 Today, as we sit here we attribute more than 90 24 percent of our NOx inventory to mobile sources. And one 25 recent in fact run shows a 40 percent increase in NOx PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 189 1 emissions from mobile sources when we look at it again. 2 And we see again the list of measures before you 3 today so far doesn't propose to adopt and implement 4 anything like the emission reductions that we're going to 5 need to help us to achieve by 2005. We'll know more 6 definitely in January when we do some modeling what 7 emission reduction targets will be to make it by 2005. 8 But we have analyzed the potential emission benefit to our 9 region from the proposed state-defined measures contained 10 in the plan before you today. The total benefit by our 11 2005 attainment date is likely to be less than three tons 12 a day of NOx and less than two tons a day of hydrocarbons. 13 Measures scheduled to take effect, in what for us 14 is the out-year of 2010, promised to achieve greater 15 benefits. But, again, if we waited that long -- in 16 exchange for that longer timeframe, we'd have to bump up 17 and join the South Coast in the extreme nonattainment 18 category for virtually no air quality benefit in exchange 19 for penalties on our sources. 20 Extreme thresholds would increase our Title 5 21 sources from 14 now to 450 in spite of the fact that our 22 rate of progress report shows a continuous overachievement 23 by stationary sources of emission reductions especially in 24 the NOx category. We just won't get to attainment by 25 further reliance on stationary source emission reductions PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 190 1 in our region. 2 Several of the measures in the plan before you 3 today do promise to provide us with substantial near-term 4 benefits and we look forward to achieving those as soon as 5 possible. In particular, this would be augmentation of 6 truck and bus highway inspections with community-based 7 inspections. A critical component of this program should 8 be to set up a statewide on-road heavy-duty smog check 9 program that builds on the existing California heavy-duty 10 vehicle inspection program. We estimate this measure 11 could get our region more than one and a half tons a day 12 of NOx benefit by 2007. 13 Another measure of this plan should expedite the 14 replacing of catalysts and oxygen sensors on older 15 passenger cars and light-duty trucks to get benefits as 16 quickly as we can. Our analysis shows that this measure 17 could get us four to five tons a day of NOx benefit by 18 2007 if it were implemented in an expedited way. 19 Recreational boats are an astounding 30 tons a 20 day of our summer ozone inventory. And Dr. Burke's 21 proposal put forth today for that category, if it were 22 expedited, would help us out a lot. Annualize that number 23 of six tons a day, but during the -- 24 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: And then you could -- 25 MS. WILSON: -- really counts the highest. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 191 1 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: And you could implement that? 2 MS. WILSON: You know we've looked at a range of 3 everything from, "Gee, would you please change out your 4 two stroke for that new four stroke you've been wanting 5 anyway?" to bans on the use of those kinds of boats on the 6 spare-the-air days. And so the range of benefits -- 7 anything that we would do, since they're totally 8 uncontrolled now, would be a big boost for us. And the 9 sooner we do it, the better. 10 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Can you wrap up? 11 MS. WILSON: Sure. 12 So we urge you to work with the Bureau of 13 Automotive Repair to expedite a contract that helps us 14 focus our resources to know whether the -- the proper role 15 for remote sensing. We want to improve the spot check 16 program. It's still one of the most cost effective ways 17 to get emission reductions. That should be an expedited 18 measure. And if you could, work on a little bit of a 19 culture change there to be proactive and solicit and 20 certify the retrofit devices for the on-road fleet today. 21 We think that would get you a long way to helping the 22 entire state. 23 The decisions you make here today will set the 24 bar for all the rest of California, and we really look 25 forward to your helping us achieve those reductions as PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 192 1 soon as possible. 2 Thank you. 3 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 4 Gail Feuer, Tim Carmichael, Patricia Byrd. 5 MS. FEUER: Good afternoon. I'm Gail Feuer, Dr. 6 Lloyd and members of the Board. I'm here on behalf of the 7 Natural Resources Defense Council and our hundred thousand 8 members who live in the State of California. 9 We, like many of the people here today, are very 10 concerned about the enormity of the black box and the 11 trend of worsening air quality in this region. That's why 12 so many people are here today to urge you to strengthen 13 the plan. I understand that you have received almost 14 7,000 E-mails from the public asking you to strengthen the 15 plan as well. 16 We are here to support Dr. Burke's motion. We 17 believe that it is an important step to strengthen the air 18 plan to add an additional 97 tons. I think it's been 19 pointed out they're in addition to the 23 tons proposed by 20 your staff. 21 I would add though that there's one very 22 important change to that motion. The motion has a measure 23 to be adopted through 2008. We support the motion, but 24 only if the adoption period is from 2004 to 2006. That 25 would give your staff three years to develop the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 193 1 measure -- the measures. 2 Our concern is if we wait until 2008 to get the 3 additional 97 tons, we still have 300 more tons to go in 4 two years. So we urge you to make a change, Dr. Burke, to 5 your motion to have the adoption by 2006. 6 In terms of the 23 tons per day, we support those 7 additional measures. We believe this Board today could 8 act both to add those 23 tons and to support Dr. Burke's 9 motion which would bring 97 more tons, and also the 66 10 tons that are contingent. We also support Attachment A1, 11 which is a schedule for development of long-term measures. 12 If, however, this Board is not prepared to adopt 13 the motion or if it is not prepared to change the adoption 14 date of that motion to 2006, then we do urge you to delay 15 for 90 days, so that there could be additional public 16 review and comment, and for you, this Board, to direct 17 your staff to develop an additional 97 tons per day in 18 addition to the 23 tons. We think if your staff had the 19 time, they could do it. 20 There also is no November conformity deadline. I 21 would like to clarify that. There is a June 2004 22 conformity deadline. There is a concern that a number of 23 agencies need to approve the plan before then. But if you 24 work with them to expedite the schedule, you can have the 25 delay, fix the plan, and still meet the conformity PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 194 1 deadline. 2 Lastly, let me address the question of a lawsuit. 3 Board Member McKinnon raised this before. I brought that 4 lawsuit on the 1994 plan, and I'll tell you why. We 5 brought the plan because there were three measures -- we 6 brought the lawsuit because there were three measures in 7 the 1994 SIP which this Board did not follow through on. 8 The problem was not that it came up with new creative 9 solutions. The problem was, frankly, it dropped the three 10 measures and did nothing to make up for it. So we lost 11 those tons and we lost the ability to achieve attainment. 12 We tried to work with staff to resolve that issue. It 13 didn't work out. We brought the lawsuit. 14 The result was a schedule for this agency to 15 achieve the tons in those measures by other measures. And 16 since that time on two occasions this Board has missed the 17 deadlines in that settlement. In each instance we worked 18 with staff, and this Board approved a resolution that 19 substituted other measures for those and gave you the 20 flexibility, gave you in fact additional time. 21 So we think that you should not be running from a 22 lawsuit when all you need to do is have measures which 23 achieve clean air. If they do not pan out, if it turns 24 out that they are not feasible, you do have the 25 flexibility to replace them with other measures. The PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 195 1 reason you got in trouble, so to speak, the last time 2 around is you did not replace them. 3 Your staff is not saying that the measures on Dr. 4 Burke's list are unfeasible. They're saying they need to 5 do more homework. And we're saying, yes, they should do 6 that homework, they should develop those measures before 7 they are adopted as regulations. But you can put them in 8 the plan today for short-term measures, and it's the only 9 way that we will achieve clean air. 10 Thank you. 11 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 12 (Applause.) 13 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Tim Carmichael, Patricia 14 Byrd, Fransiska Cahya. 15 MR. CARMICHAEL: Good afternoon, Chairman Lloyd, 16 members of the Board. Tim Carmichael with the Coalition 17 for Clean Air. 18 I want to start with a positive comment. And a 19 friend of mine, Denny Zane, gave me wisdom a few years 20 ago, saying that it's important to notice when the debate 21 has shifted from "if" to "how". And I really believe 22 that. And I feel like I came in with, you know, 23 excitement about the potential here, the mood in here. 24 And I've been frustrated by a lot of the discussion, the 25 comments by Board members today, raising a lot of reasons PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 196 1 why things can't be done, you know, problems and hurdles 2 and, you know, excuses in some ways not to act. 3 And I feel that the environmental community, 4 Californians at large, feel very strongly it is time for 5 action. And what you heard from Dr. Burke I think was an 6 eloquent representation of the frustration held by many 7 Californians about where we sit today. 8 Yes, things have been done by ARB and other -- 9 AQMD and other agencies in the past. But this discussion 10 is not about what's been done in the past. It's about 11 what needs to be done from this point forward to 2010 and, 12 you know, feeding off of that. 13 This back and forth about long term, short 14 term -- who are we kidding? There is no long term. We're 15 talking about seven years. That is short term. In any of 16 these planners' minds seven years is a short-term horizon. 17 And for us to be talking about putting stuff off to the 18 long term, you know, it's ridiculous. 19 We are talking about -- you know, before you were 20 considering a plan that only spells out 20 percent of 21 what's needed going forward -- 20 percent. In my book 22 that's not a plan, it's not viable. It's more like a punt 23 with less than a minute to play in the game and you're 24 down. I mean that's where you are as an agency. That's 25 what's stacked against you. To put off -- and I'm not PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 197 1 talking about putting off something for 60 or 90 days. 2 I'm talking about putting off decisions till 2006, 7 and 3 8, when we know that the deadline for federal attainment 4 is 2010. 5 Things have to be reviewed, evaluated, adopted in 6 the very near term and implemented starting in, you know, 7 '05, '06 or it's not going to deliver in 2010. I mean 8 everyone that works on these issues knows that. Putting 9 something off, putting these decisions off till 2008, 2009 10 means basically we don't -- we're not going to get there. 11 And that's unacceptable to not only the Coalition for 12 Clean Air, but everyone that is breathing the air in 13 California. It's unacceptable. 14 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 15 Presented as follows.) 16 One other point that I wanted to make, you 17 know -- this is a chart that was in the local AQMP. But I 18 believe it's undisputed. 19 This is a pie chart. On the left -- 20 unfortunately, it's not large enough. But on the left 21 it's the pie of VOC emissions in 2010 and on the right is 22 the NOx emissions in 2010. This is after everything 23 that's adopted is implemented. 24 ARB has the bulk of the inventory remaining. 25 Doesn't mean you haven't done a lot in the past. Doesn't PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 198 1 mean that your staff isn't working hard right now. But 2 the reality is, if you take a snapshot of where we're 3 going to be -- or a prediction of where we're going to be 4 in 2010, most of the emissions are coming from 5 ARB-controlled sources. ARB needs to do a lot more. 6 The biggest problem with -- you know, Gail 7 highlighted the adoption date problem with the Burke 8 amendment. That is something that we are encouraging you 9 to change if you pursue that. And we are encouraging you 10 to pursue that amendment. 11 But another big problem with it is it's 120 out 12 of 400 tons that are necessary. 13 So, yes, a big step in the right direction, a 14 vast improvement over what has been proposed by staff 15 today. But everyone needs to remember that's not the end 16 game. A hundred twenty out of 400 doesn't solve our 17 problem. It's a big step in the right direction. But you 18 need to be as a Board thinking about seven years as a 19 short-term horizon and thinking about everything that can 20 be done in the near term. 21 Last comment. I never thought I would be quoting 22 Arnold Schwarzenegger on the air here. 23 (Laughter.) 24 MR. CARMICHAEL: But the cover of the L.A. Times 25 today is -- it warrants repetition here. The lead story PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 199 1 in the L.A. Times today is "Capital Visit - A Call For 2 Action." And his quote, "Action, action, action. That's 3 what people have voted me into this office for." 4 That is as true on air pollution as it is on any 5 issue. If there's one environmental issue that 6 Californians are united behind, it is action on air 7 pollution. And I encourage you to take that spirit, move 8 on Dr. Burke's amendment, give the public some time to 9 comment as appropriate or evaluate as appropriate. But we 10 have to move on this stuff, not delay, not -- it is really 11 passed time for caution. It's time for action. 12 Thank you very much. 13 (Applause.) 14 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 15 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: Before we -- could I ask -- 16 these screens are exceptionally dark today. They're much 17 darker. Is that a technical problem that we're 18 experiencing, or did they just get old on us? 19 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Conservation issues. 20 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: Yeah, that's right. We're 21 running about 30 percent of power. Okay. 22 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: We have Patricia Byrd, then 23 Dr. Joe Lyou after that. 24 MS. BYRD: My name is Patricia Byrd and I'm 25 speaking today on behalf of the American Lung Association PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 200 1 of the Inland Counties and the American Lung Association 2 of California. 3 We appreciate the many good things that the CARB 4 Board has taken -- many of the good steps the CARB Board 5 has taken over the past few years to reduce vehicle and 6 fuel emissions and taken the leadership on clean air 7 issues. But today we're urging you to continue this 8 strong leadership by voting not to adopt the State 9 Implementation Plan for South Coast. 10 Instead, we're urging you to direct staff to 11 strengthen the plan by including stronger and more 12 immediate clean air measures and to bring the plan back to 13 the Board in two to three months. There are deficiencies 14 in the plan that must be addressed before we feel the plan 15 can be adopted. 16 The biggest concern of the American Lung 17 Association is the enormous black box in the 2000 SIP. 18 The CARB Board should address this now by 19 adopting more short-term commitments. And given that the 20 attainment date is only seven years from now, the American 21 Lung Association believes that putting the bulk of 22 emission reductions into the black box for a future 23 consideration is the wrong approach for achieving clean 24 air in the South Coast Basin. 25 I want to also note that we are supporting the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 201 1 alternative amendments that were proposed by Dr. Burke but 2 also with the adoption in 2006. 3 We are especially concerned about the need to 4 reduce diesel emissions in the South Coast Basin through 5 measures such as the funding of the Carl Moyer Program and 6 the School Bus Program to retrofit, repower, and replace 7 older diesel vehicles and equipment with cleaner 8 alternatives. 9 Diesel emissions are linked to asthma attacks, 10 chronic bronchitis, hospital admissions, lung cancer, and 11 premature deaths. We know that CARB is also committed to 12 these diesel emission reduction programs. And now we must 13 make it a high priority to work together to find new 14 funding sources for these programs on an ongoing basis. 15 This year we've seen first state smog alerts in 16 the Inland Empire, the first time in five years. First 17 state smog alerts are not merely measures of pollution 18 level. We have to see them as an indicator of a direct 19 respiratory assistant on residents of the areas in which 20 they occur. 21 Smog causes damage to everyone's lungs, but 22 especially to sensitive individuals such as children. And 23 you saw our asthma representative here this morning, 24 Jonah. It causes problems for the elderly and those with 25 asthma and other respiratory diseases. Increased school PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 202 1 absences, reduced lung functions, growth rate in children 2 have been documented in the South Coast Basin and linked 3 to elevated pollution levels. 4 In order for us to live in a healthy environment 5 and carry out our everyday activities, we must have clean 6 air to breathe. In order for our children to develop 7 physically, we must have clean air to breathe. 8 And, in closing, I'd just like to say we urge the 9 CARB Board not to adopt the SIP for the South Coast Plan 10 and instead direct staff to reevaluate the plan and 11 include more short-term measures. Failure to do so will 12 ultimately contribute to poor air quality and a reduced 13 standard of living for the residents of the Inland Empire. 14 (Applause.) 15 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 16 Dr. Lyou, Fransiska Cahya, Gilbert Estrada. 17 DR. LYOU: Thank you, Chairman Lloyd and members 18 of the Board. My name is Dr. Joseph Lyou. I'm Executive 19 Director of the California Environmental Rights Alliance. 20 I'm here to endorse the comments that you've heard from 21 the last three speakers and also to share with you a 22 little bit of information that I have on the environmental 23 justice implications of your decision today. 24 The poet Emerson said that if there's one thing 25 that you do -- well, it basically said if you've made one PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 203 1 person breathe easier, you have been successful. I don't 2 think he was really being that literal. But you do have 3 that opportunity today. And we want to make sure that 4 it's clear that we support Dr. Burke's proposed motion 5 with the amendment that the measures be adopted by 2006, 6 as explained by Gail Feuer of NRDC. 7 But we also ask you to consider the environmental 8 justice implications of the decision you're making today. 9 And I'd like to share with you some data that I got from 10 the Department of health services -- 11 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 12 Presented as follows.) 13 DR. LYOU: -- showing -- it's a little bit hard 14 to see here -- that -- basically what this is showing us 15 is that nonwhite children of color are twice -- more than 16 twice as likely as white children to live in areas of high 17 traffic density in the South Coast Air Basin. 18 So I'm going to try to put this positively. For 19 every three tons of emissions that you reduce, two of 20 those tons will benefit children of color in the South 21 Coast Air Basin. I want to keep -- ask you keep that in 22 mind when you pursue measures that will lead to true 23 reductions here and deal with the problems of air 24 pollution. 25 So please take Emerson's quote and poem literally PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 204 1 and help people breathe easier. 2 Thank you. 3 (Applause.) 4 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you, Joe. 5 Fransiska Cahya, Gilbert Estrada, Penny Newman. 6 MS. CAHYA: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. 7 I am Fransiska Cahya. I am a spokesperson for the 8 American Lung Association -- 9 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Sorry about the 10 pronunciation. 11 MS. CAHYA: That's okay. 12 -- of Los Angeles County. And I'm also speaking 13 on behalf of our asthma coalition partner, Long Beach 14 Alliance of Children with Asthma. 15 The American Lung Association strongly urge you 16 to not adopt the State Implementation Plan for South Coast 17 in its current form for the reason that it lacks the 18 strength needed to practically address mobile source 19 pollution impacting our region. 20 As you know, today's residents of Los Angeles 21 County and southern California breathe some of the worst 22 air on a daily basis. And in southern California itself 23 episodic outdoor levels of ozone, fine particulate matter, 24 and nitrogen dioxide has historically been among the 25 highest in United States. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 205 1 And what are the health impacts? I'm just going 2 to throw in some data here. Ozone, for instance, 3 literally it burns the insides of your lungs. In healthy 4 adults ozone causes shortness of breath, watery eyes, 5 cough, headaches. And many of you probably have known and 6 know what it feels like. 7 And it gets worse, because children who play team 8 sports and spend more time outside in communities with 9 high levels of ozone, studies have shown that they have 10 higher incidents of newly diagnosed asthma. In adults or 11 children with lung disease ozone can trigger asthma 12 attacks and cause breathing difficulties. 13 For nitrogen dioxide, for example, a recent study 14 demonstrated that lung function growth was approximately 15 10 percent slower among children living in communities 16 with higher levels of nitrogen dioxide and other 17 traffic-related pollutants. 18 So these are just compelling reasons to support 19 pollution reduction measures and goals such as the Carl 20 Moyer and School Bus programs. These are also compelling 21 reasons for you to support Dr. Burke's amendment for 22 adoption no later than 2006. 23 Our health, our children's health, and the air we 24 breathe deserves our protection, because when you can't 25 breathe, nothing else really matters. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 206 1 Thank you. 2 (Applause.) 3 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 4 MR. ESTRADA: Hi. My name is Gil Estrada. I'm 5 with Physicians for Social Responsibility. 6 First of all, I'd like to thank you very much for 7 your time. And I'd like to first applaud the ARB and AQMD 8 for the great work they've done. 9 But nonetheless in the last seven years air 10 quality has become worse in the basin. 11 And I've recently become married. And we're 12 expecting to have children next year. But I was very 13 concerned to express to my wife that our child would have 14 to breathe the most polluted air in the nation, that our 15 child, by the time it would reach two months old, would 16 exceed a lifetime of cancer, that the cancer risk of my 17 child would be at least 1,500 to several thousand above 18 the limit set by the EPA, and that the MATES II study says 19 that about 80 percent of pollution that would enter his 20 lung -- his or her lungs would be from diesel or mobile 21 source. 22 And specifically speaking about East L.A., many 23 people mention the mega-freeways. Where I grew up at 24 there's seven freeways in an area only 15.2 square miles. 25 And to put that into perspective, the State of California PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 207 1 freeway encroachment's about 2 percent, the City of L.A. 2 is about 4 percent, East L.A. is about 19 percent of the 3 land used is covered by freeways. And in unincorporated 4 East L.A. about 32 percent of their land is covered by 5 freeways. 6 You may know that the ARB set six air monitors in 7 Boyle Heights. And after 14 months study you discover 8 that the children in East L.A. are basically breathing the 9 highest levels of PM in the nation, or they exceed State 10 PM levels some 27 out of 32 days. 11 A stone's throw away from Boyle Heights is the 17 12 Freeway, which carries about 47,000 diesel trucks every 13 day, coupled with about a million non-diesel vehicles. 14 Clearly we have an amazing problem. And if cleaning the 15 air was a business, it would be many -- business in a 16 proposition that many people would be losing their jobs. 17 With that said, Dr. William Burke's motion is the 18 strongest language that I have seen yet. And I recommend 19 that you adopt his motion with the amendment of the dates 20 as well; 2004 to 2006 I feel would be more appropriate 21 than to wait for 2008. 22 And I actually invite you to speak with me and 23 other members of the community who have a vested interest, 24 obviously, and how we can work together, like the AQMD and 25 ARB is trying to work together, so we can all be involved PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 208 1 in cleaning air. Really there's no other reason why I'm 2 here but to clean the air for my wife, my future child, 3 and for the members of my community. 4 With that, I would like to thank you very much 5 for your time. 6 (Applause.) 7 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 8 I've got a request, that -- we're not at the 30th 9 witness yet, and we've got 115 signed up. And I'd like to 10 be fair to those people also towards the end. 11 So if there's anybody who wants to support a 12 position, that if somebody comes up and they're generally 13 supportive of that, please come forward and just say, "I 14 support that." I think this may be a way of getting 15 through and people getting heard. 16 But I think, you know, in fairness to the people 17 at the end and in fairness to my colleagues here, when we 18 get into a lot of repetition, it's not helping the 19 process. And I'm concerned that as the end of the day 20 goes, people at the end of the day who come to speak will 21 not get that chance. And so if you would please help us 22 in that capacity. 23 Like I say, 30 out of 115. And even three 24 minutes, which is difficult to enforce, and it can't be 25 enforced completely, you can work out the math. And we're PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 209 1 going to be here for a long, long time. 2 As you've seen from the deliberations, this is a 3 critical issue for us. I've certainly not exercised 4 discipline with some of the speakers and things because 5 this is very important. This is too important to rush 6 over. But I'm looking at the witnesses. Quite a few 7 people who may be coming along the same lines, and that 8 would be extremely helpful. 9 Thank you very much. 10 And welcome. 11 MS. SMETHERS: I'm speaking for Penny Newman of 12 the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice. 13 She had to leave and asked me to read her comments. 14 And in lieu of what you've just said, I won't be 15 repeating a lot of the -- some of the stuff that -- but 16 there is one point that I would really like to make. 17 The community -- 18 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: She's speaking on behalf of 19 Penny Newman. 20 Oh, your name please? 21 MS. SMETHERS: Oh, Coleen Smethers. I'm sorry. 22 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Okay. Thank you. 23 MS. SMETHERS: My name is on the list, too. 24 "The communities we serve in the Riverside and 25 San Bernardino Counties are suffering from some of the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 210 1 highest levels of air pollution in the nation. Children's 2 health study conducted by researchers at USC has 3 identified children in the Mira Loma area as having the 4 slowest lung growth and weakest lung function in all 5 children in southern California due to particulate 6 pollution." 7 And then she goes on to discuss other symptoms. 8 "It has been noted that more people die from 9 respiratory illnesses caused or exacerbated by particulate 10 air pollution each year in California than are killed in 11 car accidents, murders, and AIDS combined. That's pretty 12 notable. 13 "These findings are even before the planned 14 expansion of massive distribution centers, intermodal 15 facilities, rail yards, and inland ports that will 16 increase the levels of mobile pollution sources 17 tremendously. 18 "While all those planning the economic future of 19 our inland counties, no one seems to be considering the 20 health impacts of local residents. An initial review of a 21 50-page document by the Southern California Association of 22 Governments, or SCAG, on the need to increase the goods 23 movement infrastructure for cargo in southern California 24 mentioned the word "health" in only three places, raising 25 community concerns about the priority assigned to PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 211 1 community health issues and current discussions regarding 2 cargo transit expansion. 3 "We feel strongly that the proposal presented to 4 you by staff does not go far enough in protecting our 5 families." 6 Now, that was before she saw the amendments by 7 Dr. Burke. 8 "We cannot hope to improve our air quality fall 9 increasing the mobile source pollution. The current 10 version will not improve the current situation, much less 11 the anticipated pollution increase. 