BOARD MEETING STATE OF CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD JOE SERNA, JR. BUILDING CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY CENTRAL VALLEY AUDITORIUM, SECOND FLOOR 1001 I STREET SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA THURSDAY, JULY 22, 2004 9:00 A.M. TIFFANY C. KRAFT, CSR, RPR CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTER LICENSE NUMBER 12277 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 ii APPEARANCES BOARD MEMBERS Dr. Alan Lloyd, Chairperson Mr. Joseph Calhoun Ms. Dorene D'Adamo Supervisor Mark DeSaulnier Professor Hugh Friedman Supervisor Barbara Patrick Mrs. Barbara Riordan Mr. Ron Roberts STAFF Mr. Tom Cackette, Chief Deputy Executive Officer Mr. W. Thomas Jennings, Senior Staff Counsel Ms. Diane Johnston, General Counsel Mr. Michael Scheible, Deputy Executive Officer Ms. Lynn Terry, Deputy Executive Officer Ms. Kathleen Tschogl, Ombudsman Ms. Catherine Witherspoon, Executive Officer Ms. Lori Andreoni, Board Secretary Mr. Richard Bode, Health and Exposure Assessment Branch Ms. Karen Buckley, Staff, Environmental Justice Section Ms. Cindy Castronovo, Engineering and Certification Branch, MLD PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 iii APPEARANCES CONTINUED STAFF Mr. Kevin Cleary, Research Division Ms. Deborah Drechsler, Ph.D., Staff Air Pollution Specialist, Research Division Mr. Bob Fletcher, Chief, Planning Technical and Support Division Mr. John Gruszecki, Project Assessment Branch, Stationary Source Division Ms. Peggy Jenkins, Manager, Indoor Exposure Assessment Section, RD Mr. Robert Jenne, Staff Counsel Dr. Shankar Pradad, Health Advisor to the Chairman Ms. Linda Smith, Ph.D., Staff Air Pollution Specialist, Research Division Mr. Michael Tollstrup, Chief, Project Assessment Branch, SSD Ms. Lucille Van Ommering, Staff Air Pollution Specialist, PTSD Mr. Peter D. Venturini, Chief, SSD ALSO PRESENT Mr. Steven Arita, WSPA Ms. Diane Bailey, NRDC Dr. Daniel Cayan, Scripps Institute of Oceanography Dr. Kristie Ebi, Exponent Consulting Mr. Sean Edgar, Edgar & Associates, Inc. Ms. Diane Estrin, Community Action to Fight Asthma PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 iv APPEARANCES CONTINUED ALSO PRESENT Ms. Margaret Gordon, Pacific Institute/West Oakland Mr. Larry Greene, CAPCOA Ms. Staci Heaton, CTA Mr. Mark Kravis, Healy Ms. Joni Low, ALA, Representing San Diego Regional Asthma Coalition Mr. Joe Lyou, California Environmental Rights Alliance Mr. Jay McKeeman, CIOMA Mr. Dave Modisette, California Electric Transportation Coalition Ms. Patricia Monohan, VCS Mr. Kurt Miller, Reno, NV Ms. Shamar Parsad, Solano Asthma Coalition Mr. Frank Petronzio, FSP Engineers Mr. Peter Rooney, Pony Pack, Inc. Mr. Ken Selover, California Army National Guard Ms. Lisa Stegink, EMA Mr. Mike Tunnell, American Trucking Association Ms. Teresa Villegas, Hewlett Foundation Mr. Steve Wallauch, Greyhound Lines Ms. Susan White, Solano Asthma Coalition Ms. Jane Williams, CA Communities Against Toxics Mr. Bob Wilson, IdleAire PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 v INDEX PAGE Pledge of Allegiance 1 Roll Call 1 Opening Remarks 2 Item 04-7-1 Chairperson Lloyd 3 Executive Officer Witherspoon 4 Staff Presentation 5 Q&A 10 Item 04-7-2 Chairperson Lloyd 11 Staff Presentation 13 Q&A 16 Motion 17 Vote 17 Item 04-7-3 Chairperson Lloyd 17 Executive Officer Witherspoon 18 Staff Presentation 19 Q&A 33 Madam Ombudsman 35 Ms. Heaton 41 Ms. Stegink 43 Mr. Petronzio 45 Mr. Rooney 46 Mr. Wilson 48 Mr. Selover 58 Ms. Low 63 Mr. Miller 66 Mr. Lyou 68 Mr. Edgar 70 Ms. White 73 Mr. Modisette 75 Ms. Bailey 86 Ms. Williams 95 Mr. Wallauch 96 Ms. Monahan 98 Mr. Tunnell 99 Ms. Margaret Gordon 101 Ms. Estrin 110 Motion 116 Vote 119 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 vi INDEX CONTINUED PAGE Item 04-7-4 Chairperson Lloyd 120 Executive Officer Witherspoon 123 Dr. Cayan 124 Dr. Ebi 144 Q&A 160 Item 04-7-5 Chairperson Lloyd 161 Executive Officer Witherspoon 162 Staff Presentation 163 Ombudsman Tschogl 172 Mr. Greene 174 Mr. McKeeman 178 Mr. Arita 180 Mr. Kravis 184 Motion 190 Vote 190 Item 04-7-6 Chairperson Lloyd 190 Executive Officer Witherspoon 191 Staff Presentation 192 Item 04-6-2 Chairperson Lloyd 198 Executive Officer Witherspoon 200 Staff Presentation 201 Q&A 215 Ms. Bailey 220 Ms. Williams 224 Dr. Lyou 228 Ms. Tuck 241 Item 04-6-3 Chairperson Lloyd 246 Dr. Prasad 247 Ms. Villegas 248 Deputy Executive Officer Terry 257 Ms. Tuck 264 Public Comment 267 Adjournment 269 Reporter's Certificate 270 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 1 1 PROCEEDINGS 2 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Good morning. The April 3 22nd, 2004, meeting of the Air Resources Board will now 4 come to order. 5 Mr. Calhoun, will you please lead us in the 6 Pledge of Allegiance. 7 (Thereupon the Pledge of Allegiance was recited 8 in unison.) 9 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 10 Will the Clerk of the Board please call the roll. 11 BOARD CLERK ANDREONI: Mr. Calhoun? 12 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: Here. 13 BOARD CLERK ANDREONI: Ms. D'Adamo? 14 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Here. 15 BOARD CLERK ANDREONI: Supervisor DeSaulnier? 16 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: Here. 17 BOARD CLERK ANDREONI: Professor Friedman? 18 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Here. 19 BOARD CLERK ANDREONI: Dr. Friedman? 20 Supervisor Patrick? 21 SUPERVISOR PATRICK: Here. 22 BOARD CLERK ANDREONI: Mrs. Riordan? 23 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Here. 24 BOARD CLERK ANDREONI: Supervisor Roberts? 25 Chairman Lloyd? PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 2 1 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Here. 2 Good morning. Before we proceed, I would like to 3 inform everybody, if they have not seen that, that we have 4 representatives from SMUD and from the company Idling 5 Technologies. And there are two trucks outside on 10th 6 Street between I and H. And these trucks are equipped 7 with electric auxiliary power units and well worth going 8 outside. And I've been out there myself this morning, and 9 I know several of my colleagues have already been there. 10 So those who have not seen that, I was very encouraged to 11 see the progress in the technology and very viable 12 systems. And we'll hear some more about that later. 13 I think staff will be discussing these and other 14 alternative idling technologies later this morning as part 15 of Agenda Item 04-7-3, the proposed Airborne Toxic Control 16 Measure to limit the diesel-fueled commercial motor 17 vehicle idling. 18 Also from the last meeting, you remember Mr. 19 McKinnon announced his resignation at the last Board 20 meeting to take another job. 21 Also, Dr. Burke sent his letter of resignation in 22 because of the time commitments as Chair of the South 23 Coast and his service on the Coastal Commission. So I 24 would really like to thank Dr. Burke for all his service 25 to us on the Board in representing South Coast. And, PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 3 1 clearly, we look forward to looking for a replacement to 2 represent South Coast on our Board. 3 So with that, I'd like to move on to the first 4 item, which is the public health update. I'd like to 5 remind anyone in the audience who wishes to testify on any 6 of today's agenda items to please sign up with the Clerk 7 of the Board. And if you have a written statement, please 8 give 30 copies to the Board Clerk. 9 The first item is 04-7-1, our monthly public 10 health update. And, again, it's clear for the past 11 several years we've been starting each Board with a 12 reminder of our major mission that's public health and 13 getting an update on the public health issues. 14 The Air Resources Board conducts its own primary 15 research into air pollution health affects, as we know 16 with the excellent results we've had there, but we also 17 collaborate with and follow the air pollution research 18 globally. And these findings are published in the 19 academic journals and elsewhere and can be found through 20 various websites. 21 I think the -- however, I personally think all my 22 colleagues on the Board get a special benefit from the 23 direct briefings on major health findings. It gives us 24 all an opportunity to ask questions about what the 25 findings mean and how they may effect our regulatory PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 4 1 effects in other programs. 2 Today, of course, we don't have Dr. Friedman who 3 usually does his excellent commentary on some of the 4 interpretations of that. But I'm sure staff will do a 5 good job. And, hopefully, if Dr. Friedman is listening, 6 then we'll have the benefit next time of his updates here. 7 Today's update is on the subject of particulate 8 matter and new findings related to toxicity. So with 9 that, I'll turn it over to Ms. Witherspoon to introduce 10 the item and begin staff's presentation. 11 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Thank you, 12 Chairman Lloyd and good morning. 13 This informational item will highlight findings 14 from a recently completed three-campus study funded by the 15 Air Resources Board on the biological mechanisms of 16 particulate matter toxicity. 17 Investigators at the University of California 18 Davis studied airway inflammation in a rat model of 19 allergic airways disease that has some similarities to 20 human asthma. Scientists at U.C. Irvine studied 21 mechanisms of adverse heart and lung responses to 22 particulate matter exposure in an elderly rat model, while 23 researchers at U.C. San Francisco investigated both heart 24 and lung affects of particle exposure in asthmatic humans. 25 The three studies use similar exposure protocols and end PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 5 1 points to maximize the applicability of the animal 2 findings to humans. 3 Dr. Linda Smith from the Research Division will 4 update the Board on the findings from these studies. 5 Dr. Smith. 6 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 7 presented as follows.) 8 HEALTH AND ECOSYSTEMS SECTION MANAGER SMITH: 9 Thank you. Good morning, Chairman Lloyd and members of 10 the Board. 11 This morning we're going to report on the 12 findings of the recently completed ARB-funded three-campus 13 study investigating the biological mechanisms of 14 particulate matter toxicity in human asthmatics and in 15 animals that are models for responses in humans. 16 --o0o-- 17 HEALTH AND ECOSYSTEMS SECTION MANAGER SMITH: 18 Hundreds of studies have shown statistically significant 19 associations between exposure to ambient particulate 20 matter and adverse health affects, such as increased 21 respiratory symptoms, reduced lung function growth in 22 children, increased hospitalization and emergency room 23 visits for cardiopulmonary causes, and even an increase in 24 deaths due to cardiopulmonary causes. In California 25 alone, PM exposure contributes to thousands of cases of PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 6 1 illness and death each year. 2 Based on this information, the Air Resources 3 Board adopted more air quality standards for PM in 2002. 4 Also, the U.S. EPA is currently reviewing the national 5 standards in order to provide adequate protection of 6 public health. However, one piece of the puzzle remains, 7 and that is what are the biological mechanisms explaining 8 the reported associations? 9 To fill this data gap, the ARB funded in 1999 10 three University of California campuses, Davis, Irvine, 11 and San Francisco, to conduct interrelated experiments 12 designed to investigate how particles might induce adverse 13 health consequences in susceptible humans as well as in 14 animals. Each team of researchers investigated related 15 questions but from different perspectives. 16 --o0o-- 17 HEALTH AND ECOSYSTEMS SECTION MANAGER SMITH: To 18 study the mechanism of PM toxicity, two of the groups used 19 animal models that mimic human disease or conditions. Use 20 of animal models allows investigation of end points that 21 cannot be studied in humans for either ethical or 22 logistical reasons. 23 The U.S. Davis investigators used the specific 24 rat strain that is a model for allergic airway disease 25 that has some similarities to human asthma. The Irvine PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 7 1 group utilized a strain of older rats to investigate 2 likely responses of elderly humans. 3 To round out the project, U.S. San Francisco 4 studied adult human asthmatics. 5 All three groups of investigators used similar 6 four- to six-hour exposures on one or several consecutive 7 days and ammonium nitrate and elemental carbon particles 8 from the same courses. And all three groups used a total 9 particle concentration of about 250 micrograms per cubic 10 meter. 11 The ammonium nitrate and elemental carbon are two 12 of the main components of California particulate matter. 13 In some studies, point to parts per million ozone was also 14 included. The similar experimental designs and exposures 15 at all three research sites made it possible to perform 16 comparisons of the responses in animals to those of human 17 subjects. 18 Collectively, the three groups investigated 19 several potential mechanisms whereby particle exposure 20 could lead to tissue and organ damage. These mechanisms 21 were examined by measuring end points, such as airway 22 inflammation, and changes in lung function, heart rate, 23 blood pressure, and heart rate variability. The last 24 variable is particularly interesting since reduced heart 25 rate variability is a risk factor for heart attacks. The PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 8 1 major findings of the studies are summarized in the next 2 two slides. 3 --o0o-- 4 HEALTH AND ECOSYSTEMS SECTION MANAGER SMITH: The 5 group at U.C. Davis was successful in developing and 6 characterizing an animal model of allergic airway disease. 7 These animals exhibit some but not all of the 8 characteristics of human asthma. The results of studies 9 with these animals show that particle exposure on three or 10 six consecutive days did not enhance allergic airway 11 inflammation, contrary to the study's hypothesis. 12 However, particle exposures did lead to 13 epithelial cell proliferation, and repeated episodes of 14 this can lead to permanent lung damage. 15 The U.C. Irvine investigators showed that a 16 four-hour exposure on three consecutive days induced 17 decreases in blood pressure and heart rate variability in 18 elderly rats. However, single-day exposure to either 19 particles or particles plus ozone induced no 20 cardiovascular responses. 21 --o0o-- 22 HEALTH AND ECOSYSTEMS SECTION MANAGER SMITH: The 23 studies at U.C. San Francisco with asthmatic humans found 24 that PM plus ozone exposures did induce significant airway 25 inflammation in these asthmatic subjects. However, no PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 9 1 airway inflammatory changes were observed with particle 2 exposure alone in agreement with the findings on allergic 3 rats at U.C. Davis. A four-hour exposure to particles 4 alone did induce a small but significant decrease in one 5 measure of lung function, a finding that was unexpected 6 and needs to be replicated. 7 The most significant and surprising result of the 8 U.C. San Fransisco component of this study was the finding 9 that exposure to particles plus ozone but not to particles 10 alone was associated with a significant reduction in heart 11 rate variability. This result is in contrast to those 12 from the elderly rat model at U.C. Irvine, which showed 13 reduction in heart rate variability with exposure to 14 particles alone. 15 --o0o-- 16 HEALTH AND ECOSYSTEMS SECTION MANAGER SMITH: 17 Collectively, the results of these studies suggest that 18 particles of ammonium nitrate and elemental carbon at 19 concentrations that may occur on the worst days can induce 20 adverse health affects in both of the animal models 21 studied, as well as asthmatic humans that are also exposed 22 to ozone. 23 All those results only begin to address the 24 mechanisms of particulate matter toxicity. The results 25 presented today do provide evidence linking particle PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 10 1 matter exposure to adverse health affects. 2 That concludes my presentation. Thank you, and 3 we will be pleased to answer any of your questions. 4 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 5 Any questions? 6 Yes. Professor Friedman. 7 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Just a quick 8 question. What's the threshold for determining elderly or 9 old, humans and rats? 10 HEALTH AND EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT BRANCH CHIEF BODE: 11 The threshold for health affects? 12 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: The average age -- I found 13 out yesterday, the average age of a rat is two years. 14 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: So what's an old 15 rat? When they start turning grey? 16 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST DRECHSLER: These 17 particular rats are kind of a special group. On the 18 average, rats live for about two years. The National 19 Institute of Aging maintains a colony of rats that they 20 let live as long as they live. And you can buy them for 21 research projects. 22 The investigator got the rats when they were 23 about two years old. They have a life expectancy at that 24 point of five to six months. So I would guess that that 25 would be comparable to someone who's at least 80. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 11 1 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: That was the other piece of 2 the question. 3 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: You mean 4 80-year-olds only have a life expectancy of five to six 5 months? 6 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST DRECHSLER: No. 7 Proportional here. 8 HEALTH AND EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT BRANCH CHIEF BODE: 9 Actually, it is a problem, too, for the investigator 10 because rats at that stage, they start to lose them just 11 due to old age. So, basically, investigators have to make 12 sure they keep their schedule up or else they lose their 13 rats. 14 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST DRECHSLER: They do have 15 some problems with rats dying during the experimental 16 period unrelated to the experiments. 17 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Is that limited to the rats, 18 or does that happen to humans as well? 19 HEALTH AND EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT BRANCH CHIEF BODE: 20 Probably not in humans. 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: 22 Thank you very much. 23 Move on to the next agenda item, 04-7-2. It's a 24 research proposal. The background for the Board, this 25 project has been reviewed and approved by the Research PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 12 1 Screening Committee. 2 The project will collect data that can be used to 3 assess the health impacts of emissions from office 4 equipment, obviously, indoor air pollution. I think we 5 all observe sometimes some concerns from the new 6 equipment, and we can smell some issues or worry about 7 particulates which maybe we can't see. So I think this is 8 a particularly intriguing project. 9 The project is the third project this year that's 10 being funded by our colleagues at the California Energy 11 Commission. And, again, I want to thank them especially. 12 I think our relationship with the Energy Commission is 13 probably stronger than it's ever been, both on some of the 14 issue with the energy use fuels, as well as research side. 15 So I think it's great that we're working closely with 16 them. 17 So Mr. Bode, does the Research Division have 18 anything it wants to say about the proposal? 19 HEALTH AND EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT BRANCH CHIEF BODE: 20 Mr. Chairman, we have a short presentation, if you'd like 21 to hear that. 22 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Please proceed. 23 HEALTH AND EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT BRANCH CHIEF BODE: 24 Kevin Cleary from the Research Division will make the 25 presentation. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 13 1 Kevin. 2 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 3 presented as follows.) 4 MR. CLEARY: Thank you. Good morning, Chairman 5 Lloyd and members of the Board. 6 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Turn the mic on. 7 MR. CLEARY: Good morning, Chairman Lloyd and 8 members of the Board. 9 Today, we're presenting to you for your 10 consideration one research proposal that was reviewed and 11 approved by ARB staff and the Board's Research Screening 12 Committee. 13 --o0o-- 14 MR. CLEARY: Today, people are spending more of 15 their time at work using office equipment, such as 16 personal computers and printers. People are also using 17 this equipment more frequently at home. There's growing 18 recognition that a number of potentially harmful 19 pollutants are emitted from office equipment. However, 20 only limited work has been conducted to date to try to 21 characterize the pollutant types and emission rates from 22 this equipment. 23 The purpose of this study is to collect data that 24 can be used to assess the health impacts of emissions from 25 office equipment. This study would be entirely funded PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 14 1 through the California Energy Commission's Public Interest 2 Energy Research, PIER, Program and administered by the ARB 3 because of our joint interest in air quality issues. 4 --o0o-- 5 MR. CLEARY: The objectives of this study are to 6 measure emissions from personal computers and printers in 7 a controlled chamber environment and to determine the 8 primary, temporal, and operational factors which influence 9 emissions from this equipment. Emissions of both toxic 10 and criteria pollutants will be measured. 11 The project will also investigate the 12 relationship between energy consumption and emissions and 13 identify mitigation measures that operators can take to 14 reduce emissions and exposures. The office equipment to 15 be tested will be representative of the current 16 residential and commercial markets. It will include 17 desktop computers, their displays, and various categories 18 of desktop printing devices. 19 --o0o-- 20 MR. CLEARY: The proposal submitted by the 21 applicant team effectively demonstrates their ability to 22 carry out meaningful work to quantify emissions from 23 office equipment. The research team is highly qualified 24 and experienced. They offer state of the art 25 instrumentation, methods, and laboratory facilities PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 15 1 necessary in this study to determine emission of volatile, 2 semi-volatile, and particle phase pollutants. 3 --o0o-- 4 MR. CLEARY: The ARB and CEC as well as other 5 stakeholders need the results of the proposed study. The 6 expected results will be highly relevant, as they will 7 quantify the air pollutants of interest emitted by office 8 equipment. The study will also investigate the impact of 9 aging and use on emissions and determine operational 10 practices that equipment users can implement to reduce 11 emissions. 12 Finally, the balance between energy consumption 13 and emissions will be identified. The results of this 14 project will supplement the information that is included 15 in the staff's report to the Legislature on the state of 16 indoor air quality in California. This report was 17 required by the Assembly Bill 1173, and a draft has 18 recently been made available for public review and 19 comment. 20 --o0o-- 21 MR. CLEARY: The office equipment emission study 22 will be a timely and relevant effort to better understand 23 the types and amounts of pollutants emitted by personal 24 computers and printers. Therefore, we request that you 25 approve this study. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 16 1 This completes my presentation. We would be 2 happy to answer any questions. 3 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 4 Any questions? Mr. Calhoun. 5 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: Did we solicit this 6 proposal? 7 MR. CLEARY: Yes, we did. 8 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: Was this in response to 9 the bill that you mentioned? 10 MR. CLEARY: I'm sorry? 11 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: Did we solicit the 12 proposal on the basis of the proposed legislation? I 13 thought I heard you mention some proposed legislation. 14 INDOOR EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT SECTION MANAGER 15 JENKINS: I'm Peggy Jenkins. I manage the Indoor Section. 16 And we did not really solicit this proposal 17 related to that bill. I think the comment was just that 18 this will add to more information beyond what we have in 19 our current report. This was solicited in conjunction 20 with discussions we had with the Energy Commission 21 regarding an array of projects they were interested in. 22 And we looked at their projects relative to our interests 23 from our toxic air contaminants and criteria pollutant 24 concerns with indoor exposures. 25 And we've seen very serious studies, just a few PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 17 1 that raised our concerns about ozone and semi-volitals and 2 a variety of toxic air contaminants. We wanted to find 3 out what there was in California. So it was an area where 4 CEC's interest and ARB's kind of gelled. That's kind of 5 the history of the project. 6 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: Thank you. 7 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 8 More questions? Has everybody had a chance to 9 read the resolution? 10 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Mr. Chairman, I would then 11 move approval of this staff recommendation. 12 SUPERVISOR PATRICK: Second. 13 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: All in favor say aye. 14 (Ayes) 15 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Anybody against? 16 Unanimous approval. 17 Thank you very much, indeed. Thank you, staff. 18 Take a minute while we change staff. 19 Move on to the next agenda item, 04-7-3, the 20 proposed Airborne Toxic Control Measure to limit idling of 21 heavy duty diesel commercial vehicles. 22 Previously, the Board approved idling 23 restrictions for public school buses, and those rules have 24 been the model for action around the country. Today, 25 staff's building on that prior regulation with a measure PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 18 1 that addresses commercial vehicle idling, a far larger 2 category and a very important source of public exposure 3 and risk. 4 Since reduced idling also results in use 5 operating costs, the proposed measure we're about to 6 consider will also reduce petroleum use, lower emissions 7 of global warming gasses, and result in reduced fuel 8 costs. 9 Finally, the proposal addresses environmental 10 justice concerns, since a significant amount of idling 11 occurs in lower income communities that have experienced a 12 disproportionate share of the air pollution burden. And 13 we'll hear some more about that later. 14 At this point, I'd like to turn it over to 15 Ms. Witherspoon to introduce the item and begin staff 16 presentation. 17 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Thank you, 18 Chairman Lloyd and members of the Board. 19 Idling trucks and buses emit a significant amount 20 of diesel particulate matter and other toxic air 21 contaminants of concern. The proposed ATCM is intended to 22 address this by eliminating non-essential general idling 23 in the near term. 24 Next year, staff will return to the Board with a 25 proposed emissions standard for extended idling of sleeper PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 19 1 cabs that reflect the best available control options for 2 those operations. And the two regulations together will 3 be how we address the public risk from idling of trucks 4 and buses. 5 The staff presentation today will be made by 6 Mr. John Gruszecki of the Stationary Source Division. 7 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 8 presented as follows.) 9 MR. GRUSZECKI: Thank you, Ms. Witherspoon. Good 10 morning, Chairman Lloyd and members of the Board. Today, 11 I will be presenting for your consideration staff proposed 12 airborne -- 13 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Can you speak up a little 14 bit, please. 15 MR. GRUSZECKI: Today, I will be presenting for 16 your consideration staff's proposed Airborne Toxic Control 17 Measure to Limit Diesel-Fuel Commercial Motor Vehicle 18 Idling. 19 This proposed ATCM has been developed to reduce 20 public exposure to diesel PM, support the goals of Diesel 21 Risk Reduction Plan, help achieve the Board's 22 environmental justice goals, and as an added benefit, 23 reduces greenhouse gas emissions. 24 --o0o-- 25 MR. GRUSZECKI: In today's presentation, I will PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 20 1 briefly discuss the following: Background information, 2 existing idle limiting regulations, proposed ATCM 3 development, including the applicability, requirements, 4 exceptions, and alternatives to idling. 5 I will also present environmental and economic 6 impacts of proposed ATCM. And, finally, I will conclude 7 the presentation with a summary of proposed modification 8 to staff's proposal, future activities, and staff's 9 recommendations. 10 --o0o-- 11 MR. GRUSZECKI: Idling is defined as running the 12 vehicle engine at any location while vehicle is 13 stationary. 14 For the purposes of proposed ATCM, idling is 15 separated in two categories, general idling and idling 16 during extended rest periods. 17 General idling is idling during the course of 18 daily business and can be further divided in essential and 19 non-essential idling. 20 Essential idling is idling necessary to 21 accomplish for which vehicle is designed. An example 22 would be idling to operate the drum of a concrete mixer or 23 the positioning of a construction crane. 24 An example of non-essential idling would be 25 idling while waiting for the truck to be loaded or PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 21 1 unloaded. 2 Federal law mandates extended rest periods for 3 truck owners or operators after prolonged periods of 4 driving. Typically, the truck's main engine is idled 5 during these rest periods to operate heating, air 6 conditioning, and other accessories, such as televisions, 7 computers, microwaves, and refrigerators. 8 The proposed ATCM affects diesel-powered 9 commercial vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of 10 10,000 pounds or more. Vehicles covered include delivery 11 trucks, long-haul trucks, buses, and other commercial 12 vehicles. 13 --o0o-- 14 MR. GRUSZECKI: Staff estimates that there are 15 approximately 409,000 heavy-duty diesel-fueled commercial 16 vehicles operating daily in California. 17 Total projected heavy-duty diesel PM idling 18 emissions is estimated to be more than 850 tons per year. 19 Of that number, more than 50 percent of diesel PM 20 emissions is attributable to non-essential idling and the 21 use of sleepers. The proposed ATCM would significantly 22 reduce diesel PM emissions from idling. In addition to 23 the diesel PM, other criteria and greenhouse gas emissions 24 will be reduced as well. 25 --o0o-- PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 22 1 MR. GRUSZECKI: Trucks and buses typically 2 operate in urban locations, and large numbers of which can 3 congregate in locations such as rest stops and 4 distribution facilities. 5 Eliminating non-essential idling is a simple but 6 very effective means to reduce toxic criteria and 7 greenhouse gas emissions and at the same time 8 significantly reduce the public's exposure to toxic air 9 contaminants. Additionally, eliminating non-essential 10 idling will be cost effective and reduce fuel consumption. 11 --o0o-- 12 MR. GRUSZECKI: As previously mentioned, drivers 13 of the trucks equipped with a sleeper berth are required 14 under federal law to periodically stop and rest for 15 extended periods of time. Typically, the main engine is 16 idling during this rest period to run heating ventilation 17 and air conditioning system and provide electricity for 18 various appliances. Staff believes that alternatives to 19 idling the main engine do exist and will be covered in 20 more detail in the following slides. 21 --o0o-- 22 MR. GRUSZECKI: Currently, there are a variety of 23 alternatives to provide sleeper berth comfort during rest 24 periods that are either already available or being 25 developed. Some examples of alternatives which will be PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 23 1 elaborated on the next few slides are auxiliary power 2 systems, both combustion and non-combustion, and truck 3 stop electrification, which includes both on and off-board 4 systems. The other alternatives available include simply 5 shutting off the vehicle engine which weather conditions 6 allow. 7 --o0o-- 8 MR. GRUSZECKI: An auxiliary power system is a 9 self-contained truck mounted system that provides 10 electrical, thermal, or mechanical power that would 11 normally require idling of a truck's primary engine. 12 Pictured on this slide are examples of auxiliary 13 power systems. The pictures to the left are powered by 14 the battery packs that are recharged while driving the 15 truck, and the lower right is powered by internal 16 combustion engine. An example of a battery operated 17 system is currently on display outside the building's main 18 entrance. 19 Auxiliary power systems are typically powered by 20 diesel fuel, however, alternative fuel and electric motors 21 are available. Systems powered by fuel cells are 22 currently under development. An auxiliary power system 23 costs between 3,000 to $10,000 for equipment and 24 installation. And most systems are self contained. 25 --o0o-- PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 24 1 MR. GRUSZECKI: The following few slides present 2 two types of truck stop electrification alternatives. 3 Off-board truck stop electrification provides 4 climate control, power, and other amenities to a truck 5 from an outside source and no modification to the trucks 6 are necessary. IdleAire is an example of a company that 7 provides off-board truck stop electrification services. 8 Currently, there are six truck stops in California 9 equipped with this technology with approximately 400 10 spaces. 11 This system can be used on most trucks and 12 requires infrastructure deployment with an estimated cost 13 of $10,000 per parking space to install. The basic charge 14 for a driver is $1.25 per hour, which is typically cheaper 15 than idling the main engine. 16 --o0o-- 17 MR. GRUSZECKI: A second type of a truck stop 18 electrification is on-board electrification, an example of 19 which is currently being displayed by the Sacramento 20 Municipal Utility District outside the main entrance of 21 the building. Simply put, this system consists of 22 electrical outlets close to the perimeter of a truck. 23 To utilize on-board electrification, the purchase 24 of additional equipment for a sleeper cab is needed. 25 Approximately $3,500 would be needed to purchase a power PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 25 1 inverter and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning 2 system for a cab. Infrastructure deployment is estimated 3 to cost approximately $3,500 per parking space. As with 4 off-board electrification, the driver would be required to 5 pay an hourly fee for plugging into the system. 6 --o0o-- 7 MR. GRUSZECKI: I will now provide an overview of 8 existing regulations. 9 --o0o-- 10 MR. GRUSZECKI: As a part of identifying the 11 existing regulations, staff conducts surveys of all 50 12 states to assess the status of existing idling limiting 13 regulations and ordinances across the nation. 14 Staff determined there are 20 states with 15 statewide, county, or city-wide idling limiting ordinances 16 or regulations; eight states with statewide idle limiting 17 regulations; twelve states with local restrictions. In 18 addition, an idle limit of five minutes is typical for the 19 majority of the state or local regulations. 20 --o0o-- 21 MR. GRUSZECKI: Within the state of California, 22 the following idle limiting regulation exists. 23 The school bus idle ATCM was approved by the 24 Board in December 2002. Currently, the ATCM is enjoying a 25 high compliance rate and has proven to be extremely PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 26 1 effective. Staff will be providing an update and status 2 report to the Board in October 2004. 3 Placer County approved an idling ordinance in 4 November 2003 that limits the idling of diesel powered 5 trucks with a gross vehicular weight greater than 26,000 6 pounds to five minutes or less at any location. The 7 ordinance also applies to off-read diesel powered 8 equipment greater than 70 horse power. 9 Currently in effect, Assembly Bill 2650 10 establishes requirements for idling at ports in 11 California. 12 --o0o-- 13 MR. GRUSZECKI: I will now provide an overview of 14 proposed Airborne Toxic Control Measure including the 15 steps staff took during its involvement. 16 --o0o-- 17 MR. GRUSZECKI: In developing the proposed ATCM, 18 staff conducted surveys to determine the status of any 19 state or local idle limiting regulations and ordinances, 20 conducted consultation with stakeholders, and held five 21 public meetings. The ombudsman will be providing 22 additional information after this presentation. 23 --o0o-- 24 MR. GRUSZECKI: The proposed ATCM is applicable 25 to commercial diesel-fueled vehicles operating in the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 27 1 state of California with a gross vehicle weight rating 2 greater than 10,000 pounds. 3 The proposed ATCM applies to both public and 4 private vehicles, such as delivery trucks, long haul 5 trucks, and other commercial vehicles. It also applies to 6 commercial buses, such as charter and tour buses. 7 California registered as well as out-of-state and 8 out-of-country vehicles are subject to the proposed ATCM 9 when operating within the state. 10 --o0o-- 11 MR. GRUSZECKI: The proposed ATCM targets 12 non-essential idling. The driver of a diesel-fueled 13 commercial motor vehicle with a gross vehicle weight 14 rating greater than 10,000 pounds cannot idle the main 15 engine for more than five minutes at any location. The 16 drivers are expected to manually turn off the engine to 17 comply with the provisions of the ATCM. There are no 18 requirements for new or add-on control devices of any 19 kind. 20 For commercial buses, the five minute limit 21 applies with the following additional exceptions. The 22 driver of the bus may idle up to ten minutes prior to 23 boarding for passenger comfort and no idling restriction 24 applied when passengers on board. 