12 "We are here today to urge you -- no, beg you -- 13 to go beyond the recommendations provided by staff and 14 develop a State and federal strategy that is truly 15 protective of family health. AQMD has attempted to do so 16 as much as they can. Now it's time for you to step up to 17 your responsibilities and develop a plan that incorporates 18 additional short-term control strategies as well as 19 explicit long-term commitments to achieve the maximum 20 reductions possible from those sources under State and 21 federal jurisdiction. We cannot wait any longer." 22 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 23 Carol Piceno, Berishaj Rok'o, Paul Garcia. 24 MS. PICENO: Hi. I'm going to read you a letter 25 my son sent me to read for him. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 212 1 "My name is Juan Piceno. I am 12 years old. I 2 have asthma. We live in Wilmington -- four refineries, 3 the port, and a lot of diesel trucks. 4 "I could not be here today because I was sick for 5 six days from asthma. I still am sick, but I had to go to 6 school. We need more stiffer fines. And I am your 7 future. 8 "So thanks for caring. And thanks for letting my 9 mom read my letter." 10 We support Burke's motion, but we want stricter 11 standards. We want ships to plug in at the harbor instead 12 of leaving their engines running; and diesel trucks to 13 turn off their engines instead of leaving the motor 14 running. 15 I have two filters. This is one filter and this 16 is one filter after four days. This is a clean filter and 17 that's one after four days. 18 Oh, and also my son says why should he have to 19 take pills and let the polluters pollute? Because he has 20 to be on pills all the time for his lungs to be open. 21 (Applause.) 22 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 23 Just a question here. You mentioned that you had 24 seen Dr. Burke's motion. And we saw it for the first time 25 today. So when did you see it? PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 213 1 MS. PICENO: When we were out there, we heard it. 2 In the hallway. 3 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: And you had enough time to 4 digest it? 5 MS. PICENO: Yeah. 6 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Okay. Thank you. 7 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: I have a question. 8 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 9 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: I have a question. 10 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Yes, sorry. 11 Ms. D'Adamo. 12 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: What is the filter? The 13 filter is a picture of your filter or -- I can't tell what 14 that is. 15 MS. PICENO: Those are the filters that -- 16 from -- 17 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: They're from where? 18 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I think what it is is 19 basically if you expose filters and you pull air through 20 the community, and that shows the amount of particulates 21 accumulated -- 22 MS. PICENO: That's what you get in four days -- 23 what's accumulated in four days. 24 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: No, I understand the 25 concept. But that's a regular household filter or -- PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 214 1 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: No, I don't think so. 2 (Thereupon a discussion occurred 3 off the record.) 4 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: Sir, are you going to 5 testify? 6 MS. PICENO: Yeah, he's going to testify. 7 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: Okay. Hang in there. I 8 want to know about that. 9 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I think our staff can talk 10 about that also, Mr. McKinnon. 11 Thank you. 12 Thank you very much. 13 MS. PICENO: Thank you. 14 Berishaj Rok'o, Paul Garcia, Mrs. Macias. 15 And, again, please, if you've just got stuff to 16 add, please, if we can expedite things. 17 We've got Berishaj Rok'o, Paul Garcia, Mrs. 18 Macias. 19 MR. ROK'O: I am Berishaj Rok'o. I want to 20 support a strong air pollution standard. 21 Thank you. 22 (Applause.) 23 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 24 Dr. Burke, you had a comment. 25 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: Mr. Chairman, as you know, PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 215 1 this is day 67 for me after I've had a spine operation. 2 And I am now currently an hour and 15 minutes over the 3 time that my doctor said I could stay today. 4 I am heartened by the people who have come and 5 testified today. I'm heartened by the attitude of my 6 fellow Board members. 7 The reason I got up out of my bed to come here 8 today was because I think this is extraordinarily 9 important. And I obviously am going to have to leave. 10 But I feel that I leave my motion in good hands. And I 11 trust that this Board will continue to do the right thing 12 for the people of California. And I'm sorry I have to 13 leave, but I do. 14 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Yes, Mr. McKinnon. 15 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: Dr. Burke, before you 16 leave. There's been a suggestion about the amendment to 17 an earlier date. In case you're not here when we debate 18 it, I'm curious as to whether or not you favor that or 19 not. 20 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: Obviously, Matt -- you know, 21 I was laughing to myself when Mr. Estrada from the 22 Physicians for Social Responsibility said that my motion 23 was in strong words. I said he ought to hear you and I 24 talk about the Lakers and the Kings, and then he'd know 25 what really strong words were. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 216 1 Obviously, I'd like the 2006. The question is 2 the professional staff has to tell me if that's a real, 3 true, viable alternative. I think that that may be more 4 of an issue than my amending motion. And I think that the 5 motion itself may in fact be a piece of cake in 6 relationship to setting the time. Because they are right. 7 We need to hit the ground running. But I'm sure there's 8 some staff who are going to say, well, you know, the 9 regulatory process itself would preclude us putting in 10 2006. 11 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: I'll tell you what I can 12 think of off the top of my head. And, that is, that some 13 of the condition you put in there is available funding. 14 And for all of the goodwill of pushing things forward 15 faster, the reality of the State budget is the reality of 16 the state budget. And, you know, there will be others 17 dealing with that. But are we setting up failure because 18 there's not money and time? And I don't know the answer 19 to that. I just -- 20 BOARD MEMBER BURKE: My personal answer -- and, 21 you know, I see Roy sitting out there. I should look for 22 him for the signal. But, you know, this signal is, you 23 know, give us the ball. Because if it's money, let us go 24 try and get the -- don't let money be the obstacle to 25 life. Okay? PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 217 1 We, you know -- you know, that would be my 2 request, you know. Give us a shot at it. You know, it's 3 a gamble either way. You know, my request would be give 4 us the opportunity to win on our side rather than the 5 conservative side. 6 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: I wanted to give you a 7 shot at that. Because if you're not here, and that 8 becomes a debate. And I'm not sure where I'm at on it. 9 Thanks. 10 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you, Dr. Burke, for 11 your great contribution today. I appreciate it very much. 12 (Applause.) 13 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Mrs. Macias, Stephanie 14 Barger, Linda Nicholes. 15 No? 16 Dennis Baker. 17 Okay. Linda Nicholes and then Dennis baker. 18 MS. NICHOLES: Hi. My name is Linda Nicholes and 19 I represent Earth Resource Foundation. 20 I carpooled today to this event in my electric 21 car. My electric car is being charged outside as we 22 speak. In fact I think it's already charged. Normally I 23 plug it in at my house, which has solar panels on the 24 roof. So really you can kind of call it the sunshine car. 25 It runs on sun. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 218 1 My point is there are solutions to some of the 2 problems that this Board is talking about. It's just that 3 those solutions need to be supported and they need to 4 be -- people need to be educated on them. 5 Now, my car, I'm going to have to turn it in at 6 the end of the lease. And my car is going to -- my 7 electric car, which is taking thousands of pounds of 8 pollution out of the air because I'm not driving a 9 combustion car, is going to be scrapped. I just find it a 10 little bit ironic that one of the suggested AQMD-enhanced 11 control measures is that CARB and EPA should encourage 12 automakers to help speed up retirement in scrapping of 13 older polluting vehicles. 14 Now, the irony to me is that some automakers are 15 already firmly on board with retiring and scrapping older 16 and not so old EVs. My car will probably have 50,000 17 miles on it when it's going to go back. I'm not going to 18 be allowed to buy this car, and it will in fact be 19 scrapped. Don't you think there's something a little 20 wrong with that picture? 21 I notice replacing traditional lawn and garden 22 equipment with zero-polluting electric models of, for 23 instance, garden -- things like lawn mowers is 24 recommended. And it is also recommended that ships turn 25 off diesel engines while in port and plug into shore PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 219 1 electric power. I, of course, support these measures. 2 My point is that electric power is always a good 3 thing when it replaces fossil fuel combustion. If you're 4 willing to promote zero-emission vehicle lawn mowers, why 5 aren't you willing to promote zero-emission vehicles like 6 the one that I've got parked outside? 7 And I'm going to close up. 8 I think CARB needs to plug in to the idea of EV 9 promotion again. No matter how many gold, silver, and 10 bronze standards CARB talks about, every EV, old and new, 11 on the road under your current program will be placed by 12 combustion car producing -- combustion engines and 13 thousands of pounds of pollutants and carbon dioxide. I 14 would just like you not to give up on the idea of electric 15 cars and to please not forget about that and to address 16 that issue in your new plan. 17 Thank you. 18 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 19 Well, we've not given up on that. But that's the 20 subject of another issue there. 21 We have Dennis Baker, James Provenzano. 22 Oh, Stephanie's back. Okay. 23 Stephanie Barger. 24 Oh, you're going to come -- Okay. 25 MR. BAKER: We're from the same place. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 220 1 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Same message? 2 MR. BAKER: And we won't say the same thing, not 3 the same message. 4 My name is Dennis Baker. I'm with Earth Resource 5 Foundation. 6 I empathize very closely with the children that 7 spoke here about having difficulty to breathe. I do not 8 have asthma, but I grew up in Glendale in the fifties and 9 I experienced the very same things they experienced. And 10 I'm very saddened that that is still going on over 50 11 years later. I think there's absolutely no excuse for 12 that. 13 I'm also a retired automotive instructor. So I 14 have a pretty good understanding of how internal 15 combustion engines and vehicles work. And I am concerned 16 about this idea of the black box. And the reason is is 17 over my tenure as an instructor of 25 years, I saw many 18 instances where your predecessors and the AQMD imposed 19 restrictions and the manufacturers, be them trucks, cars, 20 or whatever, said, "We can't do this, we can't do this." 21 But when the regulations were put in place, somehow 22 somebody in the marketplace managed to do it. 23 The idea of putting things off as guesswork in 24 the future of black boxes I don't think is productive. I 25 would request that this Board either put off this decision PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 221 1 for 90 days, restudy it, strengthen things; or if the 2 decision is to be made during this session, that Dr. 3 Burke's amendments be incorporated. 4 Thank you very much. 5 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 6 MS. BARGER: Good afternoon. Stephanie Barger. 7 I'm the Executive Director of Earth Resource Foundation. 8 And I think the most important thing that was 9 brought up today is we need to act now. We cannot wait 10 another ten years for things to come into effect. 11 Ten years ago I drove a Ford Ranger, an electric 12 Ford Ranger. And I know you said you're dealing with 13 that. But that is the basis of our problem today, it's 14 the basis of our pollution. We are a petroleum-based 15 society. And until we move away from that, we're going to 16 have these same problems. And we need to promote it. 17 Our petroleum industry is still subsidized by our 18 federal government. We need to take the funding from that 19 and put it into clean energies. Photovoltaics is one of 20 the fastest growing industries in southern California, and 21 yet it has very little marketing, it has very little 22 government support. It can bring new jobs. It can give 23 our lower income new opportunities to make a living. It 24 can replace -- in these areas when we're talking about we 25 have all this pollution, polluting factories, they can put PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 222 1 photovoltaics to run their businesses. They can replace 2 our dirty energy. 3 I'm so passionate about this because we work a 4 lot with children, especially high school children, and 5 they get the new technology. They grew up where computers 6 went from big boxes to their things that they wear on 7 their watches. And they do not understand why we have 8 electric cars. Henry Ford developed the electric car. 9 And yet we are not using that technology. They see us 10 driving our electric RAV 4s and our GMs. And we have to 11 tell them that we have to take those cars back and crush 12 them. 13 And yet when we live in Orange County, especially 14 Orange County, every third vehicle is a dirty SUV. And we 15 talk about equity to the lower income families. Why don't 16 we start charging all these people that are able to pay 17 top dollar for their SUVs stricter standards. You know, 18 it will cost the car companies a little bit more, but will 19 also give us more money to help out the lower income 20 families. 21 Also, if we allow the -- if we force Toyota and 22 GM to resell their electric cars that they're scrapping, 23 people are willing to pay top dollar for these electric 24 cars. We could take this funding and give it to minority 25 families in order for them to buy newer, cleaner cars. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 223 1 The children have written letters -- we sent in 2 hundreds of letters, E-mails and phone calls last April 3 asking you to keep the electric car program, to keep the 4 clean air. We have the technology. We don't need to wait 5 till tomorrow. We can do it today. 6 And one comment from one of our students: 7 "Though the opinions of high school students might not be 8 of the most importance to you, I'd like you to remember 9 that when you're gone, it will be our air, and we don't 10 want to die when we breathe." 11 Thank you for your consideration. 12 (Applause.) 13 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 14 Jim Provenzano, Robina Suwol, Jim Stewart. 15 MR. PROVENZANO: Dr. Lloyd, members of the Board, 16 thank you for this time. 17 Doctor, I wonder if I could yield one minute of 18 my -- take one minute and yield one minute to the Chairman 19 of Clean Air Now, Virginia Field, because we both have to 20 head out to a meeting. 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: By all means. 22 MR. PROVENZANO: Thank you, Doctor. 23 There are two things that will get us out of 24 these problems: Renewable hydrogen energy technologies 25 and stabilizing human population. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 224 1 The first solution, implementing hydrogen energy 2 technologies, you can effect through incentives and 3 regulations. Hydrogen also provides you with an 4 additional benefit by reducing CO2 emissions per BTU 5 energy use. I remind you of your obligation forthcoming 6 of addressing mobile sources of CO2 emissions and 7 regulating those sources. 8 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Greenhouse gases. 9 MR. PROVENZANO: Yes. All the better. 10 The second, population stabilization, is not in 11 your purview, I know that. You could though affect the 12 public's awareness of population, the need to stabilize 13 human population, by a public statement, that we are 14 experiencing the beginnings of approaching a ceiling and 15 addressing environmental impacts, and that the 16 technologies and regulations can only do so much without 17 stabilizing human population growth and consumption. 18 I want to also direct you to a statement made by 19 the National Academy of Sciences and the World Academy of 20 Sciences in the early 1990s on technology and the human 21 population. And to paraphrase them, they said that 22 without human -- stabilizing human population growth, all 23 will be lost. 24 Thank you. 25 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you, James. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 225 1 (Applause.) 2 MS. FIELD: Thank you. I'm Virginia Field and 3 I'm President of Clean Air Now. We're an organization 4 that's existed in the Inland Empire in Riverside and San 5 Bernardino Counties since 1969. And over that long period 6 of time we have been involved in many issues involving air 7 quality. 8 One of our members, Robert Zwag, who passed away 9 a little over a year ago, was a proponent of renewable 10 energy and hydrogen. And that's where we've been focused 11 in the last few years. He would be here today to tell you 12 that he would like to support, I know, and our board would 13 like to support the fact that you should significantly 14 strengthen your staff's proposal. So we're just -- I 15 would like to say that we would like to support the 16 presentation made by NRDC by Gail Feuer and also the 17 change of the date. And I hope that we'll be able to move 18 forward on this. 19 I just want to say one other personal thing. I 20 think today the dialogue that I've heard, the interchange 21 and the dialogue is wonderful. It's what should be 22 happening. I think it's wonderful that you're here. I 23 think we're pleased that you're here, this audience, and 24 we could hear this kind of thing take place, because it's 25 difficult to travel to Sacramento to do that. And we PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 226 1 appreciate very much the concerns that you have and the 2 hard work that we know you're doing to try and reach these 3 difficult decisions. 4 I was particularly moved by Lynne Edgerton's 5 comments. I thought she had some very strong things to 6 say to your Board that were food for thought for all of 7 us. 8 Thank you. 9 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 10 Robina Suwol and Jim Stewart, Jose Urias. 11 MS. SUWOL: Hi. Good afternoon. My name is 12 Robina Suwol from California Safe Schools. We're an 13 organization committed to reducing toxic exposures, 14 especially to children. 15 And I really want to thank this honorable board 16 for their commitment to all citizens of California in 17 trying to reduce those toxic exposures. 18 I'm sorry that Dr. Burke had to leave. And I 19 know that Mr. Cackette is here and Dr. Wallerstein. And I 20 just want to take a moment to thank them for their extreme 21 encouragement to student participation and the respectful 22 nature in which you really are interested in hearing what 23 they have to say, particularly since they're the most 24 impacted. And for the most part there are so many times 25 when their voice isn't heard. So I really wanted to thank PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 227 1 you for that. 2 I'm also here today to support the motion 3 presented by Dr. Burke and also concur with other members 4 that, if it's amended, to be adopted by 2006. 5 And if the motion is for some reason not passed 6 today by the Board, then please delay and direct staff to 7 strengthen and bring it back for public comment. And the 8 recommendation would also be to have the public comment 9 here in Diamond Bar where it's easier for the public to 10 participate and who are directly affected by these 11 environmental toxins. 12 And I just really want to -- you know, we all 13 know about accumulative impact, we all know about 14 low-level, long-term risks. But I think if we -- Gail 15 Feuer said something earlier today that I think it's 16 really pertinent. If we look at the accumulative I.Q. of 17 everyone on this honorable board -- and you are a board of 18 really highly intelligent people -- and also the 19 environmental crew and the communities that are severely 20 impacted, I think if we all can work together, we can move 21 mountains. And I think we're all here to support one 22 another and to ensure that all Californians really have 23 the best of the clean air that I know that we can have. 24 Thank you so very, very much for all your help. 25 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you for coming. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 228 1 Jim Stewart, Jose Urias, Jay Brakensiek. 2 Any of those here? 3 Yeah. Okay. 4 MR. BRAKENSIEK: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and 5 Board members. I'm Jay Brakensiek. I'm Deputy Director 6 of the Office of Environmental Health and Safety at L.A. 7 Unified School District. I'm also a past president of the 8 Southern California Chapter of the American Industrial 9 Hygiene Association. 10 I'd like to thank both the Board and the AQMD 11 staff led by Dr. Wallerstein for the help that they've 12 given our schools and the parents and teachers and 13 students in the last years on our air quality issues. 14 We support the amendment of Dr. Burke and 15 encourage a rapid adoption. And if not, a rapid study and 16 adoption of the motion. We believe that -- in our school 17 district, as you heard from some of our schools, there is 18 a major impact of air pollution on asthma and other issues 19 of our children. I've heard this in a number of our 20 schools. So we would encourage a rapid adoption of any 21 changes that could help those conditions. 22 We also believe that other market change models 23 can be used to provide individuals and businesses fiscal 24 reasons to make changes to electric vehicle, hybrid, and 25 other environmentally sensitive technologies. We believe PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 229 1 that light rails could be expanded to reduce vehicle 2 trips. Existing technologies. For instance, a lot of our 3 airports are not served by mass transit and light rails. 4 Anything that can get vehicles off the road would help our 5 high density areas. 6 We look forward to working with the boards and 7 improving air quality in the community. 8 Thank you. 9 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 10 Rick Margolin, Dr. Brad Edgar, and Thomas 11 Johnson. 12 MR. MARGOLIN: Thank you. 13 Some folks have already alluded to what I was 14 going to talk about, so I will abbreviate my comments. 15 I am here on behalf of the Energy Independence 16 Now Coalition. We are a group of environmental- and 17 community-based organizations, universities, elected 18 officials, and progressive minded private sector entities, 19 all committed to achieving a sustainable independent 20 transportation system. 21 Energy Independence Now not only supports Dr. 22 Burke's amendments, but we support other -- we support and 23 advocate for other tighter air and water quality 24 standards. And to meet these objectives we promote a 25 variety of clean vehicle and fuel technologies, such as PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 230 1 P-ZEVS, Battery Electric Vehicles, and low VOC fuels, for 2 example. However, we believe the most efficient and 3 economical and nationally secure method to achieve these 4 goals are hydrogen fuel cells. And we would like to see 5 hydrogen fuel cells get more attention in the State 6 Implementation Plan. 7 Hydrogen as a fuel, as I'm sure you know already, 8 produces no emissions. Emissions may result from hydrogen 9 production from nonrenewable sources. But even using this 10 type of hydrogen, though not preferred, still reduces 11 emissions on a well-to-wheel basis when compared to 12 standard internal combustion engines. 13 Hydrogen and sustainable fuels are necessary now. 14 For example, a California Energy Commission study 15 documents how vehicle miles traveled is increasing at a 16 rate faster than the population growth in the state, and 17 the number of new cars coming on the road is growing at 18 exponential rates as well. What this means is that fuel 19 efficiency and emissions gains are being negated. And so 20 we would like to see hydrogen and fuel cells implemented 21 into the State Implementation Plan as a method of 22 addressing these gains that are being negated. 23 Even a 50 percent increase in fuel efficiency 24 won't decrease fuel consumption by 2020. And while 25 zero-emission vehicles are not the only option to meet PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 231 1 clean air objectives, they are the only sustainable 2 short-term and long-term solution. 3 Even short-term zero-emission vehicle measures 4 will help. If 20 percent of the fleet were converted to 5 zero-emission vehicles, we would have reduced consumption 6 by 1.5 million barrels per day. And even just a small 7 number of fuel cell vehicles. Ten thousand fuel cell 8 vehicles on the road would reduce petroleum consumption by 9 6.98 million barrels per year. 10 And estimates show that this is viable, that 11 hydrogen economy is viable. Joe Nogden, who's now with 12 the University of California at Davis ITS, reported that 13 there's enough off-peak electricity in the southern 14 California area to produce enough hydrogen for one million 15 fuel cell vehicles. 16 And the Southern California Gas Company also 17 shows that there's enough natural gas to meet -- ramp up 18 demand. 19 And economically this makes sense. According to 20 Oakridge Livermore MIT, fuel cell vehicles are cheaper on 21 a cost-per-mile basis to operate. 22 And so, in summary, what we would like to see is 23 an immediate focus on development of uniform codes and 24 standards, uniform compatibility, increased incentives for 25 commercialization and early adoption, encouraging fleet PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 232 1 purchases and, when appropriate, support legislative 2 efforts to procure funding and incentives for rapid 3 transition. 4 Again, we understand that fuel cell vehicles 5 cannot come on road overnight. But we must intensify our 6 efforts now so that we aren't here again discussing 7 nonattainment. 8 Thank you for your help and thank you for your 9 commitment to this issue. 10 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thanks, Rick. And thanks for 11 coming the other night to push us on the fuel cell 12 partnership. Thank you. 13 Dr. Brad Edgar, Thomas Johnson, and John Berge. 14 Paul, I'm going to have to reset to two minutes 15 because nobody's taking me up on the offer of collapsing 16 here. And really we are going to run into serious 17 problems. And I notice a lot of people here either 18 opposing or supporting. I say please help us along. 19 Otherwise we're really going to be in trouble. And it's 20 not fair to the people who want to stay. 21 Yes. 22 MR. JOHNSON: Good afternoon. My name is Thomas 23 Johnson, and I'm the Manager of Environmental Planning for 24 the Port of Long Beach. 25 Just to start, the Port -- both ports have PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 233 1 undertaken programs to reduce diesel emissions from State 2 and federal sources that are inside our jurisdiction. But 3 the Port of Long Beach is very concerned about the 4 District's last-minute recommendation for the SIP, that 5 marine vessel cold ironing be changed from a long-term 6 measure to a short-term measure. That recommendation we 7 believe is very premature. District staff and the Port 8 have committed to study the issues that are involved in 9 cold ironing, to gather the necessary information, and to 10 develop a workable approach to cold ironing. 11 The Port of Long Beach's study, as the District 12 is aware, is already underway. The District's study is 13 not scheduled to begin until next year, which makes the 14 recommendation at this time all the more troubling. 15 Although cold ironing of cruise ships has been 16 shown to be feasible, the situation with respect to cargo 17 vessels is dramatically different and significantly more 18 complex. The China Shipping settlement in the Port of Los 19 Angeles will be held up as an example of the feasibility 20 of cold ironing of cargo vessels. But in fact that was a 21 political decision that didn't have a technical basis, and 22 no ships are cold ironing at the Port of Los Angeles, nor 23 is there a schedule for them to do so. 24 The fact is that currently cold ironing of 25 international cargo vessels is not feasible and cannot be PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 234 1 implemented, we believe, in the timeframe called for in 2 the District's recommendation. Indeed, no one, not the 3 District, not the ports, nor the shipping industry, knows 4 how long it's going to take us to get an appreciable 5 proportion of the vessels calling in San Pedro Bay cold 6 ironed. There are formidable technical and institutional 7 issues that have to be resolved before that can occur. 8 The Port of Long Beach supports your staff's 9 approach that keeps cold ironing as a long-term measure. 10 And we strongly believe that adopting it as a short-term 11 measure would set the stage for nonattainment and embroil 12 the Board, the District, and the interested parties in 13 lengthy and nonproductive lawsuits and consultations. 14 Thank you. 15 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 16 John Berge and Chris Patton. 17 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Dr. Lloyd, just 18 to expedite the next two witnesses' testimony. The 19 District had proposed that we put cold ironing in the 20 short term. But Dr. Burke's resolution in front of the 21 Board does not move that to the short-term category. It's 22 left in the long term. And so I don't think it's before 23 the Board today. 24 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I appreciate that because, 25 again -- I appreciate that. Thank you. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 235 1 So does that expedite your testimony? 2 MR. BERGE: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and 3 board members. It certainly does. 4 I won't repeat what Mr. Johnson from the Port of 5 Long Beach said. 6 First of all let me say, my name is John Berge 7 with the Pacific Merchant Shipping Association. And we 8 represent most of the carriers that call in the ports of 9 California and around the world. 10 Again, this technology we feel is promising. But 11 it's still in its infancy and it's unproven, at least on a 12 widespread commercial basis. 13 It's interesting, there's a bill that's currently 14 sitting in Sacramento right now, Assembly Bill 471. In 15 that bill there was a stipulation that cruise ships should 16 electrify in California ports by the year 2008. While 17 that bill moved through the Legislature, the legislators I 18 believe removed that provision because they realized that, 19 in the words of your staff, this provision is just not 20 ready for prime time. 21 So thank you. And I would suggest that this be 22 kept as a long-term measure. 23 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 24 Chris Patton. 25 And, Chris, again I wanted to thank you on behalf PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 236 1 of Mike and myself for the excellent tour and education we 2 received during the tour of the Port of L.A. So thank you 3 very much. We have a much better idea now of what you've 4 accomplished, what the challenge is to come. But also, 5 when you talk about cold ironing with some of these other 6 ships, it's not a simple matter in lieu of the best of 7 intentions. 8 MR. PATTON: Thank you very much, Chair Lloyd. 9 I am Chris Patton from the Port of Los Angeles. 10 And before I make my comment, I just do want to be clear 11 on what Ms. Witherspoon said a moment ago. 12 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Yeah, let me 13 clarify. We just looked at this. 14 The chart which the District calculated the tons 15 that add up to 120 has nothing for cold ironing. However, 16 Dr. Burke's attachment lists cold ironing as an idea that 17 could be part of the package of measures that adds up to 18 the 120. 19 So the district is not suggesting a specific 20 tonnage commitment for cold ironing in the short-term, but 21 they're adding it in the narrative for -- 22 MR. PATTON: But it remains in the motion? 23 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Yes. 24 MR. PATTON: Okay. I'll try to do this in two 25 minutes. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 237 1 I am Chris Patton from the Port of Los Angeles. 2 And the Port as part of the City of Los Angeles is 3 supportive of the proposed 2003 South Coast SIP and 4 supportive of control measures that are feasible and cost 5 effective. The Port supports a collaborative approach to 6 continuing to evaluate and develop cold ironing or, more 7 accurately, ship electrification as a long-term strategy 8 in order to try to make it feasible and cost effective and 9 capable of being broadly implemented. In fact, the Port's 10 Alternative Maritime Power Program is established to do 11 just that, and we are making very good headway. 12 However, to move cold ironing from a long-term to 13 a short-term strategy at this point is premature, as it 14 was indicated by Mr. Johnson from the Port of Long Beach. 15 There are important implementation considerations 16 remaining to be resolved. And, frankly, the Port believes 17 that the estimated emission reductions are currently 18 overstated for a number of reasons and may not be 19 achievable. This will expose yourself and, in fact, all 20 of us to problems down the road. We have submitted a 21 comment letter on this. It contains further detail. 22 I do though want to emphasize one very important 23 thing; and, that is, that we are diligently working with 24 both the ARB and the AQMD very closely on a number of very 25 important projects: A comprehensive port-wide emission PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 238 1 inventory, establishment of a port-wide air quality 2 monitoring network, the vessel speed reduction program, 3 and other concrete measures to understand and reduce 4 emissions from marine operations, which happens to be 5 consistent with Mayor Hahn's commitment to no-net 6 increase. 7 Thank you very much. And we look forward to 8 continuing to work with both agencies on all these 9 measures. 10 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 11 Bob Wyman, Bill Quinn. 12 MR. WYMAN: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members 13 of the Board. My name is Bob Wyman. I'm with the Law 14 Firm of Latham and Watkins. And I'm here today 15 representing the Regulatory Flexibility Group, which is a 16 broad coalition of southern California businesses. 17 I'm going to do it as fast as I can. 18 First, we think you should adopt today the AQMP 19 as it was adopted by the South Coast District on August 20 1st. 21 You should start today a process to plug the 22 remaining shortfall. You should not, however, in our 23 view, adopt today the list of control measures that has 24 been proposed and identified in various ways, as the 12 25 measures or the 120 tons or even the 23 tons. And there's PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 239 1 a very simple reason for that. That is because no one 2 knew that that list of measures would be up today except a 3 few privileged few. I was among them. I didn't know of 4 Dr. Burke's motion until today. But I think there were a 5 few of us who knew that list was floating around. But we 6 really -- almost no one knew that those measures would be 7 considered for adoption of the SIP today. 8 Have you heard from a single boat owner? Have 9 you heard from a single truck owner? Have you heard 10 except for the ports from any of the entities that are 11 likely to be burdened by those measures for which you 12 would make a legal and binding commitment today? No. You 13 just don't have a meaningful opportunity for the regulated 14 entities to testify. Nor do you know what the burden 15 would be or even necessarily for some of those measures 16 how you would do it. 17 Now, having said that, I have to make it very 18 clear that we believe you should plug the gap that 19 consists of the black box, and you should do it very 20 promptly. And so we have proposed a four-point process, 21 which has been circulated. It has today's date. And 22 there are four paragraphs. And it starts with: "The 23 Board resolves that..." 24 And I'd like to describe it, and that will end my 25 testimony. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 240 1 We think you should direct the staff to meet -- 2 to continue to meet with stakeholders, and have those 3 stakeholders augment this list. The 12 are a good start, 4 but there are lots of other ideas you should have on the 5 table. You should review that list at your January Board 6 meeting, select those measures you think warrant further 7 development, and then initiate a nine-month process or -- 8 I guess it would be about a nine-month process -- with all 9 relevant stakeholders, as Mark Pisano recommended, 10 thinking broadly, to get people to really deal with this 11 problem. So that by no later than next October you can 12 adopt as part of the SIP enough measures to plug -- to 13 make up the shortfall, to eliminate the black box. 14 There are a lot of innovative things that can be 15 done, creative things can be done, things you can afford 16 to do and that we should do to accelerate the turnover of 17 these dirtier engines and, otherwise, to realize our 18 emission reduction opportunities. 19 But you can't do it today. And we urge you to 20 adopt this resolution, which we think would set in motion 21 a process which would hopefully work, get everybody to the 22 table, don't let them leave until they agree. That you 23 have to do that process. There's just no other way, in 24 our view, out of this box. 25 Thank you. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 241 1 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Bob, you mentioned by next 2 October. But isn't that too late? 3 MR. WYMAN: I think if you adopt the AQMP today, 4 you will deal with the conformity needs. I don't think it 5 is too late to supplement an approved AQMP -- that we're 6 recommending you approve today next October. I don't 7 think it's too late to deal with the black box issue by 8 next October. That is, in my view, the shortest practical 9 time that you could really grapple with some of the issues 10 that your staff has mentioned. 11 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: But that's based on both your 12 legal and technical assessment? 13 MR. WYMAN: Yes. 14 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 15 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Mr. Chairman, just a quick 16 question to the staff. 17 Mr. Wyman referred to something that he was 18 proposing. And I have reams and reams of paper. Do I 19 have that somewhere within my desk here? 20 MR. WYMAN: You should. I delivered it to the 21 clerk this morning -- early this morning. 22 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Maybe somebody could help 23 me and maybe get a copy. Because I'm just not sure I can 24 get through it, and I'd like to look at it before the end 25 of the day. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 242 1 MR. WYMAN: Basically it's consistent with what 2 your staff has recommended in terms of analysis. 3 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: And I'm really just asking 4 for a copy and not having to go through my reams of paper 5 and not be listening to the next speakers. So if you 6 could get me a copy of that, I'd be very appreciative. 7 MR. WYMAN: Thank you. 8 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Bill Quinn and then -- Dr. 9 Edgar, I found he left the room and he's back. And then 10 we're going to take a five-minute break for the court 11 reporter. 12 MR. QUINN: Chairman Lloyd, members of the Board. 13 Welcome to southern California. My name is Bill Quinn. 14 I'm the Vice President of CCEEB, the California Council 15 for Environmental and Economic Balance. 16 First of all, I wish to extend my appreciation to 17 Catherine Witherspoon and your staff and that of the South 18 Coast District for the extensive time and effort devoted 19 to the development and evaluation of the Air Quality Plan. 20 This has not been an easy issue. We all want 21 clean air. And we want to do it with as little cost as 22 possible. We know the days of easy and cheap emission 23 reductions are long gone. For the most part what's left 24 out there is advanced, costly, and highly questionable. 25 In the last several weeks I've heard from PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 243 1 numerous parties including many of my own members. All 2 have had a similar message. It goes something like this: 3 "Yeah, we know we need additional emission reductions, but 4 we've already done our fair share. We need to get the 5 reductions from somebody else." Obviously if we all -- 6 obviously we will not meet our emission reduction goals if 7 we believe everybody has already done their fair share. 8 So we have to move forward with something different. 9 First, CCEEB believes it's appropriate to look at 10 the remaining inventory. We note that nearly 80 percent 11 of the sources fall under the jurisdiction of ARB or EPA. 12 Given the size of the so-called black box, the boundaries 13 placed on the authority of South Coast and ARB, and the 14 quickly approaching deadline of 2010, we believe it is 15 fair to ask ARB to take on a commitment greater than what 16 your staff has proposed to date. 17 I think all of us agree that we want to keep this 18 key policy debate in the public forum and out of the 19 courtroom. So this number is critical. But as Dr. 20 Wallerstein said, we are in a sprint to the finish. I 21 encourage you to go much further than the additional 23 22 tons proposed by your staff. 23 Next, it is critical that we have a better 24 understanding of the costs and other issues associated 25 with additional measures under consideration. CCEEB PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 244 1 believes a ranking of cost effectiveness is still the most 2 important tool out there. We would support the creation 3 of a working group not unlike the largely successful 4 meeting several of us had with your staff in August. The 5 group could assist your staff in evaluating proposals such 6 as those proposed in Dr. Burke's resolution in order to 7 help determine implementation issues, cost effectiveness, 8 and to assist in addressing other concerns such as 9 legislative authority or funding. 10 CCEEB is not in a position today to say whether 11 or not each of these measures can be fully successful. 12 But we do believe some combination will get us significant 13 additional reductions. It is this number I believe we are 14 all searching for today. 15 Finally, we ask that you enhance your commitment 16 to do what you guys do best, gain emission reductions from 17 the mobile sector. This is your area of expertise. And 18 we are hopeful to see significant emission reductions from 19 this sector in the future. 20 Perhaps the greatest opportunity lies with 21 finding a way to get older vehicles off the road more 22 quickly. We encourage your staff to partner with a broad 23 community as it moves forward with this difficult task. 24 We certainly stand ready to assist you in any way we can. 25 Thank you. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 245 1 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Question. Are the oil 2 companies members of CCEEB? 3 MR. QUINN: They are. 4 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: So would you support then 5 what's in the plan to go to a cleaner burning gasoline? 6 MR. QUINN: Let me be very clear on that, because 7 it's I think very important. 8 We do not oppose or support any single measure in 9 that plan because we certainly have not had the time to 10 fully evaluate whether or not it makes sense at this time. 11 We believe collectively that group of ideas offers 12 something that should be included in the plan. We 13 understand that there's flexibility. So if you adopt that 14 measure, you don't have to have -- you don't have to meet 15 specific targets for each control measure. But as a group 16 you have to commit to the number. 17 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Okay. Given the answer that 18 Mike Scheible gave to my question and his comment about 19 the cost of that, you still think that this is something 20 that you could support? 21 MR. QUINN: I think that -- that goes right to my 22 second point in my comments. Cost effectiveness is still 23 our most important tool. I heard 100,000 from Mike this 24 afternoon. I heard 50,000 earlier. So clearly there's a 25 large -- I mean we just don't know what that number is. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 246 1 My numbers have told me that if there's a full 2 and accurate accounting of cost effectiveness -- and we 3 all can agree to those numbers -- then let the chips fall 4 where they may. Let's implement the measures in the 5 most -- in a ranking of the most cost effective measure 6 first and move down the list. 7 So, you know, I can't say here today that we 8 oppose or support that specific measure. But we are 9 willing to include that in a list to evaluate its cost 10 effectiveness. 11 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: How much time do you think it 12 would take? 13 MR. QUINN: Dr. Lloyd, I don't know that answer. 14 But -- 15 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: But I thought with -- again, 16 with your background in the petroleum industry, you might 17 be able to have some clue on that. 18 MR. QUINN: Those are many, many years ago. 19 Those brain cells are gone. 20 (Laughter.) 21 MR. QUINN: So -- 22 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Happens to us all. 23 Thanks very much. 24 MR. QUINN: Thanks. 25 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I think we'll take Dr. Brad PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 247 1 Edgar back. And then we'll take a five-minute break. 2 Sorry, Brad. I guess you just stepped out. 3 MR. EDGAR: Yes. I apologize. 4 Good afternoon, Chairman Lloyd and members of the 5 Board. My name is Brad Edgar. I'm the Vice President and 6 Chief Technology Officer of Cleaire Advanced Emission 7 Controls of San Leandro, California. 8 Cleaire is a developer, verifier, and 9 California-based manufacturer of retrofit emission control 10 systems. Cleaire is a division of Cummins West 11 Incorporated, which is owned by Mr. Kevin Shanihan. 12 As some of you may know, Mr. Shanihan has long 13 been a leader in the efforts to reduce air pollution while 14 striving to maintain the vitality of California industry. 15 It is through Mr. Shanihan's commitment to the environment 16 and vision for the future that Cleaire was formed. 17 Currently, Cleaire has three diesel retrofit 18 emission control systems that are CARB verified, all of 19 which reduce both NOx and PM. To date, we have over 750 20 diesel retrofit systems operating in the State of 21 California, with many more planned over the next few 22 years. 23 To put it simply, Cleaire's mission is not about 24 demonstration, but about deployment. Large scale 25 deployment of simple cost-effective technologies will have PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 248 1 an immediate and wide reaching impact on air quality. 2 Cleaire has partnered with Cummins Incorporated, 3 its subsidiaries, and its distribution systems to bring 4 our products to market. Our distributors are well staffed 5 with trained sales and technical personnel, and have 6 excellent service and maintenance facilities. 7 To support our customers we offer a number of 8 after-the-sale services, including maintenance contracts, 9 extended warranties, and lease options. A customer 10 purchasing a Cleaire diesel retrofit product will be 11 buying a Cummins validated product from a Cummins 12 distributor, and can be confident of the same level of 13 customer service support and reliability they would expect 14 from any Cummins product. 15 Cleaire's flagship product, the Long View, 16 integrates a diesel particulate filter with a NOx 17 reduction catalyst. It is essentially a catalytic 18 converter for diesel engines. The system has been 19 verified by ARB to reduce NOx by 25 percent and 20 particulate matter by 85 percent from a select number of 21 engines, makes, and models. 22 In addition, and importantly, the system also 23 provides significant reductions in hydrocarbons and carbon 24 monoxide emissions. 25 The CARB verification process has set a gold PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 249 1 standard to ensure real emissions benefits are realized 2 and that the technologies are robust, reliable, and 3 durable. The Long View has achieved that standard. 4 We continue to support the verification procedure 5 and will continue working with ARB staff to expand the 6 range of applications of our products, both to older and 7 newer engines and engines operating in both on-road and 8 off-road environments. 9 Retrofit technologies that reduce both NOx and PM 10 such as the Long View are now commercially available. The 11 use of these technologies has the potential to be broad 12 and far ranging. Applications include transit buses, 13 refuse trucks, ready mix trucks, and vocational vehicles, 14 among many others. This is important because the vast 15 majority of diesel engines are located ozone nonattainment 16 areas where ozone precursors must be reduced. 17 PM retrofits that also reduce NOx and hydrocarbon 18 are the right path forward. We view every application 19 slated to have a PM control devise installed as an 20 opportunity to also achieve further NOx and hydrocarbon 21 reductions. It will be challenging to ask engine owners 22 and operators to retrofit their engines twice, and we 23 think we should get as much emission reduction as possible 24 the first time around. 25 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. Is that it? PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 250 1 MR. EDGAR: I'm almost done. 2 In short, we believe in the power and -- NOx and 3 PM reductions. 4 In closing, Cleaire is supportive of the air 5 toxic control measures. We respect the high standards and 6 integrity of the ARB verification process. And we urge 7 your Board to further consider how immediate NOx and 8 hydrocarbon reductions from diesel retrofits can be 9 integrated into ARB's regulations, policies, and plans. 10 Thank you. 11 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: And I think we share your 12 interest in controlling both because, I agree, to have 13 both is critical. And, again, applaud you for the 14 efforts. 15 I think staff is aware of all -- obviously all 16 your technology and is certifying that. So, again, we 17 thank you for working together with us. 18 Let's take a break until quarter of by that 19 clock. That's about 8 minutes and come back. 20 (Thereupon a recess was taken.) 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: We'll start. 22 And we have Curt Coleman, Cindy Sullivan, Chris 23 Weaver. 24 Curt? 25 Where's Curt? PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 251 1 Cindy Sullivan? 2 Chris Weaver, Doug Lawson. 3 MS. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Chairman Lloyd. My 4 name is Cindy Sullivan. I am a consultant to the South 5 Coast Air Quality Management District. My background is 6 that I've worked at the California Energy Commission, the 7 South Coast, and the Air Resources Board. 8 I just want to provide a few brief comments 9 regarding the South Coast proposal for repowering 10 construction equipment. 11 Off-road construction equipment contributes 12 significantly to the NOx and PM inventory. And these 13 emissions are projected to increase in the future over 14 other mobile sources. 15 At least 60 percent of this equipment was 16 manufactured before 1988. And although it is not a good 17 candidate for many of the after-treatment strategies, 18 there are opportunities to reduce emissions in the 19 near-term through re-engining. Some of these pieces of 20 equipment can be re-engined to Tier 1 engines. But there 21 are several opportunities that equipment could be 22 re-engined to -- with Tier 2 engines. There are 23 challenges for this because of engine compartment size 24 constraints and cooling needs. But at least one 25 manufacturer, Caterpillar, is pursuing a technology that PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 252 1 they feel would work for repowering older construction 2 equipment with Tier 2 engines. 3 Thank you. 4 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much, Cindy. 5 Thanks for honoring the time. 6 Chris Weaver. 7 And, Chris, you're down at South Coast. Are you 8 now employed by South Coast? 9 MR. WEAVER: No. Like Cindy, I'm here as a 10 consultant on behalf of South Coast. I'm also of course 11 President of Engine Fuel and Emissions Engineering, which 12 is a consulting firm working in this area for more than 12 13 years. 14 And I will also be brief, especially since Brad 15 Edgar said half of what I have to say. 16 The Board has adopted a bold strategy to control 17 diesel PM, through retrofitting particulate filters and 18 other particulate control devices. We have an equally 19 serious problem with diesel NOx emissions. If you look at 20 the 2010 emissions inventory, 60 percent of the total 21 inventory expected in 2010 is heavy-duty diesels, on-road, 22 off-road, locomotives, and marine. 23 And since that inventory exceeds the carrying 24 capacity by a little under 40 percent, what that means is 25 that the heavy-duty diesels alone are using the entire PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 253 1 estimated carrying capacity and then some. 2 Clearly we need to reduce emissions from 3 heavy-duty diesels. 4 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Agreed. 5 MR. WEAVER: THE question is how to do it. 6 And here I think that you're in danger of missing 7 a great opportunity. Since you already have a strategy 8 that calls for virtually every diesel tailpipe in the 9 state to receive a particulate control device over the 10 next decade, at the same time it would make tremendous 11 sense to add NOx control devices. 12 Dr. Edgar has already testified on the 13 verification of the first such device, Cleaire's Long 14 View, with a reduction of 25 percent. 15 My written comments include a photo of a 16 tractor-trailor, owned by the State of California 17 actually, which has been running with a selective 18 catalytic reduction system since early this year. And our 19 on-board emission measurements in real-world conditions, 20 driving in a mix of urban and freeway driving, show that 21 that's achieving 63 percent reduction in NOx and a 34 22 percent reduction in particulate matter. And that's after 23 applying the reflash. 24 That system is expected to be verified and 25 available for sale by early summer of next year. We know PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 254 1 that we're not the only ones who are involved in that 2 process. There are a number of other companies in the 3 process of verifying SCR systems and other retrofit NOx 4 control devices. 5 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Is staff aware of where you 6 stand? 7 MR. WEAVER: I believe they are, sir. I'm not 8 sure that -- 9 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 10 MR. WEAVER: -- all of the staff are aware of 11 that since most of our communications in that regard have 12 just been with the ones involved in retrofit activities. 13 And their major focus has been on particulate control. 14 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Please make sure. 15 I have to cut you off, Chris. We're not going to 16 make progress. I'm going to be in real trouble here. 17 So thank you very much indeed. And please make 18 sure that staff has the information. 19 MR. WEAVER: Let me just add one final point, 20 which is that the cost effectiveness of these -- at least 21 of the SCR systems that we've priced out would be less 22 than $5,000 per ton, which I think compares very favorably 23 with most of the options available to you. 24 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 25 We've got a request by another board member of PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 255 1 South Coast Bea Kirtley to testify. 2 MS. KIRTLEY: Thank you very much. And I will 3 keep my comments as short as I am. 4 (Laughter.) 5 MS. KIRTLEY: Chairman Lloyd and members of the 6 Board, thank you very much for giving us this opportunity 7 to speak. 8 I wanted to let you know that I am an AQMD Board 9 member, serving 61 cities in the eastern L.A. Region -- 10 L.A. County. I'm also a Mayor Pro Tem from the City of 11 Bradbury. I'm also a school administrator and served 12 eight years as a school principal. So I'm very keenly 13 aware of what happens at the school site when our children 14 aren't breathing clean air. 15 We appreciate what the ARB has already done to 16 address mobile source pollution. As an AQMD 17 representative for the 61 cities I am constantly asked to 18 clean up the pollution from trucks, trains, and older 19 vehicles. The simple answer is that the AQMD does not 20 have the purview over these sources of pollution. AQMD 21 has racheted down on the stationary sources as much as 22 possible. Our problem in the South Coast four-county area 23 is the pollution from mobile sources. 24 We need your assistance to do what is necessary 25 to clean up the pollution from the mobile sources. Or PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 256 1 give us, the AQMD, the authority to do that. Dr. Burke 2 earlier made a motion, which I support, that keeps the 3 momentum going to achieve clean air. I also support the 4 suggested change in implementation date to 2006. 5 I thank you very much. I know you've had a long, 6 long day. Been there, done that. But thank you for 7 everything you've done for us. And I hope you continue to 8 do so. 9 Thank you. 10 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 11 (Applause.) 12 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Dr. Lawson, Bonnie 13 Holmes-Gen, Bill La Marr. 14 And, Doug, you've got two minutes. 15 DR. LAWSON: Yes. Thank you, Dr. Lloyd. 16 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I've already read your last 17 slide. 18 DR. LAWSON: Good. That's all you need then? 19 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: That's all I need. 20 DR. LAWSON: Board Chairman and Board members, my 21 name's Doug Lawson. And I'm here on behalf of the South 22 Coast AQMD. And I'm here to support the South Coast AQMD 23 recommendation to use remote sensing to identify high 24 emitting vehicles for out-of-cycle testing and repairs as 25 an element of the enhanced I&M program. I've been PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 257 1 involved with doing remote sensing studies. And we have 2 an overhead here. 3 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 4 Presented as follows.) 5 DR. LAWSON: And in fact back in 1995 the 6 District funded us to do work. And I was the principal 7 investigator on that study to use remote sensing to 8 identify high emitters and then to repair them. 9 --o0o-- 10 DR. LAWSON: And we've been doing studies such as 11 this since 1989 -- 12 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Now, Doug, you didn't believe 13 me. You didn't believe me. If you don't, you're not 14 going to get to that last slide. 