25 For vehicles equipped with sleeper berths, the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 28 1 driver must comply with five minute idling limit if parked 2 within 100 feet of a residential area. 3 Outside of residential areas, the five minute 4 idling restriction does not apply when idling the main 5 engine while using for sleeper berth. 6 --o0o-- 7 MR. GRUSZECKI: There are number of circumstances 8 which staff has determined that idling for more than five 9 minutes is necessary, and therefore, will not be impacted 10 by the proposed ATCM. 11 --o0o-- 12 MR. GRUSZECKI: This slide presents typical 13 examples of vehicles or situations where idling is 14 essential to perform work. Examples include emergency 15 vehicles while in the course of providing services and 16 idling to provide the power source for equipment, such as 17 hazard signage and street or utilities repair. 18 --o0o-- 19 MR. GRUSZECKI: The proposed ATCM contains idling 20 limitations for sleeper and APS units effective 21 January 1st, 2009. Later in this presentation, I will be 22 presenting staff's proposal to delay the Board's 23 consideration of this element of the proposal until fall 24 of 2005. This will enable the Board to concurrently 25 consider low emission standard that would enable truck PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 29 1 operator to use highly controlled main engine or APS for 2 extended idling. 3 --o0o-- 4 MR. GRUSZECKI: In developing staff proposals, a 5 number of issues arose relating to sleepers that require 6 further evaluation by staff. 7 First, there is a shortage of adequate parking 8 facilities. The estimated total number of available truck 9 parking spaces at truck stops and rest stops in California 10 is approximately 10,000. During peak hours, the estimated 11 demand for truck parking spaces is over 20,000. Due to 12 the shortage of parking spaces, flexibility will be needed 13 for owners and operators of sleeper equipped trucks to 14 determine which alternatives best suit their individual 15 needs for eliminating idling during extended rest periods. 16 As mentioned earlier in earlier slides, the main 17 truck engine is typically idled during extended rest 18 periods to provide comfort and electricity. One option to 19 using the main engine is to install an auxiliary powered 20 system that uses a smaller diesel-fired engine to provide 21 comfort and electricity. 22 Staff has estimated that the PM emissions from 23 2007 and later model on-road engine might be lower than PM 24 emission from auxiliary power systems. In addition, 25 further evaluation is needed to determine potential NOx PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 30 1 impacts of using APS. 2 To address this concern and significant emissions 3 associated with the sleepers, the ARB staff intends to 4 return to the Board by September 2005 with a proposal. 5 --o0o-- 6 MR. GRUSZECKI: I will now discuss the 7 environmental and economic impacts of proposed ATCM. 8 --o0o-- 9 MR. GRUSZECKI: Implementation of the 10 non-essential idling limits is expected to result in 11 approximately 80 percent reduction in PM and NOx 12 emissions. Significant reduction in carbon monoxide and 13 carbon dioxide are also expected. 14 --o0o-- 15 MR. GRUSZECKI: The proposed ATCM will result in 16 significant emission reductions of the diesel PM and other 17 toxic criteria pollutants and greenhouse gasses. This 18 will lead to reduced exposure and the associated risk to 19 all receptors throughout the state. 20 --o0o-- 21 MR. GRUSZECKI: Staff expects emission and health 22 risk reduction in all areas of the state, including 23 neighborhoods located where heavy-duty vehicles 24 congregate, such as rest stops and distribution 25 facilities. The proposed ATCM will help us achieve our PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 31 1 environmental justice goals. 2 --o0o-- 3 MR. GRUSZECKI: The elimination of non-essential 4 idling is expected to have a positive overall economic 5 impact based on the cost savings from reduced fuel 6 consumption and reduced vehicle engine maintenance. 7 This will result in a fuel savings of 50 million 8 gallons of diesel fuel annually and amount to 9 approximately $100 million in savings to the trucking 10 industry. 11 --o0o-- 12 MR. GRUSZECKI: I will now discuss proposed 13 modification to staff's proposal. 14 --o0o-- 15 MR. GRUSZECKI: In response to comments received, 16 staff is proposing a delay in the Board's consideration of 17 January 2009 provisions. 18 Commenters indicated that it is premature to 19 impose this limitation on idling for sleepers and 20 operation of APS units before emission standards have been 21 established. Staff agrees that we can accommodate this 22 concern by delaying the Board's consideration of this 23 provision. The delay will not diminish the importance of 24 the potential emission reduction associated with reducing 25 idling of sleepers, nor the timing for achieving these PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 32 1 reductions. It is staff's intent to return with a 2 comprehensive proposal no later than September 2005. 3 --o0o-- 4 MR. GRUSZECKI: Staff is proposing additional 5 modification to address comments received. These include 6 adding clarification that the five minute idling provision 7 does not occur during positioning of a crane; the proposed 8 ATCM applies to military vehicles, and transit, tour, and 9 commercial buses; and the proposed ATCM applies to all 10 in-state, out-of-state, and out-of-country vehicles when 11 such vehicles operate in California. 12 --o0o-- 13 MR. GRUSZECKI: I will now discuss staff's next 14 steps. 15 --o0o-- 16 MR. GRUSZECKI: If the Board approves the 17 proposed ATCM with staff's proposed changes, staff will: 18 Provide educational materials and outreach to 19 owners/operators of affected vehicles; use the existing 20 1-800-END-SMOG telephone complaint line to receive 21 complaints for investigation; and coordinate enforcement 22 efforts with CHP, local peace officers, and air quality 23 management districts. 24 --o0o-- 25 MR. GRUSZECKI: Staff recommends that the Board PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 33 1 approve the Airborne Toxic Control Measure to limit idling 2 of diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles with the 3 changes as proposed by staff. Thank you. 4 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 5 Questions from the Board? 6 Professor Friedman. 7 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: I heard 8 Ms. Witherspoon say in her introductory remarks that the 9 provisions in the proposal for the sleeper and the APS 10 would be deferred. That is, the staff is suggesting we 11 defer the consideration related to that and that the 12 adoption of these provisions be delayed. 13 And so I'm wondering, would that include the 14 recommendation or part of the proposal before us that 15 would restrict sleeper idling in residential 16 neighborhoods? 17 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Professor 18 Friedman, no, it would not. We believe there's cause to 19 move the sleepers out of residential areas now while we 20 continue working on the technology forcing standards that 21 would help us have all sleeping units operate more cleanly 22 in the future. 23 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: So clarified in that 24 way, the delay on acting on the provisions relating to 25 sleepers and the auxiliary power system units would not -- PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 34 1 not all the provisions would be delayed. In other words, 2 the provision relating to residential would still 3 be implemented. 4 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: That's correct. 5 The main delay is to the prohibition in 2009 for all 6 sleepers everywhere not being allowed to idle more than 7 five minutes. 8 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: And then under next 9 steps, I assume that would be a next step. In other 10 words, staff would continue to work back to the drawing 11 board on sleepers. 12 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: It was always on 13 the drawing board. We had a two-parter. But the desire 14 of many stakeholders was that we unify our action into one 15 coherent step on the sleepers. And we've done that with 16 the exception of not having them encroach on residential 17 areas. 18 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Okay. I'm 19 wondering, Mr. Chairman, in view of that, I see we have a 20 fair list of persons wishing to address this. We're going 21 to have to revisit it again if we're going to delay 22 consideration of the sleeper issue. So maybe we shouldn't 23 spend an awful lot of time on that part of it today. 24 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I was going to make a 25 statement before we call the witness list. In fact, I PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 35 1 jumped ahead here. So I realize I need to give the 2 ombudsman a chance to give her comments here. 3 The other thing, I think it's important to 4 recognize, as usual, that staff will work closely with the 5 stakeholders during the first phase of this program to 6 make sure things are working out. If there are any 7 issues, then they can bring them back to the Board. I 8 have confidence that will happen as we move ahead. 9 But also I'd say at this time, Madam Ombudsman, 10 will you please describe the public participation process 11 that occurred while this rule was being developed and 12 share with us any observation and concerns that you have 13 at this time. 14 OMBUDSMAN TSCHOGL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and 15 members of the Board. 16 The ATCM to limit idling has been developed to 17 reduce diesel PM from diesel-fueled engines during periods 18 of unnecessary and extended idling. It was developed with 19 input from engine manufacturers, engine dealers, 20 alternative technology manufacturers, scientific 21 community, and environmental organizations. Public 22 agencies and organizations such as University of 23 California Davis, U.S. EPA, the Sacramento Area District, 24 the South Coast Air District, and California Highway 25 Patrol also participated in the rule development. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 36 1 To obtain information detailing the extent and 2 sources of idling vehicles and to demonstrate available 3 and emerging control methods, staff had many meetings with 4 the stakeholders. They visited six facilities and 5 interviewed operations personnel where idling trucks 6 congregate. They also observed operations at sites that 7 provide alternatives to idling. 8 Additionally, staff conducted a survey of 300 9 businesses to determine the existence of policies, 10 directives, ordinances, et cetera, to limit commercial 11 idling. 12 Staff also held a public consultation meeting, 13 which was followed by four workshops. The workshops were 14 held in Sacramento, and the attendance ranged from 10 to 15 35 participants. All meetings and workshops were noticed 16 on the ARB website and approximately 300 subscribers 17 received electronic mail messages. 18 Also, the public workshops were accessible via 19 simultaneous webcast over the Internet and with the 20 ability to e-mail and receive responses from staff in real 21 time during the workshops. 22 Throughout the process, staff kept operators and 23 owners of facilities apprised of the process of the 24 proposed ATCM through the ARB website, ARB list serve, and 25 through personal communications. On June 4th, 2004, the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 37 1 staff report was mailed, e-mailed, and posted on the ARB's 2 website. Thank you. 3 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 4 Any other questions from the Board? 5 I have a couple of questions. 6 One, the effective date of implementation said on 7 approval by OAL. Do we have a feeling when that will be? 8 GENERAL COUNSEL JOHNSTON: I'm sorry. I wasn't 9 clear on the question. 10 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: It's looking at the effective 11 date in which this regulation will take place. It said in 12 the slide it will be effective upon approval by AOL. Do 13 we have a target? 14 GENERAL COUNSEL JOHNSTON: The Office of 15 Administration Law -- usually our rule making process 16 after the Board hearing takes anywhere from a couple 17 months to nine months to complete. So in this case, we 18 would be projecting, you know, probably in the spring of 19 next year that it would be approved by the Office of 20 Administrative Law. And then when it's approved, it would 21 be effective. 22 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: The division is 23 indicating they think they can complete this package in 24 about six months, the final Statement of Reasons -- 25 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: But for the stakeholders, how PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 38 1 do they know when this is going to be effective? So if 2 they're operating and we don't know if it's within a month 3 or so, then they may be operating and they won't know 4 whether, in fact, the rule is in effect. 5 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: We'll notify them 6 it's in effect. It's part of the staff's effort is a 7 major outreach once we have the regulation in place. 8 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: And then getting back to the 9 enforcement, it said you have various options for 10 enforcement, one of which is to call the telephone number 11 1-800-END-SMOG. Can you lead me through the process of 12 what would specifically happen if I saw somebody idling 13 more than five minutes? I call that number. What would 14 happen and then would be the penalty? 15 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: 1-800-SMOG -- 16 PROJECT ASSESSMENT BRANCH CHIEF TOLLSTRUP: The 17 process is basically you can call the number and you can 18 report what you've seen, give a license plate number, the 19 time it occurred, and where. Generally, enforcement staff 20 picks that up and they follow up on the complaint. I've 21 actually used it myself. 22 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: For a violation, what's 23 likely to happen then? 24 PROJECT ASSESSMENT BRANCH CHIEF TOLLSTRUP: As 25 with the school bus program that we implemented two years PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 39 1 ago, the first year or so we're generally issuing 2 warnings, trying to get the word out, trying to get people 3 educated. After that point in time, there may be a fine 4 associated with violating the provisions of the reg, 5 especially for multiple violations. So at the very 6 beginning, it will be mostly warnings. 7 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: If it's a single 8 event, we're not likely to respond in time to catch the 9 person who's idling excessively. But odds are it will be 10 where diesel vehicles congregate, so our inspectors can go 11 out. Also it might be in the case of a city government 12 not having instructed its personnel appropriately. So we 13 might end up talking to the city and educating them about 14 the idling rule so the word can filter down, or different 15 kinds of construction companies or whoever it might be. 16 So we would take the right kind of action to have it 17 changed over time. But a single idler, we won't catch. 18 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: So if somebody doesn't know 19 what they're violating, all they get is a warning. 20 STATIONARY SOURCE DIVISION CHIEF VENTURINI: 21 Mr. Chairman, briefly, as we've learned with the school 22 bus measure, one of the important significant means of 23 ensuring compliance is outreach to the people involved. 24 And so if the Board approves this measure, we will 25 probably initiate our outreach efforts and elicit the help PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 40 1 of various organizations and agencies to provide the 2 information. So well before we complete our process, 3 hopefully, the message will be out there. We may even see 4 some voluntary compliance with these provisions. 5 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Mr. Calhoun. 6 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: I talked to the staff 7 about this report, and I had two questions for them. 8 One of them pertained to enforcement. And it 9 seems to me that this is not going to be an easy job. And 10 I listened to the comments that were just made a few 11 moments ago. But I still think it's going to be 12 difficult. I live near the beach, and we have these huge 13 ports, Long Beach and Los Angeles. And I see those trucks 14 idling for an extended period of time. And what would you 15 envision the enforcement procedure -- what the enforcement 16 procedure would be there for something like that. 17 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Mr. Calhoun, 18 queuing is exempt from the idling restriction. So if the 19 vehicles are in motion, however slowly and excruciating 20 that might be, they are not subject to the idling 21 prohibition. And even the Lowenthal bill that attempted 22 to deal with exactly the problem you're describing mostly 23 had the effect of moving the queuing inside the port 24 boundaries rather than on the roads around it because of 25 the way the statute language worked out. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 41 1 So I don't think they've completely changed or 2 even substantially changed the queuing problem that they 3 had, which they need to resolve through other measures 4 like the around-the-clock delivery, the sort of time 5 management, labor management issues they're wrestling with 6 at the ports of Long Beach and ports of L.A. But our 7 regulation doesn't effect queuing at all. 8 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: Next question that I had 9 pertains to the standard. I think the staff kind of got 10 ahead of itself with the standards for 2009. And so I 11 assume that the proposed modification intended to address 12 that. 13 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: That's correct. 14 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: Thank you. 15 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Any other questions at this 16 time? 17 Seeing none, I would like to move ahead with the 18 witness list and call the first three witnesses who have 19 signed up on the item, Stacy Heaton, Lisa Stegink, and 20 Frank Petronzio. 21 As Professor Friedman indicated, recognizing that 22 the staff in the last few days have modified the proposal 23 here, comments related to the 2009 and whatnot should 24 be -- no point in doing that because we'll be revisiting 25 that item, and we'll be having that debate in the future. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 42 1 MS. HEATON: Good morning, Chairman Lloyd and 2 members of the Board. My name is Stacy Heaton. I'm the 3 Director of Environmental Affairs with the California 4 Trucking Association. 5 And CTA supports idling limitations in the course 6 of the business day. And, actually, AB 2650, as was 7 mentioned in the staff report, was our legislation. We 8 worked very hard to pass that. We're currently working on 9 addressing the issues inside the port next, because we're 10 very concerned about that next as well. So we are 11 concerned about this issue. Our members support this 12 regulation as far as the five minute idling time limit is 13 concerned. 14 I did want to add a few comments as far as things 15 like hours of service go. Currently, the interstate hours 16 of service laws state that after a driver has been on a 17 shift for 14 hours, they must stop for ten consecutive 18 hours. So it's not just eight hours of rest period. And 19 although that law is currently under appeal, it is still 20 in effect. So a driver coming in from another state must 21 stop for ten hours. They're not allowed to get out of 22 their trucks because of cargo theft issues and terrorism 23 issues. 24 So we're happy to see this move forward with the 25 exemption for the sleeper berth trucks, because we do need PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 43 1 more options as far as when drivers run out of hours, 2 other than just plugging in or staying in the truck and 3 dealing with whatever elements are out there. 4 CTA has a few more recommendations. We would 5 recommend that you direct staff to work with the 6 Environmental Protection Agency and with ATA on a national 7 solution to this sleeper berth issue. We would like to 8 see something nationwide and not just California, because 9 for the most part, California-based interstate trucks 10 aren't the trucks that are sleeping here. It's the trucks 11 that come in from out of state. We would like to see this 12 addressed on a national level. 13 We also would encourage you to make sure that you 14 loop the California Highway Patrol in on this issue during 15 figuring out who's going to enforce so we can make sure 16 that they have the authority to enforce this and so that 17 they know exactly what's going on with the regulation 18 before the sleeper berth issue comes back next year. 19 Thank you for your time. 20 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 21 Any questions? 22 No. We have Lisa next. 23 MS. STEGINK: Thank you, Dr. Lloyd. And I will 24 be brief. 25 Good morning. My name is Lisa Stegink, and I'm PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 44 1 here today on behalf of the Engine Manufacturers 2 Association. 3 EMA supports efforts to reduce unnecessary truck 4 idling and allow engine manufacturers and vehicle 5 operators to choose the most feasible and cost effective 6 idle reduction strategies that work for them. 7 With the changes that staff is suggesting and 8 proposing today, we believe that the proposed ATCM does do 9 that. Our key concern was the five minute limit that was 10 originally proposed to apply to sleeper berths beginning 11 on January 1, 2009, because it would have banned the use 12 of the primary engine idle technology as well as the 13 auxiliary power systems. And it would have left 14 interstate truckers with no effective means of rest while 15 travelling in the state. We also believe it would have 16 severely damaged the development of and market for the APS 17 as the primary engine idle control systems that are 18 available and may be developed in the future. 19 We support the staff's proposed modifications to 20 eliminate the January 1, 2009, date from the rule. And we 21 urge the Board to adopt the rule with those modifications 22 in order to assure the continued use of the most feasible 23 and cost effective strategies for reducing unnecessary 24 idling and to avoid the potentially adverse effects from 25 banning such strategies. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 45 1 We also urge California, and we support the 2 comments of CTA in this regard, to work with other states 3 and with the U.S. EPA to coordinate the effective use of 4 idle reduction strategies. Thank you. 5 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 6 Now it's your turn, Frank. 7 And after Frank, we have Peter Rooney, Bob 8 Wilson. 9 MR. PETRONZIO: I guess I didn't look like a 10 Lisa, huh. 11 Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the Board. 12 My name is Frank Petronzio, representing the Southern 13 California Ready Mix Concrete Association. I was here 14 today prepared to oppose the regulation, and it was 15 brought to my attention this morning that the term "mixer" 16 is included in the exemption. And as long as we're 17 talking about a ready mix concrete truck, if that's the 18 same as what we're using the term "mixer" as, I'd like to 19 remove my opposition. So I'd just like some clarification 20 there. 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I see staff nodding. 22 STATIONARY SOURCE DIVISION CHIEF VENTURINI: We 23 can make sure it's even clearer if necessary. 24 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: So you move from oppose to 25 support? PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 46 1 MR. PETRONZIO: Yes. 2 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Great. Thank you. 3 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Mr. Chairman, to 4 Mr. Venturini, that would be, I think, a very good idea to 5 make that extraordinarily clear, because there are so many 6 of those trucks in California. There's just a tremendous 7 number. So we need to be sure that they clearly 8 understand that. 9 STATIONARY SOURCE DIVISION CHIEF VENTURINI: We 10 will make that clear. 11 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: We wouldn't want them 12 solidifying their -- 13 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: No, we don't. 14 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Peter Rooney, Bob Wilson, Ken 15 Selover. 16 MR. ROONEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good 17 morning. 18 First, I would like to say that -- publicly 19 acknowledge that the staff was really corroborative with 20 all the interested parties in developing this. Starting 21 back in December, they've been very open. The meetings 22 have been held with an air of trying to come to a solution 23 rather than confrontation. And I would think that 24 everyone who's been involved should be thankful for the 25 staff that worked on this, because they did a very good PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 47 1 job. 2 I think it's also very good public policy that 3 this morning you're going to bifurcate the two issues of 4 unnecessary idling and the thorny issue of the sleeper 5 cab. That's an important issue. And I think that by 6 bifurcating it and giving it some more time to work on 7 that, that reasonable people come to together with the 8 good public policy. 9 I would suggest, as has been said by the two 10 previous speakers concerning interstate concerning the 11 nature of this issue, we know -- we've noticed in the 12 slides today, 400,000 trucks are going to be covered by 13 this. About 25 percent of those trucks are interstate 14 commerce trucks. So the issue is a national issue. And 15 the health impacts in Houston or Atlanta or Boston are 16 just as important as the health impacts are on California. 17 So we would urge to the extent possible the staff 18 coordinate their activities with U.S. EPA and come up with 19 a national standard, rather than trying to do it ourselves 20 only in California when the issue is an interstate issue. 21 And the second point is that in our discussions 22 prior to today's meeting, there's been, I would say, an 23 ambivalence between setting engine family standards versus 24 use standards. I would suggest to you that the better 25 solution is engine family standards, because then the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 48 1 Engine Manufacturer Association and related technology 2 people are looking at a full market. If you're just 3 looking as a manufacturer at APSes that are going to be 4 used in sleeper cabs, that market shrinks. So the 5 economic stimulus to devise a solution is reduced. So if 6 staff looks at establishing engine families rather than 7 end use, I think we'll all be better served. 8 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 9 Bob Wilson, Ken Selover, Joni Low. 10 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 11 presented as follows.) 12 MR. WILSON: Good morning. I'm Bob Wilson from 13 IdleAire Technologies. 14 --o0o-- 15 MR. WILSON: IdleAire Technologies is -- we're a 16 firm that's in the first phases of developing a national 17 network of truck stop electrification shore power. This 18 provides a host of services, including electricity and 19 heating and air conditioning to class seven and eight 20 truck drivers. This is an extremely cost effective 21 solution and provides win-win solutions for communities 22 and the environment, for fleets, and for travel center 23 operators. 24 Our firm is philosophically opposed to the idea 25 of command and control regulations. We think that the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 49 1 approach that has been taken here to delay this regulation 2 on the sleeper cabs for another year provides an 3 opportunity for the Board and the staff to further process 4 some of these very complicated issues to come up with some 5 better resolutions. So we are very much in support of the 6 postponement that's taken place here today. 7 IdleAire has an extensive deployment plan for the 8 state of California. We can deploy rapidly. And I'll 9 talk to you about that in just a moment. 10 --o0o-- 11 MR. WILSON: This is what our system looks like 12 in operation. 13 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Bob, I'm going to limit you 14 to five minutes, because I'm looking through your slides. 15 I want to make sure it's focused on the regulation, not 16 just promotion for IdleAire. 17 --o0o-- 18 MR. WILSON: All right. Very well. Exceptional 19 emission reductions and -- okay. I'll be brief for just a 20 moment. I just want to -- 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I think it explains the 22 technology, that's fine. But then focus on it. Clearly, 23 your technology is ideally suited to help us out here. 24 MR. WILSON: All right. Well, the technology 25 works. We're deploying it in locations across the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 50 1 country. And very rapidly we're building up experience. 2 We now have 2.1 million hours of actual use. When I met 3 some of the group here just three months ago, I was saying 4 1.3 million hours. Last month, it was 1.7. Today, I'm 5 saying 2.1 million hours of use across the country. 6 --o0o-- 7 MR. WILSON: We provide a host of services. 8 --o0o-- 9 MR. WILSON: Provide benefits to fleets, to 10 communities, and travel centers. We can solve quite a 11 number of their problems that the state of California is 12 facing. 13 --o0o-- 14 MR. WILSON: We also have a deployment plan which 15 would allow us to install at the travel centers across the 16 country and across California, I mean to say. There are 17 77 target locations in the state of California where we 18 would install over 10,000 of these shore power unit. 19 These are located in areas of high people concentration, 20 including the AQMD, the San Joaquin Valley, and the Bay 21 Area. 22 --o0o-- 23 MR. WILSON: Emission reductions from this 24 deployment we estimate at 9,600 tons of NOx annually, 56 25 tons of PM, 1,500 tons of CO, and so forth. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 51 1 --o0o-- 2 MR. WILSON: Okay. Now specifically on the 3 regulation. IdleAire doesn't promote the imposition of 4 regulations to resolve these issues. We believe that 5 market-based approaches are preferable when they can be 6 made to work. The history of anti-idling regulations 7 nationwide has not been a successful one. Implementation 8 has been very difficult. There has been some successful 9 implementation in local districts, but there is no state 10 anywhere in the country today that's had any real success 11 implementing and enforcing an anti-idling regulation 12 statewide. Because of these sorts of concerns, we believe 13 that market-based solutions are preferable to regulation 14 when they can be made to work. 15 --o0o-- 16 MR. WILSON: So in summary, we believe that a 17 solution like ours provides win-win-win solutions all the 18 way across the board, benefits all the parties, all the 19 industries, the environmentalists, the communities. It's 20 cost effective, quantifiable, provides immediate emission 21 reduction. 22 Because of the type of system we're deploying 23 today, our emission reductions take place right now. And 24 we are not in a situation where we might have to wait for 25 several years for other parts of the industry to catch up. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 52 1 To better deploy or more rapidly deploy this sort of 2 technology, it would be appropriate for CARB to consider 3 creative financing or some sort of incentives to help 4 speed along this marketplace adoption. 5 I'd like to respond to something in the earlier 6 report very quickly, just a staff comment. There was a 7 question about the number of trucks operating in 8 California on a peak basis and a comment about our 9 commercial truck parking spaces. 10 The commercial truck stops are open for all 11 comers. And their parking numbers are generally published 12 in published directories. Our firm's count is that 13 there's about 11,300 of these parking spaces. In 14 addition, there's another 1,000 parking spaces in rest 15 areas. There are also fleet terminals across the state of 16 California. Nationwide, the fleet terminals have a 17 substantial amount of parking. And a large fleet may have 18 a dozen or 15 fleet terminals across the country where 19 their trucks come into that area. The total -- there is 20 no tally of this amount of parking, but it may be 21 essentially equivalent to that in the commercial arena. 22 So that's one of those issues that needs to be resolved 23 over the coming year. 24 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 25 Question, Ms. D'Adamo. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 53 1 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: I have a question 2 regarding the incentives to which you refer. Does your 3 company currently receive any state, federal, or local air 4 district funding? 5 MR. WILSON: Yes, we have. To date, we've 6 received, I think, $38 million in various sorts of 7 funding, much of it from the SEAMAC Program. And we 8 provide funding that comes in from private sources. We've 9 accumulated about $100 million of private sector funding 10 which we are using as cost share along with these grants. 11 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: The other question is you 12 refer to travel centers as being sort of the focus. What 13 about distribution centers? 14 MR. WILSON: That's a very good question. This 15 technology is very readily applicable to distribution 16 centers. The travel centers are the areas of highest 17 activities. They're also the most visible where we're 18 tracking them. We know where they are. We've got their 19 coordinates. We know the managers. We have their phone 20 numbers. 21 For the distribution centers, there are no 22 published lists. I'm talking with the people in San 23 Bernardino County, for instance, "Can you give me a list 24 of the locations and the names of the distribution 25 centers, and how many parking spaces there might be?" PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 54 1 That information has not really been compiled yet. 2 However, that represents an appropriate target for the 3 technology. 4 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Is there anything we can 5 do to help get that information out? Are there sources 6 that we have? 7 STATIONARY SOURCE DIVISION CHIEF VENTURINI: I'm 8 sorry, Ms. D'Adamo. We missed the question. 9 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: My question of the witness 10 had to do with distribution centers with this technology. 11 Would this technology work at distribution centers? And 12 he said that the main challenge they're having is even 13 getting lists of where these distribution centers are 14 located. And my question of staff was, is there anything 15 we can do to coordinate with him to get that information 16 out? 17 STATIONARY SOURCE DIVISION CHIEF VENTURINI: I 18 think we do have some information on distribution centers. 19 I can check with the staff. And I think we'll also be 20 collecting some additional information as a result of the 21 Board's action on one of our previous regulations. So 22 we'll be happy to talk with Mr. Wilson and see what 23 information we have and can share with him. 24 MR. WILSON: There should also be some expertise 25 in Caltrans as well. So we may be able to tap that PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 55 1 resource. 2 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Ms. Riordan and Supervisor 3 Roberts. 4 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Yes. Distribution centers 5 just is an aside from what I'm going to ask you. 6 Your Planning Departments in the counties and 7 cities often will have those lists. It doesn't give you 8 probably a totally complete list. But they may have a 9 website or some source of information. So if somebody 10 could be dedicated to, you know, calling some of those 11 areas that, you know, where we know there are large 12 concentrations of distribution centers. The one I can 13 think of very clearly in the area that I live in would be 14 the Ontario/Rancha Cucamonga area. Those cities are going 15 to know instantly where their distribution centers are. 16 Two points. One, thank you for providing the 17 demonstration for us this morning, I believe, outside. 18 Were you not involved -- sorry. Oh, excuse me. Oh, 19 pardon me. I was looking at one and thinking you were the 20 other. 21 But I did want to ask you a question about your 22 map. And I would like to know on the map of California, 23 you had the red dots. Are those the travel centers that 24 you have noted there? What are those red dots? Right 25 there. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 56 1 MR. WILSON: That's correct. Those are travel 2 centers that represent good targets for immediate 3 deployment of the technology. 4 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Thank you. 5 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Supervisor Roberts. 6 SUPERVISOR ROBERTS: My question may be related, 7 and I was wondering about the absence of the red dots on 8 coastal Southern California. Are there no travel centers 9 in those areas? Because there seems like there's plenty 10 of opportunity. 11 MR. WILSON: Yes. There may be opportunities at 12 distribution centers and some other locations. There are 13 not a lot of travel centers along in coastal California. 14 SUPERVISOR ROBERTS: I was thinking that down at 15 the border with Mexico I would have thought those would 16 have been travel centers I've gone down to visit, also 17 distribution centers. But there's an enormous number of 18 trucks coming through there. And I thought there were 19 travel centers, and I don't see anything on the map. 20 MR. WILSON: Right. I guess those could be 21 classified as terminals and distribution centers along the 22 border, and they're not currently on this map. Although 23 those certainly represent targets and need to be further 24 investigated. 25 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Recognize, Supervisor Roberts PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 57 1 is from San Diego, and there's a porosity of red dots down 2 there. So I can understand his -- 3 SUPERVISOR ROBERTS: I was just thinking there is 4 a tremendous opportunity if you visit that border. 5 And I think you have -- Mr. Chairman, there's an 6 incredible number of trucks. I've gone down there and 7 visited the service centers. They're taking care of all 8 sorts of needs. And I would have thought this would be a 9 great opportunity. It's a much larger operation than I 10 suspect a lot of those red dots that are up there. 11 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I agree with you. I think it 12 underestimates the activity there and the potential. 