15 DR. LAWSON: Right. Okay. 16 But what we found in that study was that remote 17 sensing is accurate, that it does in fact identify high 18 emitters, with a very low false failure rate. Our most 19 recent study we had less than a one percent false failure 20 rate. 21 --o0o-- 22 DR. LAWSON: And from that -- we were talking 23 about dollars per ton -- we estimate from that study that 24 we did for the District that if we were to implement that 25 program, we would get a total cost of $3,300 per ton for PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 258 1 the three pollutants combined using this formula. If it 2 were on tons -- total tons, it would be down to $800 per 3 ton. Very cost effective. 4 --o0o-- 5 DR. LAWSON: And so our recommendation is to 6 support the District's recommendation, that remote sensing 7 be used to identify high emitters for off-cycle testing 8 and repairs. It's very cost effective. It's very 9 efficient and will improve the effect of the smog check. 10 And, by the way, I do need to correct something. 11 It's not old cars. It's mal-maintained cars. The 12 majority of old cars on the road are relatively clean. 13 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: And, Doug, staff is aware of 14 all this stuff? 15 DR. LAWSON: Yes. 16 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Okay. Thank you. 17 Mr. Calhoun. 18 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: I assume, Doug, that you 19 are very supportive of remote sensing for the I&M program, 20 is that correct, based on the studies that you've done? 21 DR. LAWSON: That's correct. 22 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: Okay. Thank you. 23 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: And, again, I generally 24 support remote sensing, too. It's the application there. 25 But I've also been somewhat frustrated at the lack of PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 259 1 progress in that arena and incorporation into the I&M 2 program there. 3 Bonnie Holmes-Gen. 4 MS. HOLMES-GEN: Bonnie Holmes-Gen with the 5 American Lung Association of California. We're very proud 6 today that you will have heard from three American Lung 7 Associations, which may be a record before your Board in 8 one hearing. 9 I will boil my testimony down to one key message. 10 We are depending on you today to show the courage, vision, 11 and leadership that's needed to achieve clean and 12 healthful air. And we need you to do that by adopting Dr. 13 Burke's amendment with the 97 additional tons today. 14 We want to stress to you that we don't believe 15 you have to know every detail of all the measures that 16 would go into that final package. There's been a lot of 17 back and forth on reformulated gas and cost effectiveness. 18 And certainly there's a lot more analysis that needs to be 19 done. But you can commit to the tons today. And you've 20 done that in the past with other technology-forcing 21 measures. So we're calling on you to do that again today. 22 However, if you choose not to do that, we ask you 23 not to adopt the staff proposal and to delay for 90 days. 24 And we believe at that point your staff and the South 25 Coast District's staff can sit down and hammer out a PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 260 1 revised proposal that can get the additional 97 tons. 2 That's our request to you. 3 We also want to stress that, as you know, your 4 Board needs to take leadership on getting new measures 5 that provide new funding for reducing diesel emissions. 6 We want to work with you on that. We urge your Board to 7 take leadership during this next legislative session and 8 make it a key priority of the Board to hammer out 9 legislation and work with the Legislature to get new 10 funding for diesel emission reduction programs. 11 Thank you. 12 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much, Bonnie. 13 Bill La Marr, Tom Diep, James White, John 14 Billheimer. 15 MR. LA MARR: Chairman Burke, Tom Diep has left 16 for the day. 17 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: It's Chairman Lloyd. 18 MR. LA MARR: Chairman Lloyd. 19 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you. 20 MR. LA MARR: What did I say? I'm sorry. 21 You see how used I am to being here. 22 Good afternoon, Dr. Lloyd and members of the 23 Board. My name is Bill La Marr, and I'm the Executive 24 Director of the California Small Business Alliance. 25 Our organization consists of a dozen trade PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 261 1 associations whose members own and operate some 14,000 2 businesses in this region and some 33,000 businesses 3 throughout the State of California. 4 The members of our Alliance believe that CARB 5 must consider adopting something akin to a fair share 6 principle with respect to controlling and reducing 7 emissions from mobile sources and consumer products. 8 Throughout the day we've heard that some agencies 9 have fallen short of their emission reduction goals, while 10 others have met or exceeded theirs. A lot of new numbers 11 have been suggested today, as both agencies agreed to take 12 a more aggressive stance on reducing air pollution. 13 Some of the commitments will involve stationary 14 sources, and small businesses in particular. We're deeply 15 concerned that any plan that does not have a fair share 16 proponent, which includes an aggressive regulation policy 17 for mobile sources and consumer products, to help deliver 18 this additional tonnage will place an enormous and 19 unnecessary burden on small manufacturing businesses. 20 To comply with today's stationary source rules a 21 small business must do more than simply change a work 22 habit or change a nozzle on a spray gun. To comply with 23 today's new and amended rules small business owners must 24 make major financial commitments to purchase and install 25 costly technologies and often times in exchange for a PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 262 1 minuscule amount of emission reductions. Each new rule 2 tests the ability of an affected company to stay in 3 business in this fragile economy. 4 Not withstanding the state of the economy, people 5 continue to buy cars, trucks, and SUVs. Commerce still 6 relies on trucks, trains, and ships to move commodities in 7 and out of the state. Any one of these source categories 8 contributes far more than most small businesses ever could 9 hope too. 10 I was encouraged at hearing Dr. Burke's 11th hour 11 motion, which at first blush seems to address many of our 12 concerns. However, we haven't had sufficient time to 13 review it. And while I came authorized and prepared to 14 oppose the approved plan without the inclusion of the 15 sources under your jurisdiction, I would ask you now to 16 defer adopting the plan until we've had time and you've 17 had time to consider the motion in greater detail. 18 Thank you. 19 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. Well, I guess you 20 share with us then not having much time to look at that. 21 Thank you. 22 MR. LA MARR: We just saw it when you did. 23 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Tom Diep, James White, John 24 Billheimer, Ignacio Garcia. 25 Tom Diep is the not here? PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 263 1 James White. 2 MR. BILLHEIMER: John Billheimer. 3 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: No, I know you, John. 4 I don't see Jim White. I saw him earlier. 5 Okay. John Billheimer, Ignacio Garcia, Dick 6 Hoffman. 7 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 8 Presented as follows.) 9 MR. BILLHEIMER: John Billheimer, Enviro Realty. 10 My interests are small business. In fact, I own 11 a strong small business myopia. 12 In representing -- from that point of view, what 13 is this ARB bureaucracy in Sacramento? How does it affect 14 me and my clients? Used to dealing with South Coast. 15 That's as far as my view goes. 16 But today things are very different. We are 17 seeing South Coast emission inventory and the ARB's 18 emission inventory and EPA's all coalesced into one 19 statement. It is hard to compare. There are some apples 20 and oranges. I'm looking just at the emission inventory, 21 not emission reductions as most of your considerations 22 have been. 23 If you look just at the point sources, those are 24 those that are subject to permits because they have one 25 point where the emission comes out and it can be firmly PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 264 1 measured, and it is equipment that you can staple a permit 2 on. 3 But let's look at what this means. In VOC, only 4 7 percent of the total emissions that you're concerned 5 with are coming from point source permitted facilities, 6 the equipment. In CO it's only 1 percent. In NOx it's 7 only 6 percent. 8 SOx is a local matter. I won't go into that. 9 In PM 10 again, 4 percent. 10 Now, these are the point sources. There are also 11 area sources and indirect sources. There's consumer 12 products, which ARB takes a strong hand in. 13 I just want to close by saying that I hadn't 14 heard any mention of the aspect of point sources versus 15 area sources in these discussions. And I think one of the 16 problems that may be arising in your deliberations is that 17 there is an apple and orange situation between permittable 18 sources where you have a very definite piece of equipment 19 with measured emissions and it is something that you can 20 write conditions on and you can shut them down in 10 or 30 21 days if they don't abide by the conditions. And every 22 year the permit has to be renewed and there's fees with 23 it. Whereas on the indirect sources there are no fees, 24 there's no money changing hands, you have a much tougher 25 job regulating. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 265 1 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 2 Ignacio Garcia, Dick Hoffman, Greg Adams, Mike 3 Eaves. 4 Ignacio Garcia? 5 Dick Hoffman? 6 I see Greg Adams and Mike Eaves. 7 MR. ADAMS: All things come to he who waits, huh. 8 Chairman Lloyd, members of the Board. My name is 9 Greg Adams. Today I'm representing SCAP, the Southern 10 California Alliance of POTW, 61 agencies dealing with 11 water and distribution of water and waste water for 7 12 counties from Santa Barbara to San Diego, as well as the 13 L.A. County Sanitation Districts, a consortium of special 14 districts representing 78 of L.A. County's 88 cities. 15 As you are aware, CARB and U.S. EPA have combined 16 jurisdiction over 80 percent of the ozone precursor 17 emission sources in the basin, largely on-road and 18 off-road mobile sources and consumer products. 19 SCAP wishes to see an accelerated fair share 20 principle implemented by the Board, recognizing what has 21 already been accomplished by the South Coast, what legally 22 can be further accomplished by the South Coast, and the 23 fact that the ARB has primary jurisdiction over those 24 sources needing additional control which are large enough 25 to deliver the required emissions reductions. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 266 1 As you are aware, CARB and EPA have already 2 fallen short of their 1997 litigated commitment of VOC 3 reduction goals on the order of 118 tons per day -- have 4 fallen short on that -- while the South Coast has not only 5 made their commitment, but has done about 46 tons a day 6 better. 7 And, furthermore, South Coast is agreeing to do 8 even more, meaning that additional area and stationary 9 sources are going to be burdened in the South Coast. 10 The bottom line is is that CARB needs to do more. 11 As Lynne Edgerton says, if not you, then who is there? 12 Our letter of October 20th states what we can -- 13 the measures that we can support. And, furthermore, we 14 would complement those by supporting the intent of the 15 measures that were raised by Bill Burke this morning. We 16 haven't had an opportunity to review those. So that word 17 "intent" is carefully selected. 18 But, finally, with the Board's adoption of the 19 actions outlined above, SCAP commits to support this Board 20 and the staff during the controversial rule making that 21 will inevitably ensue. We will not, however, blindly 22 speak in support of every rule and every condition in 23 every rule that comes down. But we'll support the rules 24 that are applicable to our members and which make common 25 sense and which don't burden local governments with PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 267 1 unnecessary administrative requirements. 2 Thank you. 3 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 4 Mike Eaves, Lee Wallace, Donald Nixon. 5 MR. EAVES: Chairman Lloyd and Board members. 6 Pleasure to be here this afternoon. I'm here this 7 afternoon for the California Natural Gas Vehicle 8 Coalition. And I'm also pleased to be here as a private 9 citizen in these deliberations. 10 I came this morning to oppose the staff 11 recommendation and -- because I felt that there are a 12 number of mobile source opportunities to reduce emissions 13 that are long term that should probably be moved into the 14 near term. And I think Dr. Burke did that appropriately. 15 I've looked at the list of proposed control measures that 16 the South Coast had submitted to ARB. And in his 17 resolution of 120 tons is a very conservative number given 18 the extent of the proposals that he had submitted. So I 19 think that's a conservative number. It's significantly 20 more than the 23 tons that were on the table. So we would 21 like to support Dr. Burke's motion and also support the 22 change in date to 2006. 23 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thanks, Mike. 24 Lee Wallace, Donald Nixon, Philip Hodgetts. 25 MR. WALLACE: Thank you, Chairman Lloyd. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 268 1 I submitted a letter outlining that we wanted to 2 support the motions before you, but with an amendment. 3 And then we'd laid out an amendment in our letter. But we 4 view Chairman Burke's, Board Member Burke's amendment as 5 being a superior amendment, we hope you will favorably 6 consider it. 7 I'm only going to go over one page of my 8 testimony at this time just to bring out a point I don't 9 think has been brought up before. 10 You've heard testimony from many residents of 11 southern California about the many health reasons why we 12 need a better defined air plan here. Those are reasons 13 enough. But I want to also describe to you some of the 14 impacts in the business community. 15 The business community here in California is 16 continuing to deteriorate. Businesses must have adequate 17 information to be able to plan for future production and 18 hopefully expansion of their operations to keep and create 19 jobs. Businesses and their employees rely upon this Board 20 and the other air districts to solve the problems of air 21 quality here in California. Businesses need this 22 information not only to estimate the costs of control, but 23 also to determine the risks of future federal sanctions 24 for failure to attain air quality standards, which 25 unfortunately are a possibility. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 269 1 As Senator Escutia said earlier, federal 2 sanctions will cause severe problems for our state due to 3 deferral or denial of highway funds. But they also will 4 cause problems for businesses. What may seem like a minor 5 issue, the obtainment of offset emission credits, is a 6 serious -- is seriously complicated by the threat of 7 sanctions. For example, businesses wishing to expand or 8 just modify operations need to know whether or not their 9 emission offsets are going to be at a ratio of 10 approximately 1.2 to 1 or under federal sanctions will 11 they be 2 to 1. 12 Offset emission credits are very difficult to get 13 right now. The situations will only get worse. We need 14 to have the information and stability and clarity to know 15 whether or not these -- what the rules of the game and the 16 necessities for permitting our facilities will be. We 17 urge you to exercise your leadership today and approve a 18 better defined plan. 19 Thank you very much. 20 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Lee, you were mentioning the 21 comments of the business. And yet, you know, Bob Wyman 22 indicated earlier the concern for some of the businesses. 23 And you mentioned certainty was important. And yet Bob 24 Wyman saying, well, you know, we need to -- the businesses 25 need time to evaluate what's going on and time to get PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 270 1 involved in the process. 2 How do you reconcile these two views, both 3 representing the business community? 4 MR. WALLACE: I had three other pages I can -- 5 but I'll defer that -- to answer you very shortly. 6 We think that what you need to do is to set in 7 motion a process which will bring clarity to this. What I 8 had is an amendment -- proposed amendment was for you to 9 direct your staff to -- in the next couple weeks to get 10 your staffs together, come up with a better definition of 11 what needs to be done, and then bring it back for a 45-day 12 comment period. 13 I think what you're really trying to do here is 14 answer two different questions: One, the legal 15 requirements of the Clean Air Act and, two, our request to 16 you for what's your vision, how are you going to do this? 17 You've got very clever legal minds here that ought to be 18 able to give you a way to provide an answer to both of 19 those questions. 20 Thank you very much. 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 22 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: Mr. Chairman? 23 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Yes, Mr. McKinnon. 24 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: On my list it looks like 25 the next speaker is from Clean Air Now. A little while PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 271 1 ago you had a speaker from Clean Air Now. It ended up two 2 speakers. And -- 3 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I think this -- no, this 4 person -- 5 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: It's not. 6 Okay. Well, let me ask you this -- 7 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: The one after that is though. 8 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: Let me ask you this: Can 9 we -- we've got an hour and a half to go through 40 10 speakers. We're going to lose a quorum. Can we ask 11 people that are multiply representing the same 12 organization to give the name of the organization, support 13 not support? I don't know. I mean I -- if we run out of 14 time, we won't act. 15 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: You're right. We cannot 16 afford to -- 17 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: Some of us can stay. 18 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Mr. Chairman? 19 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Yes. 20 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: I would suggest that -- in 21 line with what Mr. McKinnon just suggested, that people 22 can get out of order. If they're willing to just stand up 23 and say, "I support the Burke amendment" or whatever, get 24 ahead of the line, so to speak -- 25 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I made that suggestion PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 272 1 before. We had no offers. I'd hope that with that maybe 2 people would rethink that and come forward. 3 And I agree with you completely, Mr. McKinnon. 4 This witness actually is from Bentax Sweden. 5 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: Yeah, I apologize. 6 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: But I think that after this 7 speaker we should really look at that, because we do not 8 have the flexibility. We will be losing a quorum. And a 9 lot of the testimony here can be repetitive. I think 10 we've all got the message here now, and it's going to 11 be -- and I know we have not heard from some of the 12 consumer products industry, and we do expect to hear from 13 them. And we want to pay the courtesy of giving them a 14 chance also of speaking. 15 MR. NIXON: Thank you for the reprieve. 16 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: Mr. Chairman, I probably 17 politically am in line with whoever keeps yelling out up 18 there. I probably am going to vote with them. But 19 everybody's waiting their turn to talk. And the yelling 20 out keeps coming from up there. 21 And, my friend, if you want support and to be 22 listened to, wait your turn. I think it just came out 23 that you're going to get your turn. And I'll tell you, if 24 we're going to have -- I don't have a problem staying here 25 forever. But I think people have travel arrangements. I PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 273 1 happen -- that happens to be easy for me. I'll just stay 2 and hear testimony. But there won't be a quorum and we 3 won't be able to vote. 4 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Correct. 5 Thank you, Mr. McKinnon. 6 MR. NIXON: The meter starts. 7 Like Mr. Burke, my father told me something I 8 remember that's called "find a need and fulfill it." 9 My name is Donald Nixon. I had my family 10 business. I used to live at the White House while my -- 11 as often as I could when my uncle was the President of the 12 United States. He created the EPA. And from there the 13 ARB and AQMD came into existence. 14 Today you discussed various air quality problems. 15 My uncle started this effort. And I believe I have an 16 answer that will handle some of these problems, providing 17 answers, not complaints. 18 In 1919 Albert Einstein invented the first ion 19 generator because his sister had asthma. All other ion -- 20 so called ion generators in Europe and Canada have now 21 been banned because a) they don't work and b) they create 22 ozone. This does not. 23 Since 1919 over 22,500 industrial installations 24 have occurred in Europe. And it's called Bentax. These 25 installations were placed in hotels, trains, aircraft, PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 274 1 airports, hospitals, over 600 sewage plants, schools, et 2 cetera, and locations where mold or Sick Building Syndrome 3 occurs. 4 I have a list of emissions it overcomes, a list 5 of major references of these installations, a list of how 6 it works and what it does specifically to offset your PM 7 10 requirements and problems with asthmatics. 8 I humbly request that you designate staff members 9 to follow up and validate our claims. And I assure you 10 that it will be rapid and easy. 11 With reference to schools, I urge the Board to 12 follow up with respect to providing clean air without 13 filters to schools to overcome asthmatics. 14 And I shall avail myself for any questions if you 15 folks asked. Also, like I said, I provide answers, not 16 complaints. 17 There's no time left, but I wanted to do four 18 points quick: 1) trains, to answer your question. 19 Oh, no more time. 20 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Could you please work with 21 staff as to make sure that they're aware of -- 22 MR. NIXON: Who do I hand it to? 23 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I think Mr. Cackette there 24 would be fine, or Mr. Scheible behind the other one. 25 Thank you. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 275 1 I think we had someone come up to the microphone. 2 Please identify yourself there so we can move 3 ahead now. 4 MS. GARIBAY: Good afternoon. 5 My name is Sylvia Garibay. I live in Wilmington. 6 And I just wanted to support Dr. Burke's amendment and the 7 implement date 2006. 8 Thank you. 9 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you for that wonderful 10 example. And we really take that to heart. Thank you. 11 Philip Hodgetts, Clear Air Now. Again, given the 12 fact that Clean Air Now has already spoken -- is Philip 13 Hodgetts there? 14 Cecilia Sandoval, Agustin Eichwald. 15 MR. EICHWALD: My name is Agustin Eichwald. I'm 16 with Communities for a Better Environment. 17 I just wanted to say that my ears turned upside 18 down when I heard the Port of Long Beach representatives 19 say that the decision to do cold ironing on China Shipping 20 was a political decision. That decision was reached in 21 the Court of Los Angeles. That was a legal mandated 22 decision. 23 In addition, the State of California Governor, 24 the Governor of the State of Washington, the Governor of 25 the State of Oregon have also gone on the record in favor PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 276 1 of cold ironing. It's being used now. I'm 100 percent in 2 favor of it. It's going to save lives, it's going to cut 3 back the pollution in Wilmington. 4 Wilmington is at the Port of Los Angeles, one of 5 the biggest ports of the world. More than 40,000 truck 6 trips come in. That's almost one truck trip per every 7 person in Wilmington. There's 56,000 people in 8 Wilmington. Wilmington also has five oil refineries 9 nearby producing over 500,000 barrels of oil a day. And 10 the 56,000 people in Wilmington have to live with that 11 every single day, and all those truck trips. 12 I also want to say I've been hearing a lot of 13 words like black box, like attainment, like tons. But I 14 want to talk about Juan Carlos Piceno and Patricia Perez, 15 two people who couldn't come here today from Wilmington 16 because: 17 Juan Carlos Piceno has asthma. He was sick the 18 last six days. He can't miss any more school to come 19 here. Normally he comes and he testifies. 20 Patricia Perez is someone that worked with 21 Communities for a Better Environment in the housing 22 projects in Wilmington. She died of cancer. She would 23 have come up here and testified, but she can't be here 24 today because of this. 25 You know, for these people it's already too late. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 277 1 For myself, I have asthma, for Carol Piceno, who has 2 asthma, it's already too late. 3 But now you guys have something in favor of you. 4 You guys have the amendment from Burke. And cold ironing 5 can be done. Burke's amendment, Communities for a Better 6 Environment is a hundred percent behind this amendment at 7 2006. 8 That's all I wanted to say. 9 (Applause.) 10 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 11 Roye Love, Jerry Piro, Martin Rubin. 12 MR. LOVE: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members 13 of the Board. I'm Roye Love from the City of Carson. I'm 14 representing the Del Amo Homeowners Association. So this 15 is a different kind of group. 16 However, we are located just across the street 17 from a toxic hot spot. That's where you have a number of 18 refineries in Carson. Also a chemical company. 19 And a serious problem I think that needs to be 20 addressed, even though it deals not only with mobile 21 sources but stationary sources, would be the cumulative 22 impact of having all these chemicals and things that are 23 happening at the refinery and of course with the air. We 24 look around -- and I also volunteer in the school. 25 I'm a school site chairperson. The number of PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 278 1 kids that we are seeing who have asthma, the nose bleeds 2 that I have in my own kids and grand kids, the number of 3 people in my area who have cancer, even the president of 4 our organization. So I'm saying all of this means that we 5 have a serious problem that has to be addressed. And 6 we're asking this Board to look at that. 7 And I've heard talk, considerations of money and 8 all of those kinds of things. But really the most 9 important thing is taking care of the citizens. 10 Now, I came to a conference here probably about a 11 month ago. And one of the things that intrigued me, they 12 talked about something they called the precautionary 13 principle. And I'm sure many of you are familiar with it. 14 But I'll just read what one definition they said of it. 15 "When an activity raises threats of harm to human 16 health or the environment, precautionary measures should 17 be taken even if some cause-and-effect relationships are 18 not fully established scientifically." 19 What I was taking from that in the same spirit -- 20 the District has made a proposal, some modification that's 21 submitted in Dr. Burke's motion. And I can hear the 22 discussion. I can understand that professionals would 23 disagree. But because the issues are so great here, 24 because this is a life-and-death situation, we've heard 25 that -- we can't wait. The time -- you need to start PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 279 1 right away. And so I'm suggesting to this Board that, 2 please, why don't you go ahead and adopt the Burke 3 amendment and with those modifications. 4 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Can you conclude, 5 Mr. Love. 6 MR. LOVE: Okay. What's that, sir? 7 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Your time's elapsed. 8 MR. LOVE: Oh, great. 9 Okay. Well, that's the main thing. I want to 10 make sure, the issues are just that critical and I'd like 11 to -- 12 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Now, I'm hoping we 13 can get to act before we lose a quorum. We are all hoping 14 that very much. 15 MR. LOVE: Right. Well, thank you, Professor 16 Friedman. 17 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Thank you, sir. 18 Thank you. 19 MR. LOVE: And, again I'll say to Joe Calhoun, 20 haven't seen you in a long time. 21 (Laughter.) 22 (Applause.) 23 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Mr. Piro -- Jerry 24 Piro. 25 Next, Martin Rubin. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 280 1 Not here? 2 Doug Raymond. Mr. Raymond. 3 MR. RAYMOND: Good afternoon, Professor Friedman, 4 members of the Board. My name is Doug Raymond. I'm 5 Regulatory Affairs Director for the Consumer Products 6 Division of the Sherwin Williams Company. 7 As you are aware, we are a major manufacturer of 8 coatings. We are also a major manufacturer of consumer 9 products, producing products in most of the consumer 10 product categories with the exception of personal care. 11 I've worked with your staff for more than a 12 decade. During that time we have developed many 13 regulations on these products. Most recently was the 14 reactivity regulation for aerosol products, which provided 15 the state with the emission reductions it needed and gave 16 industry flexibility. 