13 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: And that was some of the 14 cause for me to not understand exactly what the red dots 15 were, because of what I think are missing from here. In 16 other words, there's probably many more red dots that 17 could be placed on this map with a little further 18 research. 19 SUPERVISOR ROBERTS: I wasn't trying to 20 criticize. I was trying to encourage. It's an incredible 21 market that could help us solve the problem. 22 MR. WILSON: We'd love to talk to you further 23 about some of those opportunities. 24 DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER SCHEIBLE: Also, in an 25 earlier presentation by IdleAire, I think I recollect that PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 58 1 the red dots were identified as travel centers with 50 or 2 more parking spaces. Because there are a lot of places 3 where trucks can get serviced and fueled, but if space or 4 the volume doesn't justify 50 or more -- is that correct, 5 Bob, is that these are the larger ones, not all of the 6 ones in California? 7 MR. WILSON: That's correct. Those are the 8 larger ones. Every travel center has a certain number of 9 parking spaces that are associated with the fuel pump. 10 But these are the ones which we know there are real trucks 11 out there parking overnight and engaging in extended 12 idling. And some of these other service centers 13 can also be secondary targets, some of the smaller ones 14 you're talking about. 15 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 16 We have Ken Selover, Joni Low, Kurt Miller. 17 MR. SELOVER: Good morning, Chairman Lloyd, 18 members of the Board, and staff. It's good to be here 19 this morning. 20 I'm Ken Selover, Lieutenant Colonel Ken Selover. 21 I represent the California Army National Guard. The Army 22 National Guard is the largest military force in 23 California. We have 16,000 citizen soldiers serving in 24 California and deployed around the world, in Afghanistan 25 and Iran -- I mean Iraq and also in other areas. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 59 1 We operate three major training facilities: Camp 2 Roberts, Camp San Luis Obispo, and Los Alamitos Joint 3 Forces Training Base. In addition, we train at the 4 national training center at Fort Irwin. 5 Our concern today -- you have two letters before 6 you. You have a letter from me addressing the regulation, 7 and also you have a letter from the Department of the Army 8 from Gerald Owens, Chief Western Regional Environmental 9 Office, U.S. Environment Center. And also my colleague, 10 Randy Freeman, representing the Navy is here today as 11 well. 12 Our concern with the regulation is specifically 13 regarding the way we operate our vehicles in California. 14 The Army National Guard, we train as we fight. And two 15 particular concerns for us is that in our training at 16 military installations, as I mentioned, in our convoy 17 operations and standby, we idle our vehicles because of 18 the obvious, that we train as we fight. And we don't turn 19 off the vehicles because for the obvious reasons, if we're 20 under attack, we may have to move the vehicles. So that 21 goes for convoy operation. 22 In addition, that goes for the Marines as well. 23 We operate convoy operations just for training in 24 California where we use the highways and the interstates 25 in California for training purposes. And we don't turn PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 60 1 off the vehicles. The vehicles continue to idle because 2 we train as we fight. The letters specifically state 3 that. 4 We request that an exemption be provided for 5 military operations in convoy tactical operation, an 6 exemption on military reservations, and also in convoy 7 operations so the vehicles can be operated in idle as we 8 train and as we would in actual national combat 9 conditions. So you have the two letters before you. 10 Also, I'd just like to mention that one of my 11 colleagues just mentioned that as far as a consultation 12 process, it is apparent that perhaps there wasn't enough 13 consultation with the Department of Defense. Again, I'm 14 only representing the California Army National Guard, and 15 we have a letter from the Department of the Army. But the 16 Air Force, the Coast Guard, the Navy, the Marines, and the 17 Army all have operations and operate vehicles in 18 California. And perhaps their voice needs to be heard 19 regarding the regulations. 20 Subject to your questions. Appreciate your 21 consideration. Thank you. 22 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 23 A question when you're talking about -- I can 24 understand some on the facilities. But when you're, say, 25 going up highway I-5 or whatever and then you pull over, I PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 61 1 don't see a compelling case why the vehicle should be 2 continued to idle. Clearly, you're not going to be under 3 attack. You're going to be -- obviously, there are going 4 to be emissions around there. The time it takes to turn 5 the engine off and turn it on, again, that seems to be 6 pretty trivial. What is the major concern about turning 7 the engines off? 8 MR. SELOVER: It's because we train as we fight. 9 And we leave the vehicles running. 10 The other issue is that in a large convoy -- I 11 mean, a practical issue is that in a large convoy of 15 to 12 20 vehicles, that one of the vehicles may not start. I 13 mean, that's not a significant concern. But, again, it's 14 training as we fight. And who drives the trucks are young 15 troops. And we train our troops as we fight, and we want 16 to get them conditioned to train exactly the way they 17 would operate in combat operations. 18 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Questions. 19 SUPERVISOR ROBERTS: I don't have a question. I 20 understand clearly what he's saying. And you want people 21 to respond. You want them to get used to a pattern when 22 they're operating. You don't want to have them unlearn 23 when you put them in battle conditions, get out of the 24 habits that they're in. Albeit from our perspective, 25 they're bad habits. For their purposes, it's no different PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 62 1 than ultimately turning off your cement mixer. 2 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: So you think that is a 3 significant -- in terms of the processes, it's a 4 significant deviation? 5 SUPERVISOR ROBERTS: If these guys are training 6 guys to put their lives on the line, I respect that. I 7 think that ought to override and there ought to be an 8 exemption. 9 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Questions. 10 Mr. Calhoun. 11 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: I guess I would concur 12 with that. My only concern, as someone who spent a lot of 13 time in the military -- and I've been out there a lot. 14 And I just question the necessity for having a blanket 15 authorization to idling vehicles for an extended period of 16 time, when in many cases you're not doing any tactical 17 training. Maybe it's within the Garrison area. 18 MR. SELOVER: Right. I would suggest that would 19 not be necessary as an exemption. I would just suggest 20 that when we're in tactical operations and training 21 conditions in California that the exemption be given. 22 And in most cases, this is not prolonged periods 23 of time, but it's beyond five minutes. And many of our 24 vehicles -- I have an inventory I could provide to staff, 25 but a significant number of our vehicles would be PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 63 1 affected. But it's clearly beyond five minute. Is it 2 three hours? No. It's probably anywhere from 15 minutes 3 to a half hour in a convoy operation, because we do have 4 necessary rest periods that we observe as we would in 5 convoy operations in combat. 6 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: If I might make a 7 suggestion. 8 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: I was going to make a 9 suggestion that we just tailor the language to fit the 10 exemption to which you refer. 11 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: I think it's 12 a perfect candidate for a 15-day change and gives us an 13 opportunity to look at the question of other forces that 14 aren't present and whether their operations are similar 15 and whether we would craft the exemption in the same 16 manner. 17 But I think we hear the concern of the Board that 18 tactical operations not be interfered with in any way, and 19 we try to write the language to accomplish that. 20 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: That's a good idea. 21 Any other questions? 22 Thank you very much. 23 MR. SELOVER: Thank you, Chairman Lloyd. I 24 sincerely appreciate the consideration and also the 25 professional work your staff has done on this regulation. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 64 1 It will go far to reduce emissions and provide healthy air 2 for California. 3 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Anything you can do to 4 facilitate interaction with the other arms of the force is 5 also helpful. Sometimes that's not that easy. Thank you 6 for your suggestion. 7 Joni Low, Kurt Miller, Joe Lyou. 8 MS. LOW: Chairman Lloyd and Board members, my 9 name is Joni Low, and I represent the San Diego Regional 10 Asthma Coalition. It's comprised of over 50 organizations 11 and individuals in San Diego County, including health care 12 providers, health plans, community-based organizations, 13 and businesses. And we are -- you've heard quite a bit of 14 testimony from industry, but I'm here to speak to the 15 issue of the impacts of diesel idling on health and 16 environment. 17 I'm talking in particular about a community in 18 San Diego which is mixed zoning: Residential, commercial 19 and industrial. So it creates an unhealthy mix of homes, 20 schools, and facilities that generate hazardous waste. 21 There are -- based on a number of meetings held in the 22 community, the number one concern which was identified by 23 the community were health hazards caused by diesel trucks 24 parking and idling in residential areas while travelling 25 to and from the port of San Diego. This was a particular PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 65 1 concern and there are other sources of diesel in this 2 community including buses, ships, and trains, and diesel 3 engines such as forklifts and generators. 4 It creates a noise, safety, and health problem 5 for the community through the emissions of these diesel 6 fumes. And they, as I think staff has identified, emit 7 high concentrations of particulate matter and represent 70 8 percent -- can represent 70 percent of the risk from air 9 toxics in this urban area. 10 Children, I think, for obvious reasons are more 11 susceptible to damage from environmental pollutants. We 12 are in the central area of San Diego where Barrio Logan is 13 located. They consistently experience the highest rate of 14 emergency department urgent care visits as well as asthma 15 related 911 calls. The estimated hospitalization rate for 16 the central area in San Diego is 140 per 1,000 population, 17 while the county rate is 78.4. And so we are concerned 18 because there is a huge cost of human exposure to outdoor 19 pollutants in general as identified by the healthy people 20 2000. 21 In the U.S., per year, that cost is anywhere from 22 40 to $50 billion. There is also an estimated 50,000 to 23 120,000 premature deaths associated with the exposure of 24 the air pollution. And so I applaud the efforts of the 25 staff and the Board to consider these regulations to place PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 66 1 restrictions on the diesel fueled vehicles. 2 One thing staff mentioned and was requested -- or 3 at least the question was raised by you, Chairman Lloyd, 4 was getting the information out to the community once the 5 regulations are approved by AOL. And staff mentioned 6 working with local government, cities, in particular, and 7 I certainly highly would recommend that. 8 In addition to that, the communities need to be 9 notified. In the community that I'm speaking of, 90 10 percent of the residents are from minority population, 11 particularly the Hispanic and African American 12 populations. They don't ordinarily work with local 13 government or they worked primarily with their 14 community-based organizations. So I hope when the message 15 is presented, it will also be presented in Spanish as well 16 as some of the other primary languages in some of our 17 urban areas. Thank you very much. 18 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 19 Questions? Comments? 20 Thank you. 21 Kurt Miller, Joe Lyou, Sean Edgar. 22 MR. MILLER: Hello. I'm an owner/operator of a 23 single Class A truck, what you're talking about. I live 24 for better than 300 days a year on the road travelling 25 throughout North America in my truck. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 67 1 As you can imagine, these regulations are of 2 great concern to me. My primary need for idling is air 3 conditioning. While there's been many proposed ideas of 4 dealing with this, they are still experimental. And I 5 haven't really seen any that satisfy my need for cool air. 6 Heating can be solved fairly simply. There's ways of 7 dealing with that without idling. Air conditioning is the 8 number one thing. 9 The ten hours sleeping rule for me is only part 10 of the time that I need to idle. The truck is my office. 11 It's my house. As you can imagine, it is where I spend a 12 good portion of my day. And to be limited to only being 13 able to run the air conditioning while I'm stopped for my 14 sleeping break isn't enough. It would simply -- if you're 15 shut down for more than an hour, the upholstery heats up 16 inside the truck, and no air conditioning system can 17 combat that. It just takes hours to cool it down once you 18 get the upholstery hot inside. 19 Am I to understand that we have until 2009 to 20 comply with whatever you come up with? 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Not in terms of the idling 22 requirement. In terms of the sleeper piece of that, but 23 not the short term. 24 MR. MILLER: Okay. And as I've said, the 25 required sleep time is only a small portion of that. We PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 68 1 spend lots of time at loading docks waiting to be loaded, 2 at which time -- and that's typically during the hottest 3 portions of the day. So we need to idle there to keep our 4 trucks cool while we're waiting to be loaded. 5 The truck stop air conditioning based systems 6 show great promise. But for those of us that are 7 non-smokers, they tend to get the smell of the cigarette 8 smoke into the system. I don't know what can be done 9 about that. But, for me, I can't use it because I can't 10 live with the cigarette smoke or the aftereffects of it. 11 So these are all things that need to be considered. 12 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: We encourage staff, and work 13 with staff. Have you participated in all the workshops? 14 MR. MILLER: I'm on the road most of the time. 15 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Well, questions from the 16 Board? 17 Thank you very much. I encourage you to work 18 with staff to provide you with the opportunities here and 19 also to look at some of the alternatives. Again, we saw 20 some attractive technologies. I understand they're not -- 21 the more we use them, the better off we'll be. 22 Joe Lyou, Sean Edgar, Shamar Parsad. 23 MR. LYOU: Chairman Lloyd, members of the Board. 24 Thank you. Joe Lyou, California Environmental Rights 25 Alliance here to speak in favor of the adoption of this PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 69 1 regulation on idling. 2 I'd like to just talk about three things: 3 Environmental justice issues, outreach and enforcement 4 needs, and provisional assistance to some of the industry 5 groups. 6 The environmental justice issues have been raised 7 here. I just want to make it perfectly clear that the 8 most impacted communities, in addition to the distribution 9 centers, which were mentioned several times, do include 10 the ports and rail yards and the airports who are moving a 11 lot of commerce and going to be moving much more commerce 12 in the future through communities who are very heavily 13 impacted by diesel emissions. 14 And we all know about the air toxic numbers and 15 risk numbers that have been generated here in California 16 with regard to diesel emissions. And this measure will 17 begin to address that. And I'm thankful that you're 18 considering the adoption of it for those reasons. 19 On an environmental justice level, I think it 20 would been have been nice if the Board and staff would 21 have conducted this meeting in an impacted community, not 22 only for this item, but also the items we'll be talking 23 about this afternoon on environmental justice. 24 Moving on to outreach and enforcement, we've 25 heard about the need for outreach and the need for PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 70 1 enforcement. Those are two things that are going to have 2 to go hand in hand, I think. I would really encourage you 3 to take advantage of your public relations staff, Mr. 4 Martin, and do some outreach to -- not only through the 5 trucking industry, but also through the public media, 6 newspaper, television, radio. 7 And you can get some good visuals about what 8 truck idling is all about and the need to address it and 9 the reason you've done it. I think people should be aware 10 more generally that you have decided to do this. And it's 11 really going to take a concerted effort, and I think you 12 need to direct staff to make that effort so the outreach 13 and enforcement go hand in glove. 14 I also want to say that providing assistance to 15 industry, to truckers on this matter is important. I'm 16 fully in favor of that. They're going to have to be able 17 to come up with ways to deal with the potential problems 18 that they have and unique ways and innovative programs for 19 reducing idling, be that staging areas and waiting rooms 20 or plug in electrical capacity and so forth. 21 I think that in passing this regulation, we'd 22 like to make sure that it is convenient and functional and 23 effective and operational for everyone involved. I do 24 think that there's no reason that community groups we 25 normally work with wouldn't be supportive of the idea of PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 71 1 helping industry to comply with this rule. Thank you. 2 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much, Joe. 3 Your comment about location of the meeting, I 4 know that for the item later this afternoon was originally 5 scheduled down in L.A. last month, but we had some changes 6 of plans there. Good point. 7 Sean Edgar, Shamar Parsad, Susan White. 8 MR. EDGAR: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Board 9 members. Sean Edgar on behalf of the Clean Fleets 10 Coalition. 11 I'm suggesting a modification H to be added to 12 your list, which would be H for happy this morning, on 13 behalf of the refuse recyclers and haulers out there. 14 We would like to support this regulation, if 15 amended, to be consistent with the landmark school bus 16 idling regulation that was previously approved by this 17 same Board. The specific language is mentioned in our 18 July 22nd letter from the Clean Fleets Coalition. And 19 that language discusses -- specifically in the exemption 20 category it discusses -- the language is bold, but I 21 repeat it in my letter, but I'll read it to you briefly. 