17 I'm here today to support the CARB SIP proposal. 18 The CARB SIP proposal is aggressive in its required 19 emission reductions, simply because many of the categories 20 have been regulated twice or three times before. I 21 believe if we work with staff we can achieve these 22 emissions. 23 Next, I'm here to request that the Board reject 24 the resolution by the South Coast for authority over 25 consumer products. As stated earlier, ARB has a long PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 281 1 history of working on consumer products and have the 2 required expertise to regulate these products. For South 3 Coast to regulate these products would be extremely 4 redundant and an expensive process for not only the 5 industry, but the State of California. 6 Next, we urge the Board to reject the South Coast 7 proposal and Dr. Burke's amendment to increase the 8 emission reduction for consumer products. As stated 9 before, ARB staff proposal is aggressive. As we saw in 10 the midterm measure efforts to reduce consumer products, 11 emission reductions were difficult to achieve. Dr. 12 Friedman was right in his assessment that if the SIP 13 details reductions, then the ARB is open for legal 14 challenges. I also was here in 1994 for the SIP revision. 15 At that time, we were told that the SIP was flexible. It 16 was called a living document. I believe, Mr. Calhoun, you 17 were here. You probably heard that it was -- said it was 18 a living document. 19 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Can you conclude 20 please. Your time has run. 21 MR. RAYMOND: As we later saw through lawsuits, 22 there was no flexibility. We have learned from the past 23 and the reductions from the SIP -- I'll just get back to 24 the bottom of it. 25 The South Coast proposal, if it's approved, will PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 282 1 cost jobs in this district. One of our vendors, Crown, 2 Cork & Seal, is here to discuss those jobs. 3 In the consideration of time all I want to say is 4 that we support the comments of the Consumer Specialty 5 Products Association. 6 And I wanted to bring up one other point that had 7 to do with Mr. Burke's amendment. And this could bring up 8 some topic about -- as far as what Mr. Wallerstein is 9 talking about the difference between him and his staff and 10 ARB staff. 11 One of the products in here -- and I just got 12 this today, so I was looking at it very quickly -- it 13 states in here that there is additional reductions from 14 consumer products to the transfer of low and ultra-low VOC 15 stationary source technology to consumer products such as 16 cleanup solvents. I can tell you that right now your 17 Board has approved a $200,000 R&D study that is being run 18 right now. I'm on the work group for that. They tried to 19 take the ultra-low technology that is in the South Coast 20 and put it into an aerosol can. Their first go-around was 21 a total failure. All of the products failed. 22 So just saying that you can do this doesn't mean 23 you can do it. 24 Thank you very much. 25 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Thank you very much. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 283 1 Ms. Cole. 2 MS. COLE: Good afternoon. 3 I'm Christa Cole. I represent California Tan, 4 Inc., which is a small to midsize business in Los Angeles. 5 And as by way of introduction for myself, I'm 6 also a native southern Californian. I'm the 4th 7 generation. Grew up in Tustin. My family's local. My 8 entire family lives here. I know this environment. I 9 love this environment. And I also love clean air. 10 California Tan is a cosmetic manufacturer 11 specializing in tanning, sunscreens, and disinfectant 12 cleaning products for the use in indoor tanning salons. 13 I'm here to put a name and a face with the small 14 businesses that will be affected by the reductions in the 15 VOCs. 16 If I didn't already say this, we've been in 17 existence for 17 years. We have over 40 full time 18 employees living in the southern California and the L.A. 19 area. Our employees also love clean air. We work very 20 hard every day to promote and foster the California 21 healthy environment and the healthy lifestyle. That's 22 what we're all about. That's what our company is, 23 California through and through. 24 However, we can't support the proposed VOC 25 reductions for the South Coast Air District. These PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 284 1 proposed reductions are not feasible and will hurt many 2 California companies that manufacture useful and necessary 3 consumer products, such as our sunscreens and our 4 disinfectants. 5 So to keep this short, I'd just like to say that 6 I support the CTFA, who's coming up after me to give their 7 comments. 8 Thank you. 9 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Thank you. 10 William Auriemma, and then Geri Duncan Jones and 11 then Debbie Waite. 12 MR. AURIEMMA: Thank you, Board. My name is 13 William Auriemma. I'm President and CEO of Diversified 14 CPC International. We supply specialty gases and 15 propellants and low VOC solvents to the personal care 16 products and consumer products industry. 17 As someone who moved here in 1977 and can compare 18 the air today to what we had back then, you're to be 19 commended for the considerable progress that we've made. 20 And I'm also very proud of the hard work that our industry 21 has done with the staff and with the Air Resources Board 22 to achieve the goals that we have. 23 We support the staff recommendations as presented 24 today. I echo many of the comments that Doug Raymond just 25 made a few minutes ago, so I won't be redundant with PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 285 1 those. But we represent one of the many companies that 2 employs people in southern California with good 3 high-paying jobs. We run modern fleets. We keep our 4 plants well maintained. We are well below our permitted 5 emission levels. And we will continue to do the right 6 things. 7 And we look forward to working with the Board and 8 with the staff. The proposed regulations that the Board 9 has submitted are by no means a slam dunk, but we welcome 10 the opportunity to go forward working with you. 11 Thank you. 12 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Thank you, sir. 13 Geri Duncan Jones. 14 MS. JONES: Dr. Lloyd and the Air Resources 15 Board, my name is Geri Duncan Jones and I'm the Executive 16 Director of the American Health & Beauty Aids Institute, 17 which is a national trade association that represents 18 small minority businesses that manufacture hair care and 19 skin care products for ethnic consumers. One of our 20 members is based here in Ontario, California, Clear 21 Essence Cosmetics. 22 We also represent more than 1,000 licensed beauty 23 professionals, many of whom are in the California area who 24 use the products in their small businesses and are, quite 25 frankly, dependent on the good quality products we PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 286 1 manufacture for their livelihood. 2 Over the past 15 years, the Air Resources Board 3 has passed very strict VOC limits for several products 4 that our companies manufacture. We also believe in the 5 importance of clean air and our members have worked 6 diligently to meet these requirements. 7 Right now our member companies are going to great 8 lengths, spending a lot of money and time to reformulate 9 the hair shine products to meet a 2005 deadline. Also, 10 our companies have had to reformulate other hair care and 11 styling products for the California market, including hair 12 sprays. 13 Our concern is the South Coast plan for consumer 14 products would hurt the performance and effectiveness of 15 ethnic products that California consumers and salon 16 professionals expect. If the products do not meet 17 consumers' expectations, they will not sell. If future 18 rules take away companies' formulation options or ban 19 certain product forms, then their abilities to innovate 20 and grow in other product areas will be stifled. As a 21 result there will be lost sales, lost jobs, and lost tax 22 revenue for the state. 23 In conclusion, we concur with Senator Escutia, as 24 we believe it is imperative that the Air Resources Board 25 recognizes and understands the severe impact that the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 287 1 South Coast proposed changes would have on small 2 businesses that market and use our beauty products in the 3 State of California. 4 Thank you. 5 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Perfectly timed. 6 Thank you. 7 Debbie Waite. 8 MS. WAITE: My name is Debbie Waite and I'm from 9 a company called Creative Nail Design. We're located in 10 Vista, California. We employ about 160 people, and we've 11 been in the area for 24 years. We sell products that are 12 used in salons and spas throughout the world. 13 And just so that you understand, the people that 14 work in those salons and spas are nail technicians that 15 use our products. They are reliant on their income by 16 doing services for people that come to have their hands 17 and feet beautified. If they don't have quality products, 18 they can't provide a quality service. 19 We are concerned with some of the proposals that 20 we have heard here today and our ability to meet those and 21 still provide the quality products for these small 22 business owners. 23 Nail technicians typically work 45 hours a week. 24 They make less than $30,000 a year. The average salon has 25 between one and four nail technicians. You're talking PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 288 1 about a lot of small businesses. 2 We urge you as you consider these proposals to 3 think about these small businesses and the effect these 4 regulations will have on them. The limited benefit from 5 reducing VOCs, particularly in nail products, is far 6 outweighed by the detriment to these small businesses. 7 Therefore, we recommend approval of the ARB 8 staff's aggressive SIP. We are challenged by this, but we 9 are willing to meet that challenge. We recommend 10 rejection of the Burke proposal because we do not see it 11 as feasible. 12 Thank you. 13 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 14 Cameron Smith, Tom Clifford, Jim Bodnar. 15 MR. SMITH: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. 16 I'm Cameron Smith and I'm here on behalf of Herbalife 17 International. 18 And you've already heard a little bit of -- some 19 of the comments from other persons in our industry about 20 the effect of additional VOC regulations, particularly the 21 more aggressive ones that apply to personal care products, 22 could result in costlier and less efficacious products. 23 Well, that's Herbalife's concern as well, because 24 Herbalife is a company that in many ways is southern 25 California. It's all about the southern California ethic. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 289 1 It's all about offering an opportunity. It's all about 2 helping people make the most of themselves internally, 3 externally, and giving them a business opportunity as 4 well. 5 Herbalife has operated for over 20 years here in 6 southern California and now employs almost 900 full-time 7 personnel here in southern California. What is more 8 important is that there is a network of over 59,000 9 independent Herbalife distributors throughout California, 10 a large proportion of whom obviously will be in the 11 southern California area as well. 12 What you may not know about Herbalife is that a 13 large chunk of its business is devoted to personal care 14 products, skin care and hair care. By denying our 15 independent distributors the ability to afford personal 16 care products to use in their businesses and to bring 17 others into the business and also by denying them the most 18 effective personal care products that we could provide, 19 we're harming -- well, we're harming the southern 20 California ethic. 21 And, more importantly, you should also know that 22 of those 59,000 distributors, a large number of them are 23 located in areas that suffer from some of the worst air 24 quality problems right here in the South Coast District. 25 Those distributors, although they suffer from air quality PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 290 1 problems, should not be denied the opportunity to make 2 better lives for themselves at the -- just for a 3 negligible benefit in additional VOC reductions. 4 Thank you very much. 5 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 6 Tom Clifford, Jim Bodnar. 7 MR. CLIFFORD: Mr. Chairman, distinguished Board, 8 my name is Tom Clifford and I am President of the American 9 Beauty Association. 10 Our association is comprised of manufacturers of 11 professional salon hair-, skin-, and nail-care products. 12 Our products are sold to wholesale distributors who in 13 turn sell our products to salons and salon professionals. 14 In addition, our products are retailed by salon 15 professionals to you, the salon client. 16 That's right, we manufacture product, we supply 17 distributors, who sell to salons and ultimately you, the 18 salon client. That's four sources of revenue. 19 Many of our over 250 members are small $3 million 20 to $7 million size companies that employ, on average, 50 21 people. Over 20 percent of our members are located in 22 California. The Wella Company, Sebastian, Graham Webb, 23 American International, Creative Nail Design, OPI, and 24 Early International, to mention a few. 25 The additional burden of having to reformulate PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 291 1 products for the third and possibly fourth time not only 2 is expensive but will destroy the efficacy of our products 3 and the expectation of enhanced salon performance from not 4 only the salon professional but from you, the salon 5 client. 6 The future of VOC reductions for consumer 7 products that are proposed are unrealistic and exorbitant. 8 If future rules take away our industry's formulation 9 options, then our ability to innovate and grow as an 10 industry will be greatly diminished. 11 Thank you for your time. 12 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Thank you very much, 13 sir. 14 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 15 MR. BODNAR: Thank you, Dr. Lloyd and Board 16 members. 17 My name is Jim Bodnar. I am representing Aerosol 18 Services. More importantly, I'm representing the 400 19 manufacturing jobs at Aerosol Services. We've been in 20 business for 40 years in California. We are a major 21 supplier to other major California companies, such as John 22 Paul Mitchell, Sebastian, WD-40, amongst others. These 23 companies employ more than 1,000 California residents. In 24 addition to our customers, we also supply hundreds of jobs 25 for the suppliers of California that supply materials to PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 292 1 us. 2 To ensure that our products have been compliant 3 in the past, we have spent thousands of dollars in R&D to 4 make sure they're compliant. We've worked with the ARB 5 Board in the past and we'll continue to do so in the 6 future. 7 We are here today to support the proposed staff 8 amendment -- or the proposed staff regulations, but oppose 9 the South Coast amendments or Dr. Burke's amendments. We 10 feel that they are, especially in the area of consumer 11 products, unattainable. And while the proposed amendments 12 by the staff will be difficult to attain, we believe they 13 are attainable and we will work to do so. 14 Thank you. 15 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 16 John Owens, William Lafield, Joseph Yost, and 17 Thomas Donegan. 18 MR. OWENS: Thank you, Dr. Lloyd and members of 19 the Board. My name is John Owens. I'm a research 20 scientist from the SC Johnson Company of Racine, 21 Wisconsin. 22 SC Johnson is a leading global manufacturer and 23 marketer of household products. We have brands like 24 Windex glass cleaner, Pledge furniture polish, Raid 25 insecticides, Off insect repellents, Glade air fresheners, PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 293 1 and Fantastik general-purpose cleaners, as well as many 2 others. 3 Many of our products are regulated by limits -- 4 VOC limits currently undertaken -- or in the regulations 5 of the ARB. And we've worked hard over the last 15 years 6 with staff and found them very diligent and professional 7 and very aggressive at enforcing their rules, but also in 8 searching technology-forcing limits and regulations for 9 the future. 10 I'm the R&D person, the scientist in our research 11 and development division that works with our product 12 development teams to comply with the regulations and to 13 find ways to comply. Sometimes we have to get innovative 14 product exemptions and use some alternate control plans 15 and other means. And I can tell you that the proposal in 16 the current SIP proposal is an aggressive one, for 25 to 17 40 tons per day reductions. 18 And understanding as well as I can -- and it 19 seems to have changed recently even with the proposal that 20 Dr. Burke made today -- but the proposal seems to imply a 21 two or three times greater reduction in VOC emissions from 22 consumer products. And as a person who works closely with 23 R&D people trying to meet technology-forcing regulations 24 over the years and looking into the future, we just don't 25 feel that that's feasible, the South Coast proposal. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 294 1 So, therefore, we support the SIP as proposed, 2 and we urge your rejection of the South Coast's additional 3 measures on consumer products. 4 Thank you. 5 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 6 We have William Lafield, Joseph Yost, Thomas 7 Donegan, and David Schonbrunn. 8 MR. LAFIELD: Dr. Lloyd, members of the Board, my 9 name is Bill Lafield, and I'm here representing the 10 Automotive Specialty Products Alliance. And I'm here to 11 endorse the other -- comments made by the consumer 12 products industry. 13 But with your permission I would like to yield my 14 time to one of our local members, who would take about one 15 minute to state his position. 16 MR. GILBERT: I'm John Gilbert from Crown, Cork & 17 Seal USA. I'm here to support our CSPA ASPA position. We 18 support a reasonable SIP. We don't support the resolution 19 to impose future unrealistic consumer products 20 regulations. 21 Because of this resolution we're concerned for 22 the future of our 80 Teamster Union manufacturing jobs 23 here in southern California. I'm sure there are other 24 manufacturers -- or manufacturing facilities in the supply 25 chain that will be adversely affected also. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 295 1 Thank you. 2 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 3 Joseph Yost, Thomas Donegan, and then David 4 Schonbrunn. 5 MR. YOST: Thank you. 6 Dr. Lloyd, distinguished members of the Board, 7 good afternoon. My name is Joe Yost. I'm the Director of 8 State Affairs for the Consumer Specialty Products 9 Association, or CSPA. 10 During the last 14 years the ARB has promulgated 11 five comprehensive sets of regulations that established 12 nearly 200 VOC emission standards that affect 82 broad 13 categories of consumer products. As a result of these 14 actions, emissions from regulated categories have been 15 reduced by 50 percent and, in total, statewide consumer 16 products emissions will have been reduced by 130 tons per 17 day by 2005. 18 This is a remarkable achievement and it reflects 19 the considerable experience the ARB staff has in setting 20 technology-forcing regulations for consumer products. 21 To achieve these mandated reductions the consumer 22 products industry has spent hundreds of millions of 23 dollars to reformulate its products to meet these very 24 aggressive standards that ARB has set. These efforts 25 continue today as CSPA members and others in the consumer PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 296 1 products industry work towards meeting VOC limits that 2 will come into effect through 2005. 3 I'd like to specifically address our concerns 4 about the proposed ARB SIP revisions. As proposed, the 5 strategy will establish a very ambitious and comprehensive 6 emission reduction target. This will represent a 7 significant challenge to our industry. Although we have 8 serious concerns about our ability to meet these stringent 9 new regulatory standards, we hope to continue to work with 10 ARB as we have done during the past 14 years in a 11 concerted effort to identify the new technologies that 12 will be necessary to meet these very ambitious goals. 13 And in particular, as you've heard mentioned by 14 several other speakers, it'll be difficult to meet these 15 goals because some of these products have been regulated 16 two and three times already. 17 I'd like to address our concerns -- in summary -- 18 (Laughter.) 19 MR. YOST: Thank you. 20 In conclusion, we understand the magnitude of the 21 task confronting the ARB. The SIP revision is a major 22 initiative with long-range effects. Therefore, CSPA hopes 23 to work with the ARB staff in a concerted effort to 24 identify the new technologies that will be necessary to 25 meet these ambitious goals. We urge you to approve the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 297 1 ARB staff's comprehensive and aggressive strategy and to 2 reject the South Coast motion for further reductions that 3 go well beyond those that are determined by the ARB staff 4 to be the maximum feasible reductions required by 5 California Law. 6 Thank you. 7 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 8 Thomas Donegan, David Schonbrunn, Sylvia Garibay. 9 MR. DONEGAN: Well, it's almost good evening so 10 I'll say good evening. 11 Dr. Lloyd, members of the Board, my name is 12 Thomas Donegan. I represent the Cosmetic, Toiletry and 13 Fragrance Association, or CTFA. We have over 600 members 14 that are involved in manufacturing and distributing 15 personal care products throughout the U.S. and California. 16 We're here to support the ARB staff proposal and 17 urge you to reject the District proposal and the Burke 18 resolution. We urge you to do that today. I think it's 19 important that there be no delay, that we get on with it 20 and start working with the staff towards what hopefully 21 will turn out to be feasible reductions in emissions from 22 our products. 23 You've heard from many of our members today who 24 have testified or many -- you've read comments from others 25 who have written. They are concerned about the balance PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 298 1 between clean air and the viability of their products or, 2 ultimately, the viability of their businesses. And this 3 is a real concern. 4 And I think the Board has a real challenge and a 5 responsibility to properly balance those things, to make 6 sure that in seeking clean air, we don't set unattainable 7 standards that ultimately drive people out of business and 8 hurt California businesses. 9 There's a lot to be learned from the Clean Air 10 Act as it's written. And I'm a little concerned about the 11 talk that we've heard today many times of revising the 12 Clean Air Act. I think that's built in a lot of balances. 13 It requires that standards be technologically and 14 commercially feasible. It recognizes the ARB as a 15 preeminent authority to regulate consumer products. And 16 that's very important, uniform regulation throughout the 17 state. It recognizes the importance of choice in the 18 marketplace and prohibits banning any product form. It 19 allows you to seek reductions in all forms, but not to ban 20 any. 21 So I think the South Coast District proposal 22 simply goes too far. I urge you to support the ARB staff 23 proposal. And we look forward to working with them on 24 future emission reductions. 25 Thank you. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 299 1 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 2 David Schonbrunn, Sylvia Garibay, and Jesse 3 Marquez. 4 MR. SCHONBRUNN: I'm David Schonbrunn of TRANSDEF 5 and very much appreciate this opportunity to speak before 6 you. 7 We are the Transportation Solutions Defense and 8 Education Fund based in the Bay Area and focusing on the 9 integration of planning for land-use transportation and 10 air quality. I had planned on testifying before you on 11 both agenda items. Now I'm having to collapse my 12 testimony. But I still do have two agenda items' worth of 13 material here. 14 We have submitted two letters, one on our own 15 letterhead dealing with statewide measures, and the other 16 from our attorney on the SIP. 17 I filed an opposition card for the statewide 18 measures resolution because it is incomplete. We see a 19 need for a vigorous statewide effort to reduce the growth 20 in vehicle miles traveled. This is a very different 21 strategy from zero emission vehicles. This is zero 22 vehicle trips, in particular. 23 With better urban planning we can achieve these 24 kind of zero vehicle trips for a significant number of 25 daily trips. With better transit on other trips, we can PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 300 1 have fewer vehicles in motion. 2 Your agency has had an on-again, off-again 3 posture towards VMT and the land-use air quality link. 4 You published an excellent booklet in 1997 and an 5 innovative draft clean air plan in 2002 with the 6 transportation control measures element. Unfortunately, 7 this entire strategy is missing from the proposed 8 statewide measures. 9 Please bring back the work that was done on the 10 withdrawn clean air plan, set a goal for the reduction in 11 the growth of VMT, choose one that is aggressive yet 12 realistic, and challenge your staff and the districts to 13 exercise their creativity on how to accomplish this. 14 For example, the State of Oregon many years ago 15 adopted a transportation planning rule that required a 16 10-percent reduction in VMT. They have accomplished much 17 of that mandated reduction. 18 I will use whatever time I have at the end of my 19 comments to offer suggested measures. 20 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: The time is up. 21 MR. SCHONBRUNN: I now want to speak on the SIP. 22 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I'm sorry. We stated at the 23 beginning people should address both. We do have your 24 letter. 25 MR. SCHONBRUNN: Well, I hope you will read it. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 301 1 But I also would like to speak -- 2 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I'm reading it. 3 I'm sorry, sir. I understand. But we did set 4 some rules down. 5 MR. SCHONBRUNN: Well, quite frankly, had it been 6 noticed differently, this would be more acceptable. But 7 because it was noticed as separate items, I literally am 8 prepared to speak on two separate -- distinctly separate 9 issues, particularly because I'm speaking about the 10 importance from the state perspective. 11 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I understand, but we have 12 your letter. And if you could send some more stuff in, 13 that would be helpful. But we've got this letter. 14 MR. SCHONBRUNN: Thank you very much. 15 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Sylvia Garibay, Jesse 16 Marquez, Danilo Marquez. 17 Jesse Marquez, Danilo Marquez, and Alejandro 18 Marquez. 19 MR. MARQUEZ: Hi. My name is Jesse Marquez. I'm 20 the Executive Director of the Coalition for a Safe 21 Environment. We actually -- there's more public people 22 here. But in your request to ask for people to 23 consolidate, we're now bringing everybody since they 24 didn't sign up under necessarily the organization's names. 25 But as you can see, we have college students PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 302 1 here, we have senior citizens here, we have Filipinos 2 here, we have Caucasians here. Our organization 3 represents people from over 30 different cities in the Los 4 Angeles County area. And we even have a few people from 5 out of state. 6 The reason we are here today is to have an 7 opportunity to express our opinion on the state's SIP. 8 Now, we did submit a written document with about 300 pages 9 of attachments to go with it. But we did take the time to 10 read it. We are an nonprofit organization. We have no 11 paid staff. We have no foundation grants of any type. We 12 are just family, we are parents, and we are a community 13 concerned. 14 We come from Wilmington. Wilmington is where the 15 Port of Los Angeles is located. Our neighbor is the Port 16 of Long Beach. We know what air pollution is. In fact, 17 we made a list of 37 major industries in our community. 18 Shell Oil Refinery has three different facilities there. 19 Chevron has three different facilities there. Alamont has 20 two different facilities there. Valero has two different 21 facilities there. We have a cement factory there. You 22 name it, we have it within five square miles. 23 We are against the State proposed SIP. We have 24 read it. We don't know where you got your staff from. We 25 don't know where you got your consultants from. But it is PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 303 1 one of the worst documents we've ever seen. 2 The primary purpose of CARB and EPA is to protect 3 the public's interest. We are the public. We are the 4 consumers of the products. We are the ones that are sick. 5 It is our children that we take to the hospital. It is 6 our friends that are dying. You may read that AQMD's 7 2,000 potential cancer victims dying per million, while no 8 one's actually done a study in Wilmington. We probably 9 have that much in one year in our own community, or at 10 least in the two or three bordering communities. 11 So we want specific mortality studies to be done, 12 morbidity studies to be done, community health surveys to 13 be done, and epidemiological studies to be done to verify 14 the fact of how serious the impact of air pollution is on 15 our communities. 16 We do support Dr. Burke's recommendation. But 17 please keep in mind that we must meet those attainments. 