22 And one of the exemptions in the school bus 23 idling provision is that "the idling is necessary to 24 accomplish work for which the vehicle was designed, other 25 than transporting passengers. For example, collection of PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 72 1 solid waste or recyclable material by an entity authorized 2 by contract, license, or permit, by a school, or local 3 government." 4 We feel that a lot of discussion went into that 5 in 2002. We feel it would be appropriate for consistency 6 for that same language to be adopted into this regulation. 7 No sense in reinventing the wheel. And we believe that 8 that same language and logic should apply to this 9 regulation. 10 We also have the retrofit controls kicking in 11 just two days ago. The refuse rule that was heard in this 12 chamber on September 25th last year is now effective. And 13 we should see those lower emission technologies being 14 rolled out over the next five years as directed by your 15 Board. 16 I'll just note somewhat tongue and cheek, but not 17 necessarily tongue and cheek, that it was interesting that 18 we found $38 million in grant money for the guy with the 19 cooling fans, but we have not had one penny approved for 20 the refuse community. 21 So with that, I would appreciate your indulgence 22 to add the language that already exists in regulation on 23 the school bus idling regulation, and be happy the answer 24 any questions you may have. 25 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Mr. Chairman. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 73 1 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Can we hear from staff on 2 that? Get staff's reaction. 3 STATIONARY SOURCE DIVISION CHIEF VENTURINI: 4 Mr. Chairman, I think that was our intent. And we'd be 5 happy to work with him. And I don't think there's a 6 problem there. 7 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: So it is happy. 8 MR. EDGAR: H is for happy. And thank you, 9 again, for rolling out your recycling cart this week. 10 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Shamar Parsad, Susan White, 11 Dave Modisette. 12 MS. WHITE: Good morning. My name is Susan 13 White. I'm the asthma educator liaison for the Solano 14 Asthma Coalition. We're one of the twelve communities to 15 fight asthma projects in the state funded by the 16 California Endowment. With me this morning is Shamar 17 Parsad, and she's the coordinator of the Vallejo Asthma 18 Network that is the direct intervention community in our 19 county. 20 Solano County is the fastest growing county in 21 California with a population of 411,072 living in a mainly 22 urban area, but it also covers a rural area. Solano 23 County has two major highways, 80 and 680, that run right 24 through it. We have two weigh stations. 25 In May 2001, the California Health Interview PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 74 1 Survey at UCLA concluded that Solano County had the 2 highest prevalence rate for asthma of all the 58 3 California counties. According to the CHIS report, 4 Vallejo has the highest hospitalization rate for children. 5 Environmental triggers, including commercial transport, 6 industrial and agricultural air pollution are important 7 factors that have an impact on the prevalence and severity 8 of asthma. Also, the American Lung Association graded air 9 quality in Solano County an F for the years 1996 through 10 2001, and indeed for 2002 and 2003. 11 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: We have a copy of your 12 written statement. If you're going to read that through 13 here, we can read just as well. But if you'd like to 14 highlight, because clearly we're delighted you're 15 supporting this. And, of course, we want to address the 16 very issues that you raise. But if there's some specific 17 points you wanted to point out. 18 MS. WHITE: According to the American Lung 19 Association state of the art report, the air report, the 20 EPA projected a long list of benefits to human health 21 expected each year from cleaning up heavy equipment, 22 diesel, and fuel. There are 9600 fewer premature deaths, 23 16,000 fewer non-fatal heart attacks, 5700 fewer cases of 24 chronic bronchitis, and 8200 fewer hospital admissions. 25 As an indicator of how much Solano County is PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 75 1 impacted by diesel, on July 13th I spoke with the Cordelia 2 truck inspection station, and they advised on July 12th a 3 total of 4,791 trucks passed through the eastbound station 4 and 9,386 trucks passed through the westbound station, 5 totaling 14,177 trucks just for the one day. And they 6 claimed there was no idling as the trucks would drive 7 straight through, and they only inspected one at a time. 8 We did a personal observation on the westbound 9 station on July 16th, and all three inspection sheds were 10 full, and there were five trucks queued up in line, 11 waiting. So, clearly, a policy needs to be established 12 regarding idling. 13 Again, on behalf of the Solano Asthma Coalition, 14 we greatly appreciate these hearings, and we thank you for 15 the opportunity to be heard today. 16 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. And 17 this is directly addressing the concerns that you have. 18 So we're very happy you're supporting the Board's 19 regulation. 20 Dave Modisette, Diane Bailey, Jane Williams. 21 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 22 presented as follows.) 23 MR. MODISETTE: Thank you, Chairman Lloyd, 24 members of the Board. Dave Modisette with the California 25 Electric Transportation Coalition. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 76 1 And I first want to thank staff for answering our 2 many, many questions and helping us with the technical 3 analysis we've done of this. In particular, Mike 4 Tollstrup and John Kato and John Gruszecki spent many 5 hours with us on the technical analysis. 6 Our interest, of course, is in the truck stop 7 electrification. I guess the real purpose of my testimony 8 is to ask you to look at this using all the tools you have 9 available. In other words, don't just look at this as a 10 regulation separate from some of the other tools you have 11 available. The regulation has some shortcomings which can 12 be overcome by other tools at your disposal, in particular 13 incentive tools. 14 So I actually think if you took both the 15 regulation and the incentive tools you had available and 16 considered them together that you could overcome some of 17 the shortcomings of the regulation and you could actually 18 produce greater emission reductions than this ATCM is 19 going to provide. We've actually tried to model that on a 20 couple of the slides. 21 This is a slide that shows -- 22 --o0o-- 23 MR. MODISETTE: -- the sleeper cab PM emissions 24 under four scenarios. The first bar chart is simply 25 the -- PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 77 1 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Are these the sleeper cabs we 2 considering today or the sleeper cabs we're considering in 3 2009? 4 MR. MODISETTE: This is the sleeper cab in 2009. 5 However, you'll see that one of the things that we're 6 advocating for is using incentives to get early 7 introduction of truck stop electrification in 2007. 8 So, again, I think the approach we're advocating 9 for is to use a combination of incentives and the 10 regulation together. And if you do that, you'll actually 11 be able to get substantially greater emission reductions 12 than this ATCM alone would have provided. 13 The first bar is simply the baseline emission 14 reductions of the sleeper cabs. 15 The second bar is emissions in 2007 with early 16 introduction of truck stop electrification. Here, we 17 picked 5,000 spaces. ARB thinks there's 20,000 spaces 18 available. So if you were to electrify these 5,000 spaces 19 by 2007, you can see the additional reductions that you 20 would get above and beyond this ATCM. It's 112 tons per 21 year of PM reductions. 22 And the third bar is the actual emission 23 reductions from this ATCM as proposed in 2009. 24 And then the last bar would be additional 25 emissions reductions with the ATCM and electrification of PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 78 1 11,000 spaces of truck stop electrification. I guess 2 that's one of the points we want to make here is that 3 truck stop electrification provides benefits over and 4 above what the ATCM is going to do. So how do you capture 5 that? And the regulation alone cannot capture that. The 6 way to capture that is with incentives both early and 7 later to try to provide incentives for truck stop 8 electrification. 9 --o0o-- 10 MR. MODISETTE: The next slide is simply the same 11 bar charts but using NOx and hydrocarbons emissions, 12 again, baseline emissions. You can see that early 13 introduction of truck stop electrification gets you an 14 additional 7,200 tons per year of emission reductions over 15 the ATCM. 16 The third bar, again, is what the ATCM provides. 17 And then the last bar is additional 18 electrification of 11,000 spaces by 2010. You can see the 19 benefits are there are an additional 2,200 per year 20 reduction in NOx and hydrocarbon emissions. 21 --o0o-- 22 MR. MODISETTE: The next two slides I'm only 23 going to touch upon briefly because it summarizes the 24 early introduction scenario where we're actually placing 25 the main engine idling. Again, this is 5,000 electrified PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 79 1 spaces, which we believe is very, very doable by 2007. 2 Summarizes emission reductions. It also displaces 36 3 million gallons of diesel fuel and is extremely cost 4 effective if Moyer funds were to be used at $600 per ton 5 of NOx reductions. 6 --o0o-- 7 MR. MODISETTE: This is the 2010 scenario with 8 additional electrified spaces. And now we're displacing 9 the APU emissions which are much less than the main engine 10 emissions. You can see it's still extremely cost 11 effective with $3,600 per year tons of NOx. 12 --o0o-- 13 MR. MODISETTE: And my last slide are simply 14 recommendations. One is that, you know, we do need some 15 improvements to the Moyer program if you want to use 16 incentives here. Probably the most important one is that 17 we do need to clarify, hopefully as soon as possible, that 18 truck stop electrification and even electric standby for 19 truck refrigeration units are not considered auxiliary 20 power units under the Moyer regulation and are therefore 21 not subject to the $3,000 per unit cab upon APUs. 22 Secondly, we believe there should be some 23 separate guidelines and chapter for truck stop 24 electrification in the upcoming revisions of the Moyer 25 guidelines. We'd like to see the guidelines accelerated PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 80 1 to December of this year, rather than waiting until next 2 year. 3 We're not proposing to change the cost 4 effectiveness cap at all. We think that should remain. 5 These technologies are extremely cost effective. 6 Lastly, we think it might be good to set aside 7 some funds for truck stop electrification and maybe 8 electric truck refrigeration units. 9 Lastly, we think there might be a possibility 10 here to consider other types of incentives, such as using 11 truck stop electrification maybe as a pilot for emission 12 reduction credits. We could also provide other incentives 13 based on other types of reductions, such as CO2 14 reductions, which are substantial in terms of 15 electrification. 16 And, lastly, we think the West Coast Governor's 17 initiative might be a good forum to talk about some of 18 these incentives that are needed. 19 With that, thank you very much. I'll answer any 20 questions as needed. 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 22 Professor Friedman, Ms. D'Adamo. 23 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: I think these 24 suggestions are excellent. I just wonder if the staff has 25 already considered some of them or they will be included PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 81 1 in the deferred consideration. I think it's important to 2 look at this as a whole piece to get the maximum 3 reductions. 4 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: We have looked 5 at the issue of electrification. And I think when we come 6 back to you with standards, it won't be a mandatory 7 electrification requirement, because there is a limit on 8 infrastructure. What Mr. Modisette is suggesting are ways 9 of overcoming those limitations with the use of subsidy 10 funds. 11 In the Governor's budget -- the budget before the 12 Legislature at the moment, there is an augmentation of 13 Carl Moyer funding of 68 million per year, and these 14 projects are very competitive for those funds and would 15 receive favorable review. 16 Mr. Cackette and I were just chatting about the 17 total number of dollars needed to accomplish the full 18 conversion of existing truck stops in California, and it's 19 on the order of 165 million. So you can see there will be 20 competition for the pool of funds that are available. It 21 is a piece of the West Coast Governor's initiative, and 22 we're looking at ways collectively to place these types of 23 facilities all the way up Interstate 5 all the way up into 24 Canada. 25 With respect to the statewide ERC program, that's PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 82 1 less attractive to staff, because if you recycle emission 2 reductions back into permitting, you don't accomplish that 3 incremental benefit that Mr. Modisette was suggesting we 4 go after. You would lose some of it back into stationary 5 source emissions. But it is on the table, and we 6 certainly are going to look at ways of moving forward. 7 I wasn't aware of these APU caps. We were 8 chatting about that, too, and how they tie into the debate 9 that's going on about eligibility criteria for the Carl 10 Moyer funding and the status of our existing guidelines. 11 But all of that is in the mix, and we'll note those 12 connections and see what we need to do to adjust those 13 pieces as well. 14 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Just a quick follow up before 15 Ms. D'Adamo. 16 On one of the recommendations, it was to 17 accelerate the guidelines, which seems like a good idea. 18 What's the current scheduled date? 19 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Well, I don't 20 know what the current scheduled date is, but a lot depends 21 on what happens at the end of session and whether the 22 statutes underlying the guidelines are changed themselves, 23 because there are a lot of issues on the table about 24 whether the program should change from NOx only to NOx 25 plus PM, whether the environmental justice set aside PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 83 1 should be retained, whether agricultural sources should 2 have access to the funds not withstanding regulatory 3 mandates, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. So there is a 4 very good chance of statutory changes in the final month 5 of session, and we would need our guidelines to reflect 6 the current -- 7 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: So what's the answer to the 8 question? 9 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: I don't know, 10 because I don't know how many changes there will be -- 11 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: When's it currently 12 scheduled? There must be a date out there that somebody 13 is aware of. 14 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Typically, we 15 review them every spring. 16 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Okay. 17 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: So that would be 18 a very fast acceleration, and it would come down to how 19 many statutory changes and how much staff time we needed. 20 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I'm not disputing what you 21 say. It could be very complicated. I understand. 22 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: The other thing 23 we chatted about is there is a holdback in Carl Moyer 24 funds for projects of statewide significance. And we were 25 discussing whether there's a statutory holdback or a PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 84 1 guideline holdback and how that might affect, too, the 2 competitiveness of these projects as compared to things of 3 high local significant, because this would have a large 4 dividends view from a statewide perspective. 5 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 6 Ms. D'Adamo. 7 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Actually, I was going to 8 encourage this discussion that we just had. But one 9 remaining question on the cap, how significant of a 10 problem is that right now, say, for example, if someone 11 were to apply for Carl Moyer funding? 12 MR. MODISETTE: I think it's a very significant 13 problem. I actually know of projects which have been 14 discouraged from applying because of that cap. 15 Part of it is simply electrification 16 infrastructure is quite different than APUs. 17 Electrification infrastructure serves many trucks. So if 18 you have an APU cap or a per truck cap, how does that 19 apply to infrastructure? So there's a lot of uncertainty. 20 There are actually project proponents which I 21 think have been dissuaded from applying for those funds 22 because of the cap. We have had some very encouraging 23 conversations, you know, with some of the lower level 24 staff recently that I think have given us this idea that 25 perhaps just an interpretation of the Moyer guidelines PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 85 1 that truck stop electrification is not an auxiliary power 2 unit is really the way to go. And I think that makes a 3 lot of sense. 4 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: The other thing was just 5 wondering whether or not these changes would be something 6 that we would simply deal with, or are you engaged in 7 discussions that are going on right now before the 8 Legislature? Would you have to have changes implemented 9 at that level? 10 MR. MODISETTE: No. I don't think you need 11 legislative changes for that at all. I think it's 12 something that's totally within the control of the Board 13 and the staff. 14 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Thank you. 15 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: When you talk about 16 discussion with lower level staff, what do you mean by 17 "lower level"? Are you talking about people not here? 18 MR. MODISETTE: With Jack Kitowski and his staff. 19 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Jack isn't such lower. 20 MR. MODISETTE: I guess in particular. This 21 issue has kind of been bubbling along at the kind of Moyer 22 staff -- 23 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: No, that's good. 24 MR. MODISETTE: It hasn't come to the attention 25 of the Executive Officer, and I actually apologize for it. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 86 1 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: But Jack is a good person. 2 Thank you very much. 3 CHIEF DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER CACKETTE: If I 4 could, I just want to make one comment about the caps so 5 you don't get the wrong idea here. I think the reason 6 some of these caps have been put in place are because 7 there are other projects that have other returns to the 8 operator, like savings in fuel. And in some cases, we 9 just didn't think it's necessary to put that much money 10 out towards the initial capital investment because there's 11 payback coming to the operator. And we could use the 12 money more efficiently by having these caps. The question 13 is whether it applies to these other technologies that -- 14 it's not put out there for any arbitrary reason just to 15 say we don't want to spend more than X dollars on this 16 unit. 17 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 18 MR. MODISETTE: Thank you. 19 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Diane Bailey, Jane Williams, 20 Steve Wallauch. 21 MS. BAILEY: Good morning, Chairman Lloyd, 22 members of the Board, and staff. My name is Diane Bailey, 23 and I'm a scientist with the Natural Resources Defense 24 Council. 25 I'm here today in strong support of the rule. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 87 1 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Do you want to 2 lower that mic a little bit. Make it easier for you. 3 Thank you. 4 MS. BAILEY: This rule is extremely important, 5 not only because of the tremendous adverse health impacts 6 associated with diesel and the tons of pollution that can 7 be avoided, but also because of the millions of gallons of 8 fuel that can be saved. And as you know from our written 9 comments that we're signed on to, we are in support of 10 this rule. However, I did want to outline a few concerns 11 today, including sleeper cabs, queuing, and enforcement. 12 We're troubled by the last minute change in the 13 sleeper cab requirement to the rule, the 2009 deadline. 14 And I'm hoping that the Board can reconsider dropping this 15 deadline today. I think this deadline is very important. 16 While sleeper cabs are only a small portion of 17 California's truck fleet, about 16 percent, they account 18 for about half of the emissions incorporated in this rule. 19 That's about 50 percent of total PM and about 70 percent 20 of NOx. So this is a huge portion of the rule that's 21 being deferred to next year. So we hope that the 2009 22 deadline for sleeper cabs can be included as a regulatory 23 backstop encouraging the development next year of the APS 24 requirements. 25 Queuing is also a very large concern due to the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 88 1 large amount of idling emissions associated with these 2 lines of trucks. Truck drivers serve in California's 3 three large ports report to us that they idle for about an 4 hour at each pick up. And this is responsible -- when you 5 think about the 40 to 50,000 trucks serving the large 6 ports each day, this is responsible for 30 to 40 tons of 7 PM and roughly 2,000 tons of NOx per year. And these are 8 emissions that could be avoided if the lines or the queues 9 at the ports were controlled. 10 This idling rule should not contain an exemption 11 for queuing. Instead, the agency should work together 12 with the ports to come up with a solution to avoid the 13 queuing at ports, which still continues despite the 14 Lowenthal bill. One approach that would successfully 15 eliminate these queues or the deli take a number approach 16 similar to what you do when you visit your local deli 17 counter. This would allow drivers to pull right up to a 18 gate, take a number, go through and park their rig, wait 19 in a designated area until their paperwork is processed 20 and their cargo is ready. 21 While this type of approach is prescriptive, it's 22 clearly a better alternative to the constant inching 23 forward of long lines that we see today. And the deli 24 system would allow drivers to save fuel, relax, and cut 25 pollution at the same time. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 89 1 Enforcement is another large concern that we 2 have. We are very pleased to see that inclusion of 3 special restrictions on idling in residential areas in 4 this rule. However, the success of those restrictions are 5 contingent upon the complete enforcement of this rule. 6 And I can't emphasize that enough. And as you've heard 7 from other people speaking today, the idling within 8 residential areas is really a huge problem throughout 9 California. 10 Truck drivers should also be made aware of the 11 elevated health risk they face during idling, and we hope 12 that ARB can launch a large outreach campaign not only to 13 the truck drivers, but also to law enforcement as well. 14 Finally, we are pleased to see this rule move 15 forward quickly, and we appreciate all the hard work that 16 staff has put into this rule. We would like to see 17 similar rules to limit idling from other diesel sources 18 such as off road locomotives and marine vessels. We hope 19 these rules will be under development in a similar time 20 frame as the APS rule in 2005. 21 And, again, I'd like to request that the 2009 22 requirement to end sleeper berth idling be included as a 23 regulatory backstop today. And, again, that would ensure 24 the timely development of the APS rule. Thank you. 25 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 90 1 Any questions, comments from staff? 2 Professor Friedman. 3 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Has the staff 4 considered the deli approach in dealing with queuing? 5 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Take a number. 6 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: I didn't 7 understand the question. The deli approach? 8 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: I heard it deli 9 approach, take a number, and then you do the paperwork. 10 You shut your engine down. And instead of everybody 11 idling in a long line, they go in -- 12 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: Don't you go to delis? 13 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: I thought that's 14 what I heard, but I do have a hearing impairment. I know 15 it's getting close the deli time for me anyway. 16 PROJECT ASSESSMENT BRANCH CHIEF TOLLSTRUP: As 17 far as the issue of queuing, staff did look at that in the 18 process and try to evaluate what measures we could take to 19 reduce that. Because of the wide range of queuing 20 activities, we couldn't define a process. We don't think 21 the deli approach works in every instance. As far as 22 ports go, there are some requirements in state law for the 23 ports under AB 2650 that does have a similar approach. 24 And it may work in that circumstance, but a lot of the 25 issues we try to deal with under our reg -- one size won't PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 91 1 fit all. 2 DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER SCHEIBLE: And basically 3 in this effort we're looking at, control of the truck is 4 under the control of the operator. And designing a reg 5 where we could -- once educating operators it could be 6 implemented. And things like queuing are beyond the 7 control of the operator. It possibly is a substantial 8 source of excess emissions at certain locations. And if 9 we need to look at that, we need to go and look at the 10 facility level and deal with the facility changing its 11 operations so that the truck operator no longer needs to 12 creep forward at some undefined period of time. 13 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: That would at least 14 take cooperation from the facility operators and it may 15 even ultimately be up to them. I mean, ports and other 16 places, I guess, have their own jurisdictional authority. 17 DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER SCHEIBLE: That's 18 correct. It would take a solution instituted by the 19 facility. 20 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: But it's worth 21 exploring. 22 DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER SCHEIBLE: We'll be 23 happy to take a look at that. I don't know how it would 24 come back. It might be a facility regulation or something 25 we included in an ATCM for cargo handling or something PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 92 1 like that. 2 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 3 Supervisor DeSaulnier. 4 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: Just along those lines, 5 when Staci made her comments from CTA, she referenced they 6 are having some discussions. Is that with us or in the 7 Legislature about something about queuing? 8 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: They were the 9 sponsors of the legislation, the Lowenthal legislation, 10 that was queuing outside the gates of the ports. And then 11 the queuing is mostly moved inside the gates. And there 12 was a back story to it all that had to do with labor 13 negotiations and time issues and -- 14 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: I think it's important at 15 least that we are involved in discussions, either in that 16 venue or here. And if when we did the bus rule, you 17 remember I made some comments because that was right in 18 the period of time of the work stoppage for the 19 longshoremen. And for the queues, at least in my 20 experience, it sounds like Joe has some experience in 21 Southern California, but in Oakland it was outrageous in 22 that window during that time. But it still is bad. 23 It strikes me as being an opportunity in terms of 24 management where we can help and maybe be a convener of 25 those discussions, and certainly NRDC and the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 93 1 environmental community should be part of that. So maybe 2 as just direction to staff that you could convene or be 3 part of some of those discussions, if you're not, and work 4 specifically -- what I'm interested in is we start with 5 the ports because they're so big and they're public 6 agencies and we can work specifically with sister public 7 agencies. 8 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: We've just 9 initiated a major process for port ATCMs for all the 10 categories there involving the South Coast district, the 11 Bay Area district, and the ports themselves and mostly 12 under the umbrella of cargo handling and figuring out what 13 to do with the proliferation of transportation sources 14 congregating at ports and moving in and out. This issue 15 of queuing will come up in this discussion, as will 16 electrification, operational changes, switching out engine 17 types and fuel types and all of that. 18 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: Especially at the port of 19 Oakland and I assume in the Southern California points, it 20 is an EJ issue as well. 21 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Very much so. 22 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: On the other comment by 23 NRDC in terms of 2009 as a backstop, could you comment on 24 that? 25 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: That was the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 94 1 original staff proposal. And it caused more alarm than we 2 intended. We always expected -- planned for a follow-up 3 regulation in 2005 that would articulate in more detail it 4 was not a flat prohibition, but there would be an 5 opportunity to idle with an ultra-clean engine. What we 6 found was a number of stakeholder were uncomfortable 7 letting that go on the books until they saw the rest of 8 the regulation. So we've brought all of the sleeper cab 9 issues into one rule making with the exception of keeping 10 them out of residential areas in the meantime. 11 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: If I understood the 12 request, it may be just more of a fear. Because the 13 original staff report, as you said, the response was 14 concerning it wasn't possible to do from the operators. 15 So if you have this as a backstop -- and maybe there is a 16 middle way, a hybrid, that we believe we actually can 17 accomplish these things. 18 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: We thought it 19 would be reassuring to the folks who had more than fears. 20 They were flat out opposed to us having that prohibition 21 on the books today, that it would be reassuring to them to 22 understand what our intentions were with respect to the 23 follow-up regulation. But that was not enough for them to 24 remove their opposition. So we would have had a very 25 stark, far more competitive hearing today had you heard PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 95 1 from the people and staff not amended its posture on how 2 to conduct the sleeper cab rule making. 3 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I think the issue there, 4 Supervisor, was one of process. 5 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: I understand. 6 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Setting that date without any 7 knowledge on the -- 8 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: The only thing I'm 9 concerned about is maybe a perception thing. We let the 10 hearing go long, but by trying to reassure them, you may 11 let it go further. And we'll have less success. 12 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Absolutely not. 13 Staff is going to look at whether 2009 can be accelerated 14 as well during this intervening year. We are not 15 intending to move away from the '09 date, but just to 16 clarify what kind of idling operations will be allowed at 17 this time. 18 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: Thank you. 19 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Clearly, this is a critical 20 part of our diesel emission reduction plan. 21 Thank you. 22 Jane Williams, and then Steve Wallauch and 23 Patricia Monahan. 24 MS. WILLIAMS: Good morning, Chairman Lloyd. 25 Jane Williams, California Communities Against Toxics. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 96 1 The Supervisor brought up most of the issues I 2 was going to bring up. So I just want to say I'm very 3 pleased with the posture the Board is taking on this, 4 because to say we're going to somehow defer 18,000 tons of 5 reductions, and many of these ton reductions would be in 6 communities I represent at the ports and other 7 environmental justice communities, is very alarming to us. 8 To hear the staff and the Board maintain their commitment 9 to these reductions at the earliest possible opportunity 10 is what is important to us, because we all know that these 11 emissions are having a dramatic impact on public health in 12 these communities. 13 So with that, I just want to cosign the comments 14 of my colleague Diane Bailey from NRDC, who has been 15 watching this rule very closely. And I just want to say 16 that there's opportunities when we think out of the box 17 about how we can get these emission reductions in this 18 program. 19 And as you know, there's other ongoing 20 conversations with Moyer. We have a lot of 21 competitiveness for Moyer funding, but there is a way to 22 focus Moyer funding in these highly-impacted communities. 23 But I would challenge us all not to say that because we 24 are a statewide rule-making body that we can't get 25 flexible in both funding and regulatory authority on the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 97 1 problem and reducing the problem in the most highly 2 impacted communities. 3 Thank you. 4 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much, Jane. 5 Again, it's nice when we have both CTA and environmental 6 groups both supporting a regulation. 7 MS. WILLIAMS: It's amazing. 8 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: It's good. 9 MR. WALLAUCH: Good morning. Steve Wallauch on 10 behalf of Greyhound Lines. 11 First, I'd like to extend our appreciation to 12 staff in working on this regulation and addressing 13 concerns we've expressed for the past six, seven months. 14 Greyhound is not opposed to idling regulations. 15 In fact, they kind of already internally impose idling 16 restrictions on their fleet because it is good for the 17 customers. It's also good for their business as well. 18 They save quite a bit of money in turning off the vehicles 19 as much as possible. 20 There are two areas of concerns we'd like to see 21 addressed. One I think was addressed from staff's 22 comments, and I think that was a clarification to the bus 23 definition to make sure it covers the vehicles operated by 24 Greyhound. 25 The other is the intent on operating wheelchair PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 98 1 lifts. And there is language in the regulations regarding 2 the operation of the lifts. Primarily, I think that was 3 intended for construction-type vehicles. It could be 4 interpreted to also mean wheelchair lifts, because 5 wheelchair lifts operating on these larger buses can take 6 anywhere from five to ten minutes to load and unload 7 passengers, unlike urban transit buses which can be on and 8 off pretty quickly. 9 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I see the staff nodding 10 that's appropriate. 11 MR. WALLAUCH: I think we've -- thanks for your 12 work. 13 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 14 Patricia Monahan, Mike Tunnel, and Margaret 15 Gordon. 16 MS. MONAHAN: Good morning, Chairman Lloyd, 17 members of the Board. My name is Patricia Monahan. I'm a 18 senior analyst with the Union of Concerned Scientists. I 19 want to be brief here. This is actually the happiest 20 Board meeting on a diesel issue I have ever seen, and I 21 give kudos to the ARB staff for developing such a widely 22 accepted regulation. 23 I'd like to say first off, I want to reiterate 24 the comments that Joe Lyou and Diane Bailey had made. And 25 I won't burden you with repeating them. But the only PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 99 1 issue I really want to highlight of is that of compliance 2 monitoring. I think we all recognize this is going to be 3 a very difficult regulation to monitor and to assure 4 compliance. So I have a suggestion which -- well, two 5 suggestions. 6 First, I would like to see regulatory language 7 that holds the Board perhaps just to an annual reporting 8 of how much compliance -- you know, some kind of 9 compliance evaluation. And, second, to suggest that I 10 think some of the interest in the chip reflash oversight 11 committee are similar. So you could use that committee to 12 discuss and to evaluate some of the compliance issues. 13 With that, I'll end my remarks just to say I 14 strongly support this regulation. 15 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Seems like good suggestions. 16 STATIONARY SOURCE DIVISION CHIEF VENTURINI: We'd 17 be happy to return with an annual report. You had a 18 similar request when we did the school bus measure. We'll 19 be bringing that to you, I believe, in October. We'd be 20 happy to give you a report. 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thanks. 22 Hi, Mike. Margaret Gordon and then Diane Estrin. 23 MR. TUNNELL: Good morning, Chairman Lloyd and 24 members of the Board. My name is Mike Tunnel. I'm with 25 the American Trucking Association. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 100 1 ATA supports the elimination of unnecessary 2 idling. And I've talked to numerous companies over the 3 last several months and generally no way envision a 4 problem with the five-minute idle limit, provided 5 appropriate exemptions were provided. And I think your 6 high level staff did a good job of flushing out what -- 7 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: High level staff. 8 MR. TUNNELL: What additional -- what exemptions 9 should be provided. And it sounds like with the inclusion 10 of the happy exemption and others that were mentioned 11 today, we're headed in the right direction. 12 So with that and the suggested modifications that 13 staff has proposed, we support the proposed regulation. 