18 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Can you wrap up please. 19 MR. MARQUEZ: I'm trying. But like I said, we 20 did combine. 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Oh, sorry. I missed that. 22 Sorry. 23 MR. MARQUEZ: We're asking for an extra minute or 24 so. 25 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Yes. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 304 1 MR. MARQUEZ: But we do realize that, you know, 2 major things do need to be changed. We did testify in 3 review of the four different refineries in our area on the 4 Title 5 permit. And we got to see how bad the pollution 5 was. We're talking about 380 tons of NOx from one 6 facility; carbon dioxide, 445 tons from one facility. 7 When we added up our four facilities we were talking about 8 tens of thousands of tons of pollution coming into our 9 community. That's not acceptable. 10 We don't support the reclaim project for any 11 trading of credits. We need to stop pollution now and in 12 the future. 13 We recognize there are small businesses out 14 there. But we are also the consumers that use those 15 products. 16 We're saying: Use a precautionary principle. 17 You are indeed researchers and scientists and technicians 18 and lab people. You study the products before they're 19 released. And if new technology or new scientific and 20 medical studies show that it is causing a health danger to 21 the public, then you must work with us in addressing that 22 solution to that problem. We're not trying to shut you 23 out of business. We're just saying work with us. Let's 24 make it a safe world for us. 25 We have someone from Wilmington that died PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 305 1 recently of lung cancer. Who is going to replace Mr. 2 Schwaub's wife Gertrude? 3 Eddie Morrow's been in the hospital for three 4 years now. Lung failure. Had a tracheotomy done. His 5 hospital bill is over $600,000. Who do you think is 6 paying his public health bill now? The public. 7 We've seen some of the U.S. EPA recent studies. 8 The cost to the public in health care is over a billion 9 dollars. You talk about "Where is the money going to come 10 from to help pay for some of these plans and some of these 11 programs?" The money is there. 12 In case you haven't seen the recent statistics 13 for some of the oil refineries, we happen to have a copy 14 of it. It showed that some of our companies -- let's see, 15 if I can find it. One second. 16 For example, Exxon Mobil, their net profit for 17 the first quarter this year was $7 billion. 18 Let's talk about local companies here. Shell Oil 19 Refinery, 5.3 billion net profit, first quarter. BP/ARCO, 20 4.3 billion net profit. Chevron/Texaco, 1.9 billion net 21 profit. 22 And they're trying to tell us they don't have the 23 money to implement new technology. They do. 24 This week's headlines two days ago, Chevron just 25 agreed with U.S. EPA to pay $275 million in fines and to PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 306 1 retrofit the refineries. BP/ARCO is being sued by a local 2 AQMD for $319 million for hundreds of violations. Yes, we 3 trusted them on the honor system. They failed to maintain 4 their promise to do better. 5 So we need to have stricter standards to protect 6 us, because I don't want to be here with our organization 7 one year from now scratching our head wondering why 8 nothing improved. We are asking you, implement those 9 standards, implement those requirements, implement those 10 rules. Let's make it happen. 11 Thank you. 12 (Applause.) 13 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you, Jesse. Thank you. 14 Thank you very much. Thanks for coming. 15 I'm not sure -- did that include all of 16 Wilmington? 17 MR. MARQUEZ: Yes, yes. 18 What about Pacoima Beautiful, Kristin Aldana 19 Taday and Liseth Romen-Martinez? 20 Not here? 21 Maria Elena Arreola from CBE, although we've 22 heard CBE before here. 23 Okay, thank you. I knew we covered that. So 24 thank you. 25 Gurcharan Bawa and John Hunter. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 307 1 No? 2 I don't know what this -- CIDS Enterprise. What 3 is that? 4 Moises Lara. 5 No. 6 Roy Peters, Edgar Cruz and Martha Rios. 7 No, I was calling three people, yeah. 8 MR. PETERS: I'm Roy Peters from Trinity 9 Consultants. We're an air pollution company, and we've 10 got a lot of offices throughout the United States. And we 11 like to call ourselves air heads. 12 So I want to address some of the regulations that 13 you're proposing. 14 If you know about Los Angeles, you know that 15 there is 16 million people that live in the L.A. Basin. 16 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Yeah, tell us something we 17 don't know. 18 MR. PETERS: And they have 11 million motor 19 vehicles. So on any given day you could have 11 million 20 motor vehicles on the highway. 21 So I think you have to address mobile sources as 22 a key pollution control. 23 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: What unique advice can you 24 give us? 25 MR. PETERS: We can give you the unique advice PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 308 1 that you have to have stringent regulations to control 2 this, and that's the only answer. Backing off from 3 that is not an answer. 4 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: And people pay you for that 5 advice? 6 MR. PETERS: They sure do. 7 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. Thank you. 8 Edgar Cruz, Martha Rios, Stephanie Pacheco. 9 Martha Rios. 10 Stephanie Pacheco. 11 Rick Bishop. 12 MR. BISHOP: Good afternoon, Chairman, members of 13 the Board. I'm Rick Bishop, the Executive Director of the 14 Western Riverside Council of Governments, also 15 representing the SCAG area of Subregional Coordinator's 16 Group. We have provided correspondence to you. 17 Let me just say that I think, like many of the 18 others that have provided testimony to you this afternoon, 19 we're also very concerned about the stagnation or lack of 20 improvement of air quality during the last few years. I 21 suspect that probably we can't benefit too much from 22 additional meteorological mulligans that we've received in 23 the last few years due to good weather. 24 I think that we're also very concerned about the 25 70 percent VOC and the 90 percent NOx emission reductions PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 309 1 that are outside the realm of control of the local Air 2 Quality Management District. And we're very hopeful that 3 the State Air Resources Board and the Federal EPA will 4 redouble their efforts to help us achieve our goal of 5 clean air. 6 And speaking as a representative of the Inland 7 Empire, I also want to let you know that we're very 8 concerned about our economic advancement as the region 9 grows significantly in the future. And we think it's very 10 closely tied to clean air and a clean environment. So we 11 see those two things as going hand in hand. 12 Thank you. 13 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 14 Roy Miller, Clayton Miller, and Jan Kidwell. 15 MR. MILLER: Good afternoon, Chairman, members of 16 the Board. My name is Clayton Miller and I am 17 representing the Construction Industry Air Quality 18 Coalition. 19 Our association is comprised of the Associated 20 General Contractors, the Engineering Contractors 21 Association, the Southern California Contractors 22 Association, and the Building Industry Association of 23 Southern California. In all, we represent about 3,300 24 member companies and 650 general contractors in southern 25 California. In our opinion, this represents roughly half PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 310 1 of the construction companies in the South Coast Air 2 Basin. 3 I arrived here this morning intending to comment 4 on two construction-related provisions found in the 5 proposed 2003 State and federal SIP. It was then, like 6 many others, I learned of Dr. Burke's motion. 7 To my knowledge, our coalition is the only 8 organization representing the construction industry that 9 has been involved in and trying to determine the direct 10 impacts of the proposed strategies on our industry. We 11 are concerned this is coming to us now, especially with 12 the additional amendments proposed today, our organization 13 has not had sufficient time to consider the affordability 14 of the proposal and the impacts to the 650 construction 15 companies and the roughly 52,000 employees, let alone 16 understand the impacts on noncontractor companies in 17 southern California and the rest of the state. We wonder 18 if CARB staff does. 19 Over the last three years several of our 20 companies have participated in incentive-based diesel 21 engine repowering programs, including Carl Moyer, to 22 replace older engines with cleaner certified engines. To 23 date, 372 engines have been replaced. The incentive 24 programs have covered approximately two-thirds of the cost 25 of engine replacement. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 311 1 Based on the average cost to repower an engine, 2 this proposal before you could cost the 650 companies 3 approximately $1.6 billion. How much will it cost the 4 entire industry in southern California and the state as a 5 whole? I'm not sure what figures and values the Board has 6 before it, but I've talked to three officers of companies 7 in my coalition and believe the costs -- and they believe 8 the costs of this magnitude would break at least 9 three-fourths of the companies. 10 We just simply need more information. We need to 11 develop a process to get more feedback from contracts on 12 the implementation of this motion and these strategies. 13 Further, we wonder if the California SIP is a 14 plan, a program, or a regulation. How much flexibility 15 exists with the dates found in the proposed strategy? 16 Will the public be given an opportunity to participate in 17 workshops? Will a working group be established? We have 18 been involved in a working group for development of an air 19 toxics control measure for portable equipment in the 20 statewide registration program for portable equipment and 21 believe it's an effective process. 22 Once the proposed SIP is adopted is there any 23 flexibility with the proposed action implementation dates? 24 It's always been the practice to adopt standards for new 25 engines and equipment. This proposal moves into PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 312 1 unchartered territories. 2 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Can you bring it to a close? 3 MR. MILLER: Yes, I will. 4 Never before has a prohibition of this scale been 5 adopted for existing equipment. 6 I guess in conclusion we have to say that we just 7 think something coming this quickly just needs much, much 8 more evaluation, and we respectfully urge your Board not 9 to act today on these measures. We believe it's vital 10 that the impacts be clearly understood before CARB moves 11 in this direction. 12 Thank you. 13 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. But I think you 14 can rest assured before we move to any of those, we will 15 clearly get the public involvement, et cetera. 16 Jan Kidwell, Harvey Eder, Brendan Huffman, Maria 17 Hall. 18 Harvey, are you going to come down in time? 19 And then Ok Hwan Kim. 20 MR. EDER: Good afternoon, Dr. Lloyd and Board -- 21 or good evening. My name is Harvey Eder. I'm Executive 22 Director of the Public Solar Power Coalition and a very 23 concerned citizen. 24 I come to you with a proposal that we faxed to 25 you yesterday of approximately 60 pages. That is for a PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 313 1 State and local and PSPC involved solar conversion agency 2 partnership called SolarCal -- Solar California, with a 3 goal of converting solar, wind, and hydrogen, other 4 renewables which are solar, direct or indirect, by the 5 year 2010. 6 G.E. bought out Enron's wind company. And 7 they're down to a dollar a watt for windmills. And within 8 1,000 to 2,500 miles from California there are hundreds 9 and hundreds of gigawatts of wind power that can be 10 generated and either brought to California or converted 11 through electrolysis into hydrogen and brought in and used 12 in converted engines, or more directly and efficiently in 13 fuel cells. 14 However, there's an article in June 13th of this 15 year in the Journal of Science about how hydrogen economy 16 may harm the ozone layer. Existing fossil fuels is doing 17 the same thing. But this is something that you should 18 consider since your long-term plan is for hydrogen. And 19 solar hydrogen is the way to go. 20 Thank you. 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 22 Brendan Huffman, Maria Hall, and Mr. Kim -- Ok 23 Hwan Kim. 24 MR. KIM: Hi. My name is Ok Hwan Kim, and I'm a 25 dry cleaner representing Korean Dry Cleaners Association PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 314 1 of Orange County. 2 And South Coast AQMD has been clamping down on 3 dry cleaners more than enough for the past few years. 4 Most of us have been issued citations and paid heavy 5 fines. 6 And some of the reasons -- some of us got rid of 7 the machine -- the perch dry cleaning machines because of 8 the regulation -- heavy regulation on us. And the new 9 hydrocarbon machine that we have to buy costs about at 10 least $50,000 or more. 11 And one of the reasons for the citation we get 12 is, if you have a small vapor leak from your machine, and 13 you are supposed to fix it right away. If you cannot fix 14 it, either you have to go out of business or buy a new 15 machine that does not leak. 16 But at the same time this can of chemical that we 17 use to waterproof on garment, this chemical is exactly the 18 same as perch. I mean main ingredient is perch. And you 19 can spray this all day long any place you want, there is 20 nobody that will stop you for doing this. 21 But if the same chemical comes out of the 22 dry-cleaning machine and you can't use it and you have to 23 go out of business. And it just doesn't make sense. 24 Something is not right here. The same exact chemical. 25 And you can buy this at any place, any dry-cleaning supply PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 315 1 company. 2 And if you have to -- if you have to buy a big 3 expensive machine just because less than the amount of 4 the -- the chemical that's coming out of this is less than 5 like a few drops or whatever, and you won't have to buy 6 this. And yet you can use this all day long without any 7 regulations whatsoever. 8 So I strongly support the South Coast AQMD 9 proposal and urge you to do your part to help the 10 situation here. 11 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 12 (Applause.) 13 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: With that, I think that ends 14 the public witness. 15 So I guess, does the staff have any more 16 comments? 17 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Not at this time, 18 unless you wish for us to restate the staff 19 recommendation. 20 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I think that might be 21 appropriate. 22 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Staff recommends 23 that you approve the 2003 South Coast SIP with the 24 amendment to include 23 tons worth of new short-term 25 measures, and also with the commitment to include 66 tons PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 316 1 of "what if" measures, if we had the authority, if we had 2 the funding. Those were identified in the staff 3 presentation in three different categories. 4 And, lastly, in Attachment A to the resolution we 5 have a schedule for the evaluation of long-term measures 6 with firm years by which each evaluation must be 7 completed; and if the evaluation shows that the measure is 8 feasible, firm dates by which we shall move to adoption, 9 to bring you the regulation if it's a regulatory measure, 10 or presuming we can get the funding or statutory authority 11 from the Legislature to move on those measures as well. 12 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I should say I guess since 13 it's not a regulatory item, it's not necessary to 14 officially close the record. But obviously we can enter 15 in the discussion at this time. 16 Professor Friedman. 17 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: I'd like to make a 18 few comments. And then I'd like to make a motion to amend 19 Dr. Burke's motion. 20 My comments are that I benefited greatly from the 21 testimony. I usually do, but this was particularly 22 enlightening. I got the clear impression personally that 23 both our staff and the staff of South Coast Air Quality 24 Management District have struggled mightily with the same 25 concerns. Although our staff's jurisdiction has more to PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 317 1 do with mobile sources obviously and South Coast's 2 concerns -- primary responsibility is for stationary 3 sources here within the District. 4 But they are both expert staffs. They have 5 struggled. And I commend them for the effort, the time, 6 and all of those who have participated before today in 7 helping shape these recommendations. 8 I do think there is truth in the statement that 9 we do have ultimate responsibility as a State board for 10 not only approving -- reviewing and approving the South 11 Coast's SIP, but for developing and adopting our own. And 12 if we don't assume that responsibility, then who? And if 13 not -- I would add, if not here, then where? And if not 14 now, then when? 15 And so I think I have enough to act. I know this 16 is an evolving kind of set of rules, identifying pollution 17 sources, identifying feasible control measures, 18 identifying a time -- realistic and reasonable timelines 19 for implementation of the control measures, and effective 20 means of assessing and evaluating and so forth. And all 21 of that is of necessity. It's inherently going to be 22 something that has to evolve, from experience and from 23 testing and from the best kinds of technological 24 information that we get as technology advances and as 25 people have brilliant new ideas and new solutions. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 318 1 I do feel that the staff -- if our staff can't 2 find additional tonnage reductions, then I really believe 3 no one can. And I think that we -- I think with pride and 4 with some sense of security, for me at least, we can ask 5 and challenge our staff to do a little more than they may 6 feel they are quite ready to commit to. And so I 7 personally am prepared to endorse Dr. Burke's amendment 8 for additional tonnage reductions. 9 I think that if I read it right and my colloquy 10 with Dr. -- I'm tired and it's late and I'm old -- but Dr. 11 Wallerstein of the AQMD indicated that what we're really 12 apart is 97 tons of short-term reductions, in the near 13 term. The additional 60 or 66 tons of long-term 14 reductions are already in the staff's proposed -- latest 15 proposal. And so that's in sync with what Dr. Burke's 16 other part of it was. 17 So what I'm going to ask -- I'm going to propose 18 an amendment. And then I'm going to, if I may, if it's 19 seconded and before you all discuss it, I'd like to ask 20 the staff if they feel this is something -- that this is 21 too much to bite off or whether it's something we can all 22 aspirationally target. 23 It would be to take Dr. Burke's amendment to the 24 resolution before us, which is 03-23, and change paragraph 25 A from 120 tons to 97 since the staff has already included PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 319 1 in Resolution 03-23, as I understand it, 23 tons more. 2 And it would be to delete paragraph B of Dr. 3 Burke's proposed amendment which has to do with the 4 additional 66 longer-term tons of reduction because it's 5 duplicative of what again the staff has more recently 6 included in their resolution. 7 And then it would be to accept the staff being 8 directed to return in a year with agency allocations -- 9 proposed allocations at State and local levels for the 10 long-term reductions; and then each of the next three 11 years conduct a SIP implementation summit, let's call it, 12 with participation from technical experts, academia, 13 consultants, and other interested stakeholders. 14 And then to include Item 3, slightly modified. 15 "Return to the Board every 12 months over the next 3 years 16 with explicit California Air Resources Board commitments 17 for adoption and implementation of control measures to 18 achieve the long-term reductions contained in the approved 19 State strategy." I would delete the "not less than 20 one-third." 21 And then the attachment, I would propose amending 22 this proposed amendment to read in its second paragraph 23 here, "The emission reduction target set forth herein is 24 in addition to that specified for other short-range 25 measures to be implemented by CARB." This would be the 97 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 320 1 ton additional. "To implement this measure and achieve 2 the overall emission reduction target, CARB" -- and I 3 insert -- "contingent upon their feasibility, as 4 evaluated, as specified in paragraph 1" -- the first 5 paragraph -- "in Attachment A1 of resolution 03-22" -- 6 that's our resolution before us -- "CARB will develop and 7 adopt regulations for on- and off-road mobile sources and 8 consumer products between 2005 and 2008, with 9 implementation in 2006 to 2010." 10 And then there follows language that "The 11 regulations may include any of the following items or 12 actions as appropriate" -- "as deemed appropriate by the 13 staff and ultimately by this Board, however it may be 14 constituted." 15 And then there's a list of suggested areas or 16 categories from which further reductions might be 17 achieved. And I know that that has alarmed some of those 18 who would be affected, would be subject to these 19 categories. But it's a long way from now to any specific 20 proposed control measures, which would all be workshopped 21 on full notice, which we would go through the normal 22 regulatory process. 23 And so I appreciate the concern that some have 24 expressed, dry-cleaners and the industries, the paint and 25 there's others. But these are areas obviously of PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 321 1 emissions, these activities. And the question is: When 2 and if it would be feasible and how? And this -- but this 3 is putting everybody on notice. But it's no new notice. 4 Everybody's known this anyway, that we've got to look 5 continually and diligently and vigilantly and aggressively 6 for ways to reduce emissions. 7 Personally, I'm still bothered that we don't seem 8 to be making that much headway in the refineries, in the 9 ports, in the areas of great pollution -- diesel, 10 trucking. And I just wish there were more we could be 11 doing. And it seems to me those would be obvious first 12 look-at areas. 13 So that's the -- I think that covers the changes 14 in Dr. Burke's motion. 15 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to 16 second. But I'd like to state a couple of understandings 17 or restate a couple of understandings I got out of what I 18 just heard. 19 My understanding is that a full public process 20 will happen in the implementation of any of the measures 21 on the amended suggested list. 22 And I want to -- there's suggestion that consumer 23 products might get moved around in terms of jurisdiction. 24 I'm very clear that it's good for the Board to have 25 jurisdiction and continue that way. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 322 1 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Yeah, I didn't see 2 that in here. But -- 3 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: No, but there was 4 testimony -- there was some concern that we were going to 5 have, and there's been some concern, that we were going to 6 have different formulas for consumer products in different 7 parts of the state. 8 So, anyway, I think that that's a really well 9 worked out amendment and I happily second it. 10 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Further discussion? 11 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Yes. 12 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Mrs. Riordan. 13 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Mr. Chairman, I would 14 certainly support the amendment to the amendment. And 15 indicate to the audience, after the excellent testimony 16 that we heard today from a variety of resources and 17 experts and advocates, I think you can draw some comfort 18 with this amended amendment to say that you're going to 19 have a lot of participation throughout the process. 20 We have indicated we want some summits of the SIP 21 implementation so that we clearly, along with the public 22 and along with the affected stakeholders, understand 23 exactly what kind of progress we're making. And that we 24 have indeed our staff working with us and working with the 25 South Coast Air Quality District to be really successful PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 323 1 in that effort. And I'm very much in support of this 2 second amendment. 3 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 4 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Mr. Chairman? 5 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Could I ask -- at 6 some point I'd like to get the staff's reaction. 7 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Ms. D'Adamo. 8 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Just a few quick comments. 9 I think that we made a great deal of progress 10 within the last week. And I know that we had a couple of 11 options before us today: Should we delay the plan for 12 several months and try and reach additional progress, or 13 go with the Burke amendment, or just adopt the plan? 14 I think that, Professor Friedman, your amendment 15 deserves support because basically it gets down to one 16 central issue and, that is, do we have enough faith in the 17 short-term measures that we can move forward now or do we 18 not really have enough faith and keep those measures in a 19 long-term black box? I think that in light of the 20 progress that's been made just over one short week, we can 21 do it. And this amendment is important because it's going 22 to keep pressure on all of us. It's going to keep 23 pressure on this Board. It's going to keep pressure on 24 all the stakeholders to move forward. So I'll be 25 supporting it. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 324 1 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Professor Friedman, can I -- 2 just bear with me one minute, Supervisor. 3 Could I ask if you would include an additional 4 direction to staff to convene in the next six months maybe 5 to work with SCAG, an effort directed to goods movement in 6 the South Coast Basin to address the issue of the ports, 7 to address the issue of intermodal transport, to address 8 the issue of truck traffic and terminals, et cetera. As 9 we look at moving that about the basin, I think it's 10 important that we look at how we do that most effectively. 11 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Definitely. I 12 believe that's in the staff's own recommendation, to 13 convene that working group at least for the long-term 14 measures, and to the extent that it would be useful to do 15 that for short-term as well. 16 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I think it would -- again, it 17 would be useful to initiate that process. 18 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Mr. Chairman, did they not 19 invite us to be a part of that in some way, shape, or 20 form? And I'm thinking maybe that would be an idea, that 21 perhaps a staff member could be present at those meetings 22 and be included. 23 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I think that Mark Pisano made 24 that offer. I wasn't sure of the full extent of that 25 because I think we'd looked here, but also we would want PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 325 1 to make sure that happens also in a place like the Port of 2 Oakland, et cetera. But if that's already -- if there's 3 an opportunity, then clearly we don't want to create 4 anything new there. 5 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: We've proposed to 6 align our evaluation of port measures with the District's. 7 And we'll endeavor to make sure all of the right 8 stakeholders are involved as we go through that process. 9 I think you're right, that we have many of them in 10 southern California already. We're already part of a 11 multi-agency group that has been meeting and working on 12 these measures. 13 But we probably need to broaden the tent a little 14 bit more to make sure we picked up Bay Area folks and even 15 other states. There is a Washington, Oregon, California 16 commitment to work in cooperation on electrification of 17 piers and vessels. And so there's a conference coming up 18 this spring about that. And we need to have those 19 alliances as well. 20 So we will -- we will work on making sure the 21 group is as broad as it needs to be. 22 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 23 Supervisor DeSaulnier. 24 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: Thank you. 25 Those last comments I particularly appreciate. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 326 1 As I've told my colleagues before, although somewhat 2 separate, offtrack as it were, Mr. Chairman, we have 3 serious problems at the Port of Oakland in the Bay Area 4 that need to be addressed, and they're very similar to 5 Long Beach, vis-a-vis, EJ and congestion at the Bay 6 Bridge. 7 And I want to say right off I appreciate my 8 colleagues' effort here. I do wish Dr. Burke was here. 9 Unfortunately he's not. And I wanted to -- I say to Hugh, 10 "I appreciate what you have attempted to put on the 11 table." I guess my only hesitance, and I hope no one 12 takes this personally over there, but I just want to be 13 certain about -- and I think Matt and Didi both said 14 this in their own comments -- if you could sort of briefly 15 tell us what the public outreach would be, the components 16 that we're going to assure lots of involvement on here. 17 Didi's expression I think was keep the pressure on. I 18 actually -- feasibility is for a generalist just pretty 19 broad. And I know you have a more technical understanding 20 of the statutory feasibility. 21 I've always felt that there's a lot more feasibly 22 if we as a board put pressure on all of the staff, because 23 I think all of the staff is I think more highly up than 24 they probably think of their competence, both the South 25 Coast staff and our staff. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 327 1 So I want to be able to vote for this, but I'd 2 like a little more assurance maybe from staff of outreach 3 and that this isn't going to be some kind of 4 get-out-of-jail-free pass at some point, that feasibility 5 becomes what I was concerned with coming into this, that 6 it's just not doable so we're not going to go any further 7 than maybe an extra 20 tons. And when I think about how 8 much angst went through in the Bay Area for 26 extra tons, 9 that as of today I was just informed has now evaporated 10 because Region 9 has agreed to put us back in attainment. 11 But it was worth it because it accomplished multiple other 12 things, in my view, for the public health. 13 So if you could just reassure me in terms of the 14 process going forward, I think I would appreciate that. 15 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: I'd actually like 16 to answer your question in two parts, because there is no 17 get-out-of-jail-free card in this amended language, which 18 we were just discussing here at the staff table. We 19 believe that what the language does is commits the Board 20 to 97 additional tons as a legally binding commitment as 21 stated. And even with the insertion of the feasibility 22 language, that would allow us to set aside individual 23 concepts listed here, but not to step away from the 97 24 tons which would be owed ultimately in 2008 and have been 25 adopted by then. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 328 1 What we were talking about is what if through all 2 our feasibility determinations we narrowed this so much 3 that there weren't 97 tons here. Then you are facing the 4 possibility of court enforcement of the order and us 5 coming up with substitution whether we know how to do that 6 or not. And I'll just raise for you the possibility of 7 yet another refinement that says to the extent there are 8 sufficient available feasible measures as a condition on 9 your 97 ton commitment, because right now the way the 10 language is drafted we owe the 97 tons even if we reject 11 two-thirds of this list as infeasible. 12 And then on the process question. What we would 13 do is have the large stakeholders group of everyone 14 concerned about the SIP and concerned about how the 15 categories balance off one another. But in short time 16 that will devolve to individual working groups in source 17 category areas where the people with the most expertise 18 and interest toil away at the analysis of those source 19 categories, the inventory, the potential control 20 strategies, the degree of funding needed if there needs to 21 be incentives, and people will go off on legislative 22 initiatives. 23 So I see that being very involved, big global 24 group, many smaller groups on high priority items. 25 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: Well, and I appreciate PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 329 1 that. And I'm feeling better all the time. 2 I think it's really important, Mr. Chairman and 3 to Catherine, that the follow-up immediately is going to 4 be important in terms of the confidence that's going to 5 build with all the people here. So in the spirit of what 6 I heard from Hugh, I'm happy to support it. But I would 7 encourage staff to really work on that follow-up 8 diligently as soon as possible. 9 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: And I just 10 noticed we need two additional conforming amendments on 11 the second page of the attachment. Where there's a little 12 chart and it has 120 tons stated in there, that should 13 read 97. And below that there's a paragraph that once 14 again references 120 tons, and that should also say 97. 15 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Mr. Chairman, I have a 16 question -- 17 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Yes, Ms. D'Adamo. 18 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: -- with regard to the 19 issue of substitution. You have the lead way to 20 substitute any of these measures or even a new one that's 21 not even on the list. 22 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Yes, I think that's the case. 23 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: Mr. Chairman. 24 I'm sorry. Were you done? 25 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: I was just going to say I PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 330 1 realize there may be a concern about whether or not we can 2 meet any one of these individually. But I think in order 3 to keep the pressure on, in light of the fact that we can 4 substitute and come up with a whole new item, I think it's 5 important to keep -- 6 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: We don't need the additional 7 clause that -- 8 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Right. 9 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Yeah, I think that was the 10 point you were making. 11 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Right. 12 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Mr. McKinnon. 13 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: So procedurally when we 14 vote, a vote on the amendment of the amendment would then 15 carry the amendment and then the actual motion or -- 16 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: No, I think 17 technically we would -- if you vote in favor of amending 18 Dr. Burke's amendment, then it amends -- 19 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: -- the whole thing. 20 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: And then we would 21 move to adopt our Resolution 03-23 as amended by the Burke 22 amended amendment, in other words by this as amended, 23 including this amendment. 24 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Excuse me. Mr. Chairman, 25 I think -- and I'm looking at counsel -- you have to have PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 331 1 two votes. 2 GENERAL COUNSEL JOHNSTON: That's correct. 3 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Right. You would vote 4 first on the amendment to the amendment and then you would 5 vote on the amended amended -- 6 GENERAL COUNSEL JOHNSTON: Well, actually what 7 you have before you is Dr. Burke's motion, which directs 8 that the Board would approve the SIP as amended therein. 9 And so you will have a second vote on a resolution, and it 10 would -- the resolution would be amended by your first 11 motion if that passes as an amendment. But first you must 12 vote on Professor Friedman's proposed amendment to Dr. 13 Burke's motion. 14 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I'd like to also just say a 15 few words. 16 Again, I'd like to echo Professor Friedman's 17 comment. I think it's been really a fascinating and very 18 instructive day. And I think -- I've been impressed by 19 the level of commitment we've heard all around. And I 20 want to reiterate again the emphasis on the joint working 21 of staff. And I appreciate also the input of the Board 22 members and Dr. Wallerstein and staff here in really 23 constructively trying to help us to move ahead, because 24 it's very clear there's a major effort ahead. 25 And while we're moving ahead on this part, of PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 332 1 course we shouldn't forget that there's also major areas 2 that we need to identify in the future. This gets us 3 on -- continues, if you like, or gets us on a more 4 aggressive path to address some of these issues. But we 5 still have, you know, far more to do. 6 And, again, I was -- I came in today really 7 uncertain as to which way to go, given what I saw, 8 considerable technical uncertainties at the issues. But I 9 think I'm compelled by the discussions by some of the 10 comments made that, look, time is short and realizing that 11 the time between now and 2010 in the overall time it takes 12 to form anything is really short. 13 So I'm comfortable in supporting this because I 14 think we have the safeguards in here and the usual -- the 15 resources of our staff and with the commitment of the 16 South Coast staff to work with us, we will be able to work 17 with the industry. And that if we really fall short in 18 some of the areas, we're able to look at ordinate 19 measures. 20 And I agree with Ms. D'Adamo. And according to 21 the challenges put before us earlier, that we should be as 22 aggressive as we can, consistent with again a strong 23 technical base. 24 So, again, being a resident here for a number of 25 years, seeing the data that Dr. Wallerstein put up and our PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 333 1 staff put up, it's sobering that, yes, we've come a 2 tremendous way, but we still see continued economic 3 growth. We want that economic growth to continue. And 4 it's going to take a lot to go from basically where we are 5 now, slightly flat or the last couple years increasing, to 6 bend that down again. So I'm happy to support the motion 7 of Professor Friedman. 8 So I guess if anybody else wants to speak on the 9 motion, any of my colleagues? I guess they mostly have. 10 So with that let's ask for a vote. 11 So all in favor of the vote say aye. 12 (Ayes.) 13 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Anybody against? 14 So the motion carries. 15 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: All right. I now 16 move that we adopt Resolution 03-23 as amended by the 17 Burke -- the new Burke amendment. 18 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Second. 19 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: All in favor say aye. 20 (Ayes.) 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Anybody against? 22 No. 23 GENERAL COUNSEL JOHNSTON: Can I ask for a 24 clarification. 25 Are you voting on 03-22 or are you voting on the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 334 1 Burke amendment? I'm sorry, I was -- 2 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: We voted on both. 3 GENERAL COUNSEL JOHNSTON: Did you vote on -- 4 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: The first one was the 5 amendment to Dr. Burke's -- 6 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: We adopted the 7 amendment to Dr. Burke's proposal or motion. 8 GENERAL COUNSEL JOHNSTON: Okay. 9 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: And having adopted 10 it, that is now the Burke amendment, right? 11 GENERAL COUNSEL JOHNSTON: Yes, that's correct. 12 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: We then moved 13 adoption of Resolution 03- -- 14 GENERAL COUNSEL JOHNSTON: -- 22 -- 15 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: -- 22, was it? 16 GENERAL COUNSEL JOHNSTON: Twenty-two is the 17 correct number. 18 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: I'm sorry. That 19 should have been 22. Forgive me, I misspoke. 20 GENERAL COUNSEL JOHNSTON: Thank you. 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Okay. So it is -- so the 22 vote was 22? 23 GENERAL COUNSEL JOHNSTON: Right. 24 And now you -- 25 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: So all in favor of -- PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 335 1 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: -- as amended by the 2 Burke amendment. 3 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: As amended. Okay. 4 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: And that -- can that 5 record be clarified on that? 6 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: So all in favor of 03-22 as 7 amended by the Burke amended amendment. 8 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Right. 9 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: All in favor say aye. 10 (Ayes.) 11 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Anybody against? 12 No. 13 Well, thank you. 14 GENERAL COUNSEL JOHNSTON: And now the Board may 15 consider the Resolution 03-23, which is the South Coast 16 Implementation Plan. 17 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Move adoption. 18 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Second. 19 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: All in favor say aye. 20 (Ayes.) 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Anybody against? 22 No. 23 Thank you very much. Thank you. 24 And I must say, I'd like to really express my 25 thanks and our thanks to Dr. Burke for coming in today for PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 336 1 his constructive amendment and for the time he spent here 2 and in some obvious pain. So we really appreciate it. 3 And I hope to our colleagues at South Coast we 4 have demonstrated that we are willing and able to step up 5 to the plate. And we are going to work with you very 6 strongly. This is the start and a continuation. But 7 we're going to work even more closely in the areas where 8 we need to jointly work together. 9 So thank you so much. Thank everyone here. 10 Thanks, staff, for a wonderful job -- both staffs 11 for a wonderful job. 12 And thank my colleagues. 13 With that I'd officially like to bring the 14 October 23rd Board meeting to an end. 15 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: You don't want to 16 do the marine or legislative report? 17 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Oh, sorry. We could do the 18 legislative report. I think I talked Mike -- 19 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: The staff are 20 here for both. So we could do both or just one -- 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Oh, I thought you sent them 22 home, Mike. No? 23 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: They'd already 24 changed their reservations, so they're here. 25 DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER SCHEIBLE: They're so PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 337 1 dedicated they wanted to stay and serve the Board for 2 another half an hour. 3 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: They can't go anywhere 4 right now anyways. 5 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Can we get everything done by 6 6:30? 7 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Yes. 8 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Proceed. 9 The next item on the agenda today is 03-8-5, 10 public meeting to consider status report on the use of 11 cleaner fuels and efforts to reduce emissions from 12 locomotives and marine vessels. 13 This item will be an update on the ongoing 14 efforts to reduce emissions from locomotives and 15 commercial marine vessels. This is a follow-up to the 16 July Board hearing in which the Board adopted proposed low 17 sulfur diesel fuel requirements. The requirements did not 18 apply to locomotives or marine vessels, prompting the 19 Board to ask several questions about ARB's efforts to 20 regulate these sources. I understand that staff has put 21 together an informational item on this and will address 22 issues -- will address the questions raised at that time, 23 as well as providing a background. 24 At this time, I'd like to turn it over to Deputy 25 Executive Officer Mike Scheible to introduce the item and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 338 1 direct staff to begin their presentation. 2 DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER SCHEIBLE: Thank you, 3 Chairman Lloyd and members of the Board. 4 Locomotives and marine vessels contribute a 5 significant and growing percentage of California's overall 6 emissions of NOx, SOx, and diesel particulate matter. 7 They're also a significant concern for communities near 8 ports and rail yards, which are exposed to higher levels 9 of diesel particulate matter. 10 In today's presentation we will provide you with 11 data on emissions contributions from these sources, the 12 type of engines we are dealing with. We will discuss what 13 has been accomplished to date to reduce emissions and 14 present a brief discussion of our plans to achieve further 15 reductions. We will discuss some of the unique challenges 16 we face in achieving further emission reductions and 17 address fuel usage and identify the ideas that we have to 18 address ways to clean up fuel. 19 I would now like to have Peggy Taricco of our 20 Stationary Source Division present the update. 21 Thank you. 22 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 23 Presented as follows.) 24 MS. TARICCO: Thank you, Mr. Scheible. 25 And good afternoon and almost good evening, PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 339 1 Chairman Lloyd and members of the Board. 2 As Mr. Scheible said, we're going to try to 3 answer some of your questions that you had during the 4 hearing last July and talk about some of the things that 5 we are working on now to reduce emissions from both marine 6 vessels and locomotives. 7 As you'll see as we go through the presentation, 8 cleaner fuels will be an important part of our strategy in 9 reducing emissions from locomotive and marine engines. 10 But the approach will likely be different than what we 11 have done for fuels in the past. 12 --o0o-- 13 MS. TARICCO: Our presentation focuses on 14 commercial marine vessels and locomotives. 15 Commercial marine vessels include the 16 internationally traveling ocean-going ships, such as 17 tankers, container ships and cruise ships. It also 18 includes harbor craft, fishing vessels, tugboats and work 19 boats that generally travel within California coastal 20 waters. 21 Recreational marine vessels are not being 22 addressed today. 23 Locomotives are categorized as line-haul or 24 short-haul locomotives and switchers. Line-haul 25 locomotives carry freight over long distances in and out PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 340 1 of state. The short-haul locomotives typically travel 2 shorter routes within California. And the switcher 3 locomotives are used in rail yards to assemble and 4 disassemble trains or sometimes for short hauls of small 5 trains. 6 --o0o-- 7 MS. TARICCO: Locomotive and commercial marine 8 emissions are significant contributors to the statewide 9 NOx, SOx, and diesel PM emissions inventory. And the 10 emissions are becoming a larger proportion of the 11 emissions pie in future years. 12 On this chart the red slice is the marine 13 emissions contribution and the gold trains. As you can 14 see here, the NOx contribution is projected to increase 15 from 9 to 16 percent, or almost double, between 2000 and 16 2020. And we see similar trends for diesel PM and for 17 SOx. 18 --o0o-- 19 MS. TARICCO: In addition, because much of the 20 marine and locomotive activities are located in the South 21 Coast Air Basin and the San Joaquin Valley, emission 22 reductions from these sources will be key to achieving 23 their SIP commitments, as we heard today, and to reducing 24 risk from toxic diesel PM. 25 --o0o-- PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 341 1 MS. TARICCO: Not only are the emissions from 2 commercial marine vessels and locomotives significant at 3 the state and the regional levels. They are also a 4 significant concern to the communities exposed to diesel 5 exhaust from ships, locomotives, and on-road diesel trucks 6 that all work together to transport cargo. 7 In most cases ports, intermodal facilities, and 8 rail yards have a community interface, as is shown on this 9 slide of the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. 10 --o0o-- 11 MS. TARICCO: Here is another example of where, 12 as time has gone by, a community has grown closer to a 13 large intermodal facility. This photo is the J.R. Davis 14 rail yard up in Roseville, California. 15 The engines that are used in the locomotives that 16 visit this rail yard or in the engines of ocean-going 17 ships are different than your typical on- or off-road 18 engine with respect to size, life span and technology. 19 --o0o-- 20 MS. TARICCO: With respect to marine engines we 21 estimate there are about 10,000 ship calls each year here 22 in California, with the majority of these calls being from 23 ships that only visit California once or twice a year. 24 The propulsion engines on these ships are generally two 25 stroke and have very long life spans and are very large, PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 342 1 ranging in power output from about 2.5 to 80 megawatts. 2 Harborcraft engines are considerably smaller, but 3 still large by on-road standards. Many are similar in 4 size to the locomotive engines, which we'll cover in just 5 a second here. They also have very long lives. A recent 6 survey we conducted revealed that there were many engines 7 in use in harborcraft here in California that dated back 8 to the '40s the '50s. We estimate that there are about 9 between 1,500 and 2,500 harborcraft here in California. 10 Many of these vessels also have diesel-powered 11 auxiliary engines and boilers on board. For example, a 12 typical ocean-going ship will have three to five auxiliary 13 very large engines that are up to three megawatts each. 14 --o0o-- 15 MS. TARICCO: And these are the engines that are 16 generally operating when they are in port or hotelling. 17 And then we heard quite a bit about that today. But 18 there's a lot of concerns about these emissions. 19 This photo gives you some perspective on the size 20 of an ocean-going ship propulsion engine. Here we have 21 two very distinguished looking deckhands overlooking a 12 22 cylinder engine, which is actually much larger than it 23 appears here in the picture. At nearly 80 feet long and 24 about 40 feet high, it's the size of a good size building. 25 This engine in this photo's rated at about 65,000 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 343 1 horsepower. 2 --o0o-- 3 MS. TARICCO: For locomotives we estimate that 4 there are about 24,000 in the United States. Locomotive 5 engines are periodically remanufactured, about every four 6 to seven years, returning the unit to a like-new 7 condition. Therefore, locomotives also tend to have long 8 life spans, on average 30 years or more, resulting in a 9 very slow turnover of new technologies into the fleet. 10 A majority of the locomotive population consists 11 of the line-haul locomotives. Line-hauls are powered by 12 3,000 to 6,000 horsepower engines, with a recent shift 13 toward the purchase of the larger horsepower engines. 14 Most of the line-haul locomotives currently in 15 use were built after 1972. 16 Switcher locomotives typically use smaller 17 engines of about 2,000 horsepower. Historically practice 18 has been that the older line-haul locomotives are retired 19 into switcher service. Therefore, many of the switchers 20 that are currently in use here in California were built 21 before 1973. However, this practice of retiring line-haul 22 locomotives to switcher service is beginning to die out as 23 the newer line-haul locomotives increase in size, making 24 them impractical for switcher operation. 25 --o0o-- PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 344 1 MS. TARICCO: And here is a photo of a typical 2 line-haul locomotive engine. This one in this photo is 3 about 6 to 7 feet tall and about 20 to 25 feet long. 4 Overall, marine and locomotive engines lag behind 5 in terms of emission-control technology when compared to 6 other on- and off-road engines, and they present some 7 unique challenges when looking at ways to improve the 8 emissions profiles. The fuels they use are dirtier. The 9 engines are very large, yet the space on marine vessels 10 and locomotives for scaled-up emission controls is 11 limited. And they also operate nationally or 12 internationally. Nevertheless, some progress has been 13 made. 14 --o0o-- 15 MS. TARICCO: For marine engines there are both 16 national and international standards established by the 17 International Maritime Organization. However, these 18 regulations are expected to achieve very modest emission 19 reductions here in California. And for the ocean-going 20 ships the regulations do not establish standards for PM. 21 On the local front in California, legislation was 22 recently enacted that requires passenger ferries in 23 California to use CARB diesel fuel. And this began last 24 January of this year. 25 Other in-use programs include voluntary programs PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 345 1 such as the Carl Moyer program, which has repowered many 2 harborcraft engines here in California. And here in the 3 South Coast, the ports, along with the ARB, the local 4 district, EPA and the shipping industry, have instituted a 5 voluntary vessel-speed-reduction program under which 6 vessels calling on the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach 7 are requested to slow to 12 knots within 20 miles of the 8 ports. By slowing the vessels down, then the NOx 9 emissions are reduced. 10 --o0o-- 11 MS. TARICCO: For locomotives there are three 12 tiered national emission standards to control hydrocarbon, 13 NOx and PM from locomotives that were originally 14 manufactured in 1973 or later. The Federal Clean Air Act 15 preempts California from adopting standards for these 16 locomotives. 17 In order to get additional locomotive emission 18 reductions in the South Coast Air Basin beyond the federal 19 program, the ARB worked with the U.S. EPA and the 20 railroads to develop an innovative MOU to expedite the 21 operation of the cleanest locomotives available in the 22 South Coast Air Basin by 2010. This MOU is expected to 23 result in an additional 35 percent reduction in the 24 emissions beyond the federal regulation. 25 --o0o-- PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 346 1 MS. TARICCO: Although there are new engine 2 standards in place for locomotives and commercial marine 3 vessels, these standards do lag far behind those for other 4 diesel sources. As you can see here, the NOx standards 5 for new marine and locomotive engines are much weaker than 6 for on-road trucks and other off-road engines. On this 7 slide the red and gray bars represent the line-haul 8 locomotive and ocean-going ships respectively. 9 --o0o-- 10 MS. TARICCO: A similar relationship exists for 11 PM as well. And it's clear that further progress from 12 marine vessels and locomotives is necessary. Because 13 locomotives and marine vessels travel nationally or 14 internationally, it is critical to have effective new 15 engine standards at the national and international level. 16 Due to the long life spans of these engines, 17 however, it's also very important for us to find ways to 18 reduce emissions from the in-use fleet. To get additional 19 emission reductions we have identified several strategies 20 that we are currently pursuing. 21 For marine vessels our strategy is three-pronged. 22 First, as I mentioned, we need strong new engine standards 23 at the national or international level. To that end, we 24 are working to encourage U.S. EPA and the IMO to pursue 25 more stringent new engine standards, including standards PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 347 1 for PM. 2 We are also pursuing a variety of in-use 3 strategies in cooperation with U.S. EPA and the local 4 districts to control emissions from in-use fleet. These 5 include looking at the use of retrofit devices, cleaner 6 fuels, operational controls such as slowdown zones or 7 idling limits and cold ironing. 8 And we are working to develop port-specific 9 emissions inventory to help us identify measures to 10 further reduce emissions at the ports beyond the levels 11 achieved by existing and planned regulatory efforts. This 12 is in recognition of the concentration of emission sources 13 at the ports and the potential impacts to the portside 14 communities. 15 To facilitate these activities we have created a 16 maritime working group. This group meets periodically to 17 provide a forum for discussion of the technical issues 18 that we encounter as we evaluate the measures, and to 19 simply allow participants to keep up to date on their air 20 quality related events. 21 --o0o-- 22 MS. TARICCO: We have several activities underway 23 to support the three measures described. And I'd just 24 like to highlight a couple of them. 25 First, on November 8th, just about two weeks from PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 348 1 now, in-use emission testing will be performed on a Maersk 2 container ship, with the funding assistance of the Port of 3 Los Angeles. We're real excited about this opportunity to 4 actually test emissions from a ship. And it's a little 5 different than your normal testing. The tester will be 6 getting on in Los Angeles and be getting off in Tacoma. 7 So it will be a long period that we'll be able to do some 8 testing. 9 Next spring, through a cooperative effort with 10 the U.S. EPA, the Maritime Administration, and some of the 11 coastal districts, we expect to retrofit a container ship 12 with the innovative on-board water-fuel emulsification 13 system, which is expected to reduce NOx and PM emissions. 14 We have also instituted bimonthly calls with our 15 sister agencies in Canada, Alaska, Washington, and New 16 York to discuss and coordinate approaches for reducing 17 emissions from ocean-going ships. 18 And we are also evaluating opportunities for 19 cleaner fuels, which will be discussed in a little more 20 detail later. 21 --o0o-- 22 MS. TARICCO: To reduce emissions from 23 locomotives in the San Joaquin Valley and statewide, we 24 are working with the railroads to determine the best 25 strategies to reduce locomotive emissions, such as PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 349 1 reducing idling at switch yards via the installation of 2 idle timing limiting devices, retrofitting locomotives 3 operating in the San Joaquin Valley with after-treatment 4 devices, and the voluntary early introduction of cleaner 5 federal Tier 2 locomotives. 6 As with marine engines, effective national 7 standards are critical, and we are encouraging U.S. EPA to 8 set the cleanest fuel and emissions standards as soon as 9 possible. 10 Specifically, we have commented to U.S. EPA. But 11 it's important to reduce the diesel sulfur fuel level for 12 locomotives from the current level of 3,200 ppm to 15 ppm 13 and to have after-treatment-based emissions standards for 14 locomotive engines. 15 We are also considering site-specific strategies 16 such as cleaner fuels and operational changes to reduce 17 the impacts on communities next to rail facilities. 18 --o0o-- 19 MS. TARICCO: Some of our current efforts are 20 focusing on projects to evaluate locomotive technologies 21 and potential emission reductions. For example, we have 22 been involved over the last few years in a test program 23 sponsored by Burlington Northern and Union Pacific to 24 evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of diesel 25 particulate filters in locomotive and switchers PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 350 1 applications. 2 We are also looking at community impacts 3 associated with rail yards to better understand the 4 emissions impacts from the diesel PM emissions to nearby 5 residents through air dispersion modeling. And, in 6 addition, we are working to improve our emissions 7 inventory for locomotives. 8 --o0o-- 9 MS. TARICCO: Now I'd like to transition to focus 10 on fuels, beginning with a short discussion on the types 11 of fuels available and what is being used in locomotives 12 and marine vessels today. 13 As you know, there are a number of fuels 14 available in California. While more than one type of fuel 15 may be used in a particular mode of transportation, the 16 quality of the fuel can have a significant impact on 17 emissions. As you can see on this slide, current 18 projected in-use sulfur levels of on-road diesel fuels are 19 significantly lower than non-road diesel and marine fuels. 20 Hopefully, U.S. EPA will approve its currently proposed 21 non-road diesel fuel regulations, and sulfur levels for 22 non-road fuels could drop by nearly 90 percent from 23 today's levels. 24 For marine fuels there are currently no 25 regulatory proposals for lower sulfur levels. As you can PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 351 1 see, current sulfur levels from marine fuels can be a 2 hundred times higher or more than that for on-road diesel 3 fuels. 4 --o0o-- 5 MS. TARICCO: While marine vessels and 6 locomotives are significant sources of emissions, they 7 represent only a small portion of the total amount of 8 transportation fuels sold in California. This is likely 9 due to the fuel burned in California being purchased 10 elsewhere. 11 Marine bunker fuel cells, the fuel predominantly 12 used in ocean-going ships, consume the equivalent of about 13 half of all the diesel fuel sold in the state, with most 14 of this bunker fuel being imported. 15 As you can see, marine distillate fuel, a 16 diesel-like fuel used mostly by harborcraft, represents 17 only a small percentage of the total marine vessel fuel 18 cells. 19 Diesel fuel cells to the railroads in California 20 account for less than 10 percent of total diesel fuel 21 cells, with nearly all of this fuel being dispensed into 22 line-haul locomotives. 23 In considering opportunities for cleaner fuels, 24 it's important to understand fueling and operational 25 characteristics. The line-haul locomotives and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 352 1 ocean-going ships, in most cases they fuel prior to 2 arriving in California. Because of their large fuel 3 storage capacity, they can travel significant distances 4 between fuelings, avoiding the need to ever have to fuel 5 in California. 6 While significant quantities of fuels are 7 dispensed in California in to line-haul locomotives and 8 ocean-going ships, most of the fuel is consumed outside of 9 the state. For locomotive fuels we estimate about 10 two-thirds of the locomotive fuel purchased in California 11 is burned outside of California. 12 --o0o-- 13 MS. TARICCO: In comparison, the switchers, 14 short-haul trains, and harborcraft typically operate 15 within California. And because of this, these sources are 16 fueled almost exclusively by fuel distributed within the 17 state, resulting in the use of higher quality fuels, often 18 meeting on-road highway diesel fuel standards. 19 --o0o-- 20 MS. TARICCO: With this backdrop I will now 21 discuss some of the opportunities that exist to use 22 cleaner fuels in both marine vessel and locomotive 23 applications. 24 --o0o-- 25 MS. TARICCO: As is the case with all mobile PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 353 1 sources, cleaner fuels are an essential component for 2 reducing emissions from locomotives and marine vessels. 3 The use of cleaner fuels enables the use of advanced 4 emission control technologies. And cleaner fuels can 5 provide criteria on toxic emission benefits. 6 However, there are some challenges in providing 7 cleaner fuels to interstate locomotives and ocean-going 8 ships, and our traditional approach to regulating fuels is 9 not appropriate for these sources. 10 Key to our success is the adoption of measures at 11 the national and international level to ensure cleaner 12 fuels are available wherever the fueling may occur. 13 --o0o-- 14 MS. TARICCO: We are currently evaluating five 15 strategies for cleaner fuels. 16 For marine vessels we are looking at three 17 strategies: 18 Requiring the use of CARB diesel by harborcraft, 19 which would provide PM and NOx reductions. 20 The introduction of cleaner fuels for auxiliary 21 engines of ships while hotelling. As I mentioned earlier, 22 hotelling emissions generally occur in port and can impact 23 neighboring communities. 24 And along with investigating the use of cleaner 25 fuels, we are also looking at opportunities for PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 354 1 electrification and retrofitting of these engines. 2 We are also cooperating with the U.S. EPA to 3 pursue designation of California and other west coast 4 harbors, including Mexico and Canada, to be designated as 5 sulfur emission control areas where marine bunker fuel 6 sulfur limits would be lowered to 15,000 ppm. 7 --o0o-- 8 MS. TARICCO: For locomotives we are evaluating 9 the potential for switcher engines and locomotives that 10 primarily operate inside California to use CARB diesel 11 fuel. Since they are already predominantly using on-road 12 quality fuel, this would preserve existing benefits 13 already being realized and can provide some additional NOx 14 and PM benefits. 15 For line-haul locomotives we're continuing our 16 efforts to encourage and support the U.S. EPA in adopting 17 proposed national non-road and locomotive diesel fuel 18 standards. 19 --o0o-- 20 MS. TARICCO: To sum up our presentation, 21 emission reductions from marine vessels and locomotives 22 are very important in our quest for clean air, and they 23 are not being ignored. While the locomotive and marine 24 sector have some unique challenges and the path to 25 emission reductions may be slightly different than what PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 355 1 we're used to, the bottom line is the same: We need 2 effective new engine standards, cleaner fuels, and 3 innovative strategies to clean up the in-use fleets. At 4 the staff level we are committed to seeing that these 5 reductions occur, and we will continue our efforts to 6 evaluate the measures we identified today and to work both 7 locally, nationally, and internationally to ensure that 8 progress is being made. 9 And with that, that concludes our presentation. 10 And we want to thank you for this opportunity to give you 11 this update. 12 And we would be happy to answer any questions 13 that you may have. 14 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much indeed. 15 Dr. Friedman. 16 BOARD MEMBER WILLIAM FRIEDMAN: I just have one 17 question. 18 How much cheaper is the bunker fuel at 15,000 ppm 19 than at 3,000 ppm? I mean currently it's close to 30,000 20 ppm? 21 MS. TARICCO: Paul knows the answer to that. 22 MR. MILKEY: Distillate fields, which -- yeah, 23 I'm Paul Milkey. I work for Peggy, the Air Resources 24 Board. 25 Distillate fields, which would be like marine PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 356 1 distillate fields, around 3,000 ppm would be about double 2 the price of bunker. 3 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much indeed. 4 A really comprehensive overview. 5 Do you want to add something, Mike? 6 DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER SCHEIBLE: No. I just 7 hope that the presentation clarifies that we are pursuing 8 aggressively this area. It's very important from an 9 emissions standpoint. There are aspects where I think the 10 Board was perhaps disappointed last time when we did the 11 sulfur diesel rule, that we didn't apply it universally to 12 rail and marine. We're looking at where it makes sense to 13 apply it. And in the areas where it doesn't, we're 14 looking at other measures that can be taken in concert 15 with U.S. EPA or international bodies to address this 16 issue and achieve emission reductions. So we'll be back 17 on this issue as we progress along those lines. 18 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. It was 19 very informative. We appreciate it. 20 We have one person signed up to speak on this, 21 Terry Shore from the Blue Water Network. 22 I guess that's one advantage of going late. 23 (Laughter.) 24 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: So with that, I guess 25 we'll -- thank you very much indeed. And we'll move on to PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 357 1 the last item today, which is Agenda Item 03-8-6, public 2 meeting to consider review of the air quality legislation 3 for 2003. 4 This item is a summary of this year's air quality 5 legislation. The Legislature just finished the first of a 6 two-year session in September, and the Governor has taken 7 action on all of the bills that reached his desk. 8 Therefore, I have asked Rob Oglesby, our Legislative 9 Director, to give us an overview of the legislative year. 10 And I would also like to take this opportunity to 11 thank Rob for his continued outstanding work, and his 12 staff. I know how busy and hectic things are at times, 13 working around the clock. And he has continued to do an 14 excellent job for us. 15 So, Rob, I'd like to officially and publicly 16 acknowledge this great work you and your staff do. Thank 17 you. 18 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: Thank you, Mr. 19 Chairman. 20 Are we ready? 21 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 22 Presented as follows.) 23 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: It's good to see 24 you all here, after such a long day, and with the patience 25 to listen to a legislative report. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 358 1 Mr. Chairman, members of the Board, Ms. 2 Witherspoon, thank you. I always look forward to this 3 opportunity to address you and provide a brief review of 4 significant air quality legislation. 5 First, to give credit where credit is due, I'd 6 like to acknowledge the Legislative office staff who 7 couldn't be here to see you today but who clearly do most 8 of the work in the office. And that's Sheila Marsee, Jon 9 Costantino, Lisa Macumber, Jill Glass, and our 10 all-important executive assistant, Ollie Olaluwoye, who 11 works very hard. 12 They're all dedicated, hard working, and they 13 serve you well. 14 I'd also like to recognize the support the 15 Legislative office receives from the Chairman's office, 16 the Executive office, and the excellent program staff at 17 the Board. 18 Now, I'll begin with a brief overview of this 19 year's legislative session. 20 --o0o-- 21 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: The session 22 recessed on September 12. And the deadline for the 23 Governor's sign-or-veto bills was midnight on October 12. 24 Almost 3,000 were introduced, and about 90 25 related to air quality. Of these, 25 bills went to the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 359 1 Governor. All of these 25 bills are intended to enhance 2 or safeguard air quality. No bills to curtail or limit 3 air quality programs passed. 4 All 25 bills on the Governor's desk were signed 5 into Law. 6 One unusual and resource-demanding feature of 7 this session was the extraordinary number and timing of 8 special hearings on air quality issues. 9 Normally the Legislature conducts only a handful 10 of special hearings, that are typically convened during 11 legislative recess periods. This year however ARB 12 participated in no less than 14 hearings that were held 13 concurrently with a legislative session and throughout the 14 state. 15 --o0o-- 16 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: This is just a 17 list of the hearings' subjects and dates. It was a 18 challenge to keep up with the regular bill analysis and 19 committee hearing process while participating at the 20 special hearings. 21 --o0o-- 22 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: And, as you can 23 see, the Senate Select Committee on Air Quality in the 24 Central Valley kept us the busiest. In fact, the 25 Legislative office racked up more than 3,000 miles driving PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 360 1 to the Committee's hearings up and down the valley. 2 --o0o-- 3 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: And now turning to 4 the more typical aspects of the session, I'll observe that 5 2003 was a particularly eventful for air quality 6 legislation. I'll hit the highlights in the following 7 areas: 8 ARB's budgets; a package of bills targeting air 9 quality in the San Joaquin valley; a bill intended to 10 safeguard state new-source review rules; a bill mandating 11 particulate control measures; and, finally, a bill 12 establishing a buffer zone requirement for new schools. 13 --o0o-- 14 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: Now, turning to 15 the budget. This session ARB saw another year of fiscal 16 belt tightening. The Board's budget was reduced by 26.4 17 million, this represents an 8 percent reduction from last 18 year's already austere budget. 19 Thankfully the Legislature passed AB 10X by 20 Assemblymember Oropeza. And as you know, that bill 21 requires ARB to collect fees on stationary sources, 22 consumer products, and paints to cover the cost of air 23 quality programs related to those sources. 24 You adopted the regulations implementing the fees 25 last July. And these fees are expected to raise about PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 361 1 14.4 million, leaving a net cut of 12 million for this 2 year. 3 The Board's Executive Officer and managers have 4 responded to ensure that the critical elements for the 5 Board's programs are continued. Cost cutting actions have 6 been taken, 119 positions have been eliminated, 7 expenditures have been deferred. We are down to the bone, 8 but ARB's core program activities have been maintained. 9 --o0o-- 10 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: Now I'll highlight 11 major bills that emerged this session. 12 This year the Central Valley was the center of 13 controversy for air quality bills. Political interest in 14 the Valley's poor air quality reached critical mass when a 15 court ruling invalidated California's agricultural 16 exemption and triggered federal sanctions. 17 --o0o-- 18 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: This converged 19 with heightened public concern raised by our Fresno Bee 20 series on the San Joaquin air pollution and later by a 21 similar piece published by the Bakersfield Californian. 22 --o0o-- 23 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: Several 24 legislators responded by introducing bills related to air 25 quality. But Senator Flores stands out as the most PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 362 1 prolific and persistent. He introduced an aggressive 2 10-bill package addressing air quality in the San Joaquin 3 Valley and bolstered the effort by conducting 10 hearings 4 by a Senate Select Committee on Air Quality in the Central 5 Valley. Ultimately five of his bills made it to the 6 Governor's desk and were signed into Law. SB 700 is the 7 cornerstone. 8 --o0o-- 9 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: Let me preface 10 this by pointing out that SB 700's provisions apply 11 statewide, but the bill mostly impacts the San Joaquin 12 Valley because most of the mandates target agricultural 13 operations only in the areas of the state with the poorest 14 air quality. 15 --o0o-- 16 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: Very briefly, SB 17 700 removes agriculture's 56-year-old air quality permit 18 exemption and explicitly establishes local air district's 19 authority to regulate agricultural sources of air 20 pollution. 21 The repeal of the exemption satisfies the Court's 22 ruling and removes pending statewide federal sanctions 23 that threatened the loss of 2.4 billion in transportation 24 funds and the imposition of 2 to 1 offset requirements. 25 But SB 700 went beyond the minimum needed to PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 363 1 avoid federal sanctions. The bill for the first time 2 applies emission control strategies to many farming 3 activities. The bill requires areas with the poorest air 4 quality, the San Joaquin Valley and South Coast Districts, 5 to adopt emission reduction requirements from agricultural 6 practices by January 1, 2006. 7 Other local air districts must adopt similar 8 control requirements by January 1, 2007. But those 9 districts can opt out if agricultural sources are not a 10 significant part of their air pollution problem. 11 By July 1 poor-air-quality districts must adopt a 12 rule which requires large Confined Animal Feeding 13 Operations, or CAFOs, to obtain a permit from the district 14 that will reduce emissions of air contaminants from the 15 facility. Again, areas where CAFOs are not a significant 16 part of their air quality equation can opt out. 17 ARB is charged with the task of defining what a 18 large CAFO is. 19 By January 1, 2005, CAPCOA must develop a 20 clearing house of available control measures and 21 strategies for reducing emissions from agricultural 22 sources to assist the districts in meeting the 2006 and 23 '07 rule-making requirements. 24 The bill also expands the State Treasurer's 25 Capital Access Loan Program to include outreach to finance PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 364 1 institutions that service agricultural interests in the 2 state for the purpose of funding air pollution control 3 measures. 4 --o0o-- 5 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: The second bill of 6 Senator Flores' package that was signed into law relates 7 to agricultural burning in the San Joaquin valley, and was 8 motivated by the 1.5 million tons of agricultural waste 9 that was burned just last year. Emissions of particulate 10 matter from agricultural burning in the San Joaquin Valley 11 can be as high as 35 tons per day in the fall. 12 SB 705 phases out open-field burning of 13 agricultural waste beginning in June 1, 2005, with full 14 implementation on June 1st, 2010. The air district, with 15 agreement from ARB, may delay the phase-out for certain 16 categories of waste material if, among other things, 17 alternatives are not available. 18 --o0o-- 19 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: One alternative, 20 biomass electricity generation, received a boost from the 21 next bill I'll discuss, Senate Flores' SB 704. 22 SB 704 requires the Energy Commission to allocate 23 $6 million to provide incentives in the amount of $10 per 24 ton of agricultural waste that goes to biomass facilities. 25 Qualifying agricultural biomass must be waste that would PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 365 1 otherwise be open-field burned. Urban or forest wood 2 waste are excluded. 3 Senator Flores also authored bills primarily 4 targeting mobile and other non-ag sources of pollution. 5 --o0o-- 6 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: SB 709 confers the 7 powers already enjoyed by the South Coast District related 8 to mobile and area sources to the San Joaquin Valley. 9 SB 709 requires the district board to adopt a 10 one-dollar surcharge on all motor vehicles registered in 11 the district to promote the use of cleaner burning 12 alternative fuels and encourage ridesharing. The district 13 adopted the surcharge on October 16th. 14 --o0o-- 15 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: The district must 16 adopt a schedule of fees to be assessed on area wide or 17 indirect sources of emissions that are regulated but for 18 which permits are not issued to recover the cost of 19 district programs related to those sources. 20 --o0o-- 21 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: The bill requires 22 the district to expand the existing Office of Small 23 Business to include agricultural assistance. 24 And, finally, the district must establish 25 expedited permit review and project assistance mechanisms PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 366 1 for facilities or projects that are directly related to 2 research and development demonstration or 3 commercialization of electric and other clean-fuel-vehicle 4 technologies. 5 --o0o-- 6 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: Assemblymember 7 Reyes also authored a successful bill that made it into 8 law that related to the San Joaquin Valley. That bill is 9 AB 170. 10 AB 170 requires each city and county within the 11 jurisdiction of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution 12 Control District to amend the appropriate elements of its 13 general plan to include strategies to improve air quality 14 no later than one year from the date of the next revision 15 of its housing element. And that begins after January 1, 16 2004. 17 The San Joaquin Valley Air District already has 18 published air quality guidelines for general plans which 19 is intended to assist cities and counties with AB 170's 20 requirements. 21 --o0o-- 22 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: Now I'd like to 23 shift to a few significant statewide bills, starting with 24 legislation affecting federal new source review, or NSR. 25 Some history first. On December 31st, 2002, U.S. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 367 1 EPA announced sweeping new regulatory changes that allow 2 facilities to forego installation of up-to-date pollution 3 controls, or BACT. The new federal requirements eliminate 4 the mandate to place state-of-the-art pollution technology 5 on facilities being modified. 6 In revising the federal NSR requirements the U.S. 7 EPA argues that industries will be motivated to improve 8 efficiency and environmental performance by making it 9 easier to simply update equipment. 10 ARB and other states disagree and argue in a 11 lawsuit that the most cost-effective time to incorporate 12 BACT is during major modifications. 13 --o0o-- 14 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: Also in response 15 to the U.S. EPA NSR revision, Senate Sher, at the behest 16 of a coalition of environmental organizations, introduced 17 SB 288. 18 SB 288 enacts the Protect California Air Act of 19 2003, which prohibits local air districts from releasing 20 their programs to be less stringent than those in place on 21 December 30th, 2002, the day before the U.S. EPA 22 promulgated the NSR remission. 23 In addition, the bill extends for five years, to 24 January 1, 2010, motor vehicle fee authority for the South 25 Coast Air Quality Management District's Clean Fuels PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 368 1 Program. SB 288 does not change the existing rules under 2 which industry in California has been operating. 3 --o0o-- 4 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: Senator Sher also 5 introduced the next bill I'd like to discuss, SB 656, 6 relating to particulates. 7 This bill is intended to -- 8 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Excuse me, Rob. 9 Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question? 10 Relating to particulates. What particular 11 particulates does this bill particularly relate to? 12 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: Particularly all 13 of them actually. It's comprehensive. 14 The bill is intended to provide broad statutory 15 reference for the control of particulate matter. Rather 16 than authorizing new work, however, the bill adds 17 specificity and delineates the process for the control 18 program that is already developed under the existing 19 general obligation of both the ARB and the local air 20 districts. 21 SB 656 has two major components: It requires 22 public adoption of a list of PM control measures by 23 January 1st, 2005; and requires public adoption of an 24 implementation schedule for the list it measures by July 25 31st, 2005. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 369 1 The first requirement amounts to a report on the 2 current status of known controls. The second requirement 3 results in a public promise by both the ARB and local 4 districts to adopt a particular particulate control 5 program in the future. 6 --o0o-- 7 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: The final bill I 8 will mention is Senator Escutia's SB 352, which was 9 briefly mentioned this morning. 10 SB 352 prohibits the siting of a school within 11 500 feet of a freeway and brings closer scrutiny to the 12 siting of schools near large agricultural operations or 13 rail yards, unless it can be determined that air quality 14 at the proposed site poses no health risk to pupils or 15 staff. The bill provides an escape from its prohibition 16 if a local school board determines that no suitable 17 alternative site is available due to a severe shortage of 18 sites. 19 --o0o-- 20 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: And finally the 21 annual report, right here. 22 The document provided to you today tells the 23 legislative story for all the air quality related bills we 24 identified and tracked in 2003. And for the audience we 25 had a supply when they were here that were available at PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 370 1 the hearing room. 2 I appreciate the Board's interest in the 3 legislative program. And if you have any questions about 4 the presentation or the legislation, I'd be happy to 5 answer them. 6 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much, Rob. 7 And, again, these are very valuable. And excellent 8 presentation. 9 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Mr. Chairman? 10 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Yes. Ms. D'Adamo. 11 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: I just want to, for the 12 benefit of the rest of the Board members, underscore the 13 importance of Rob's involvement with the Flores' bills, in 14 particular. As you know, I'm Chairman of the Ag Air 15 Advisory Committee. And those individuals can be rather 16 tough on air quality regulators in the valley. And Rob 17 just did a superb job at every single hearing. And I kept 18 getting feedback that he was very objective in his 19 analysis. And I actually think that it helped to slowly 20 bring them around. 21 So I just wanted to compliment you for all that 22 good work. 23 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: Thank you very 24 much. 25 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: And I know you'll be PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 371 1 appearing before our next meeting to walk all of the 2 advisory committee members through the new laws. 3 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much, Ms. 4 D'Adamo. That's very nice. 5 Any questions from the Board at this time? We've 6 got copies to go. 7 Professor Friedman. 8 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Well, let me just 9 add that I -- despite my little jab. I'm just proving I'm 10 still awake at this hour. I too would like to compliment 11 Rob. I'm not surprised at what you've reported, because I 12 found him to be very objective and fair and articulate and 13 calm and reassuring. I think he has a very calm demeanor 14 that, in this job particularly, is important. And -- I 15 mean, I don't know, maybe he screams at home. 16 But it's been a pleasure, Rob. 17 LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OGLESBY: Thank you very 18 much. 19 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Good year. 20 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. Very good year. 21 Thank you. 22 Well, I guess this time I can really say, if 23 there's no more items here, officially bring the October 24 23rd meeting of the Air Resources Board to a close. 25 And I'd like to thank Paul for the excellent job PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 372 1 you've done on audiovisual. 2 And again I'd like to thank Barry again for the 3 excellent accommodation and hospitality at this building. 4 And thank staff again. And have a safe trip 5 home. 6 Thank you all. 7 (Thereupon the California Air Resources 8 Board meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m.) 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 373 1 CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER 2 I, JAMES F. PETERS, a Certified Shorthand 3 Reporter of the State of California, and Registered 4 Professional Reporter, do hereby certify: 5 That I am a disinterested person herein; that the 6 foregoing California Air Resources Board meeting was 7 reported in shorthand by me, James F. Peters, a Certified 8 Shorthand Reporter of the State of California, and 9 thereafter transcribed into typewriting. 10 I further certify that I am not of counsel or 11 attorney for any of the parties to said meeting nor in any 12 way interested in the outcome of said meeting. 13 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand 14 this 10th day of November, 2003. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 JAMES F. PETERS, CSR, RPR 23 Certified Shorthand Reporter 24 License No. 10063 25 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345