14 The only other thing, to be very brief, I just 15 want to mention some of our other activities that our 16 trucking companies are doing, and that involves work with 17 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Smart Way 18 Program. Through that program, they're looking at idle 19 reduction programs as a large component of the Smart Way 20 Program. And with that involving a whole variety of ways 21 of reducing idling, they're looking at the issue quite a 22 bit. 23 In addition, some of our companies are working 24 with the U.S. Department of Energy and other states 25 through grant programs looking at the evaluation and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 101 1 deployment of idle reduction technologies. 2 So what I want to make sure is that as this 3 process moves along down the road, these technologies that 4 are being invested in today will not be -- will need to be 5 considered in the process. Because I would hate to see 6 California have a different approach than other states. 7 And since we're in cross country operations, it could 8 present some difficulties in that realm. So I just want 9 to -- hope we can get EPA and everybody else involved in 10 trying to come up with a solution. 11 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Clearly, we want very much to 12 work with EPA, and we take your comments seriously. In 13 return, again, we trust that with your concern for 14 emissions, you're not working to delay the 2007, 2010 15 standards. Because we want to work in unison, but we 16 don't want to delay. 17 MR. TUNNELL: We want to make sure people are 18 buying trucks in 2007. 19 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 20 Questions? 21 Thanks. 22 Margaret Gordon and Diane Estrin. 23 MS. GORDON: Good morning. My name is Margaret 24 Gordon. I'm a community member of the West Oakland 25 neighborhood. And I just want to tell you my story about PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 102 1 diesel. 2 I live on the thoroughfare of 7th Street and 3 Willow, right down the street where there's lots of 4 trucks. We're surrounded by three freeways, 580, 980, 5 880. I also have the post office distribution center 6 across the street from where I live at. I also have the 7 Port of Oakland further down the road from where I live. 8 I'm inundated by trucks 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 52 9 days a week. I'm just inundated with trucks from my 10 community. 11 This past Sunday, I'm in my house. Trucker 12 parked up the street, came back. He left and came back 13 and idled to start his truck. He idled the truck so long 14 the fuels came through the bedroom window, and I'm on the 15 second floor. And I had an asthma attack. Okay. 16 So I'm just saying it's not also about the port 17 outdoor air quality from diesels. It's also about the 18 indoor air quality that's affecting people. 19 Just because I have an education around asthma, I 20 was able to shut the window, turn the air purifier on, use 21 my inhaler not to be able to have to go to the hospital. 22 But how many other people like that are having that 23 experience, who don't have the education, who are not part 24 of an environmental justice process to understand what 25 these trucks are doing to the community. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 103 1 I understand from Wilma Chan's office that asthma 2 amongst children have gone up 160 percent. I have three 3 children -- three grandchildren who have asthma. I have 4 asthma. I have two sons who have allergies real bad. 5 I'm saying that within our communities, they are 6 overburdened with heavy truck traffic, industry. We are 7 not getting the help and support that we need and in 8 working to reduce the diesel. So it's a different story 9 when industry has for themselves technology, why is the 10 technology not being used now? 11 West Oakland doesn't even have a truck stop. But 12 we have over from 12- to 14,000 trucks coming through that 13 community every day. We have people who are independent 14 truckers who bring their cabs home, live in the community. 15 They don't speak English. And I think there should be 16 much more supportive services given to the communities 17 like West Oakland and for the communities like West 18 Oakland throughout the whole state. And I'd like to leave 19 one of my reports that we did about reducing diesel. 20 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 21 Supervisor DeSaulnier, did you have any comments? 22 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: I think the comments are 23 just a reality of what happens in West Oakland and the 24 industrial areas of any metropolitan region. But for the 25 Bay Areas, that's what happens. And I'm obviously, as my PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 104 1 colleagues know, more than sympathetic. 2 When we went to Richmond, we talked about this. 3 So, clearly, I think when we get to the end and giving 4 direction and approving a staff's report, I think you're 5 going to have some comments, I know you will from me, that 6 we have to continue to pursue that. I know because of 7 your commitment, Mr. Chairman, former Board Member Matt's 8 commitment -- and we'll talk about this later in the 9 agenda -- but we can't -- the perception is really 10 important and the reality is important that we have to 11 continue to pursue the kind of issues that the speaker was 12 talking about. 13 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 14 Diane Estrin. 15 MS. ESTRIN: Good morning. 16 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Oh, sorry. Professor 17 Friedman. 18 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Excuse me. I'm 19 sorry. I just want wanted to, before we leave this, I'd 20 like to hear maybe Ms. Witherspoon, somebody, tell me 21 exactly how this rule, this proposal, would affect and 22 hopefully change what this woman experienced. You know, 23 we aren't told how long this fellow left his truck idling 24 in front of her home, but -- 25 MS. GORDON: It was over five minutes. It was PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 105 1 over five minute. It was an asthma attack. 2 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Are we getting at 3 this issue? I mean, this is a real live problem. 4 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: It's a huge 5 issue. And the entire diesel risk reduction program is 6 aimed at all aspects of it. Everything from the new 7 engine standards, to cleaner diesel fuels, to rebuilding 8 vehicles on the road, to retrofitting them with traps, to 9 stopping unnecessary idling. This is a small piece of the 10 puzzle, and it will get at trucks that park on her street 11 and idle. It won't get at the trucks going through. 12 That's what our motor vehicle standards are aimed at and 13 our retrofit program is aimed at, passing through. And 14 the queuing of vehicles, which we've talked about a lot, 15 is probably the thorniest problem we've got out there. 16 When they congregate, the risk just magnifies. 17 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: But it would be a 18 rule that hopefully is enforceable. So maybe when would 19 this go into effect? Six months? 20 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Roughly six 21 months from now. 22 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: When the Office of 23 Administrative Law approves it. 24 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: That's correct. 25 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: If I understand PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 106 1 correctly, at that time, unfortunately not sooner, I'm 2 assuming she could call a complaint. She could call 3 somebody, the police, someone, and get some really -- 4 somebody can come arrest this person or tell him to shut 5 his engine down, cite him. 6 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: We have mobile 7 source inspectors in the field that currently are writing 8 citations for excess opacity. And we're going to be 9 hopefully expanding the number of inspectors we have to 10 deal with the Mexican truck issue. So those same 11 inspectors would be out on the streets looking for 12 excessive idling as well. 13 And then we do targeted enforcement in areas 14 where it's prevalent. We've sent inspectors and CHP down 15 into Wilmington where people were traversing surface 16 streets that trucks aren't allowed upon to deter that 17 activity and push them back onto major arterials. So you 18 have to have a police presence in some of these 19 communities to make a change. 20 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: So she'd have -- and 21 we could notify folks particularly down in these areas 22 that are so subjected to this, give them phone numbers, 23 hot lines. And on a Sunday even, I think I heard her say. 24 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: That's correct. 25 It's a 24-hour line. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 107 1 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: She could call 2 somebody and hopefully get some prompt relief. 3 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: I don't know how 4 prompt it will be. 5 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: We don't respond to 6 those calls. But if there is a law, and there ought to be 7 some way to enforce it. 8 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: Mr. Chairman, just in 9 relation to Hugh's questions. 10 I think specifically for the Bay Area and this 11 woman's comments, we should work with the Air District and 12 be able to work in her instance with the local government, 13 with the City of Oakland, so there's really targeted 14 enforcement in those kinds of communities. Because we 15 know intuitively at least a lot of those trucks are going 16 to the industrial sites including, but not limited to, the 17 Port of Oakland. 18 Having been -- Stephanie would be shocked to hear 19 this. But having been in the trucking industry back in a 20 prior life, that's part of what truckers do. Depending on 21 when they're allowed to deliver, pick up, there are land 22 use restrictions -- as D.D. and I were talking about -- 23 and local land use restrictions as to when they go. So 24 they go out in the neighborhood and wait until the 25 opportunity to deliver. That's probably what was PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 108 1 happening there, or he was doing some book work. 2 But we should work I think along the lines with 3 what you suggested. When it goes into effect, we make a 4 real targeted effort in these type of communities. On 5 behalf of the Bay Area Air District, I'm happy to offer to 6 work together to do that with the city of Oakland, city of 7 Richmond, and places like that. 8 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: I think you're 9 absolutely right. That's, in fact, how we deploy our 10 enforcement resources. We do it strategically and try to 11 go to target rich environments where there are a lot of 12 congregating trucks, be it weigh stations, borders, port 13 areas, and that's where our enforcement personnel will be 14 for the most part. 15 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Thank you, 16 Ms. Gordon. I hope you can see we're determined that a 17 better day is ahead for all of you. 18 MS. GORDON: I'm determined also there is a 19 better day for the people of West Oakland. 20 I'm also really concerned about when you say do 21 enforcement and working with the community, that they're 22 going to do that you know, a lot of people say we want the 23 community to be involved, we want community sitting at the 24 table. But it's two different things if you're going to 25 collaborate with me to make change and come out with PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 109 1 results and outcomes, and also if you're going to inform 2 me. Sometimes they don't want the community at the table, 3 because we have too much experience, too much emotion 4 around the issue. So saying one thing and doing one thing 5 is another thing. I'm reassuring that you get my address 6 and my telephone number to inform me when these meetings 7 are happening in the Bay Area. 8 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: Margaret, at the end of 9 the hearing, I'll come out and give you my business card 10 and give you a personal reference of Ethel Dotson in 11 Richmond who in my county and Contra Costa County who I've 12 worked with for eleven years, and she'll tell you that 13 she's as persistent as you are, but I hope she'll tell you 14 I've been responsive. So we can talk. 15 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Mr. Calhoun and Ms. D'Adamo. 16 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: I was listening to our 17 Executive Officer talk about our inspectors. It seems to 18 me we can target some of those areas, especially high 19 volume areas and -- 20 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: That makes the 21 most sense, because we can't be everywhere at all times. 22 So we do go where we expect to find the largest number of 23 vehicles and the largest number of violations. 24 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: Don't the local districts 25 also have inspectors to go around the areas? PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 110 1 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: They're not 2 authorized to cut citations for violations of our 3 relations. 4 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: 24242, isn't it something 5 in the Health and Safety Code? All the district are 6 authorized to enforce that. 7 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: They enforce 8 nuisance laws. If they characterize the issue as a 9 nuisance -- 10 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: I'm talking about opacity 11 violations. 12 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Opacity of 13 stationary engines. We do the opacity requirements. 14 STATIONARY SOURCE DIVISION CHIEF VENTURINI: 15 Mr. Calhoun, as we did with the school bus measure idling, 16 we intend to do with this measure. And we coordinated on 17 that one, and we can on this, with the Highway Patrol, the 18 local districts, and our enforcement people, and in 19 conjunction with the community giving us information to 20 affect the enforcement of this regulation. And so we do 21 envision a roll for the districts to participate in the 22 enforcement levels. 23 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Ms. Estrin, thank 24 you for being patient. 25 MS. ESTRIN: Thank you. I'm Diane Estrin. I'm PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 111 1 the Director of Community Action to Fight Asthma, also 2 known as CAFA. CAFA is a network of community coalitions, 3 twelve of them, across California, four regional centers, 4 and the state coordinating office that have united to work 5 to reduce environmental triggers of asthma across 6 California. Our goal is to improve the quality of life of 7 our children in our respective communities. And we 8 definitely share your concerns today. 9 As I'm sure you know, numerous studies have shown 10 the links between outdoor air, particularly diesel 11 exhaust, and the exasperation of asthma, as Margaret 12 pointed out. I would like to give you a CAFA briefing kit 13 which contains science-based fact sheets on asthma and 14 diesels, as well as additional facts on asthma and outdoor 15 air. 16 You asked if this is addressing those issues. It 17 is, indeed. And you can see how the reduction of diesel 18 makes a significant difference in the lives of asthmatics 19 and all of us. 20 CAFA is very interested in your efforts to reduce 21 diesel, and particularly in this regulation you're 22 considering today. First, we really do commend you for 23 addressing this issue. And we are pleased to see that you 24 are working to reduce diesel idling. This is an issue 25 that affects many of our communities. Because all of our PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 112 1 coalition members could not make it here, although many of 2 them are, I have been charged with reading some of their 3 concerns as given to me. I'd like to take a moment to do 4 that. 5 "My name is Sylvia Pena. I live in Long 6 Beach, California. I have four children, and two 7 of them have been diagnosed with asthma. My son, 8 Jonathan, was diagnosed at eight months and 9 Giovanni at the age of twelve. 10 "I believe it is caused by the contamination 11 from the trucks idling to enter the Port of Long 12 Beach. I have seen trucks idling for up to two 13 hours during this time, and the pollution that is 14 released by the trucks is unbelievable. There 15 are ways to reduce and eliminate triggers in my 16 home to better the health of my child, but what 17 can I do to reduce triggers once my child walks 18 outside our home? 19 "I ask you to please work to help to change 20 our communities. Who knows what's to come of our 21 children in the future. If we continue the way 22 we are, our children will be sick, and they will 23 not enjoy the lives we have worked so hard to 24 provide them." 25 I have many more of these. I'll read you one PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 113 1 more. 2 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: We've actually heard 3 from a number of these. They're very moving. Please 4 finish up. 5 MS. ESTRIN: I think it really brings it home. 6 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: That's why we 7 declared it's an air toxic contaminant. That's why we 8 realize it's poisonous. We're doing what we can. 9 MS. ESTRIN: I'm really glad to be here today. 10 "My name is Claudia Marin. I have lived in 11 the city of Long Beach for five years. And 12 during that time, I have had a child diagnosed 13 with asthma. I live with a high-traffic zone 14 near the I-710 freeway where trucks were idling 15 waiting to pick up cargo. 16 "The contamination is near to my home, and 17 I'm aware of the problem pollution is in my 18 community. I notice the windows of my home and 19 car covered with black filth. This filth affects 20 my child when she goes out and plays and when she 21 tries to gasp for a fresh breath of air. Many of 22 the children in my community have asthma. Our 23 children are effected first hand by all the 24 contamination. 25 "Trucks idle for an average of 30 minutes to PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 114 1 an hour to enter into or depart from the Port of 2 Long Beach. This is the reason I'm worried, not 3 only about the health of my child, but the health 4 of all the children in my community. For this 5 reason, if we work together, we can better the 6 environment to provide our children with a 7 future." 8 CAFA Coalition believes this regulation has the 9 potential to contribute significantly to reducing asthma 10 and therefore improving the lives of children with asthma 11 across the street. 12 As you are, we are also concerned about 13 addressing enforcement issues. For this regulation to 14 make any difference for our community, enforcement as you 15 have just talked about is crucial. You've heard from many 16 of the advocates today about different ways to address the 17 enforcement. And just to reiterate, informing truck 18 operators and the public, as Margaret says, about the new 19 regulation is a key issue here. Engaging state and local 20 law enforcement and local air districts in enforcement of 21 the rule, adding new California Air Resource Board fuel 22 enforcement officers to staff ensure -- would help to 23 ensure the enforcement. Specifying an enforcement start 24 date and specific penalty amounts would also be helpful. 25 We also believe, as mentioned earlier, that you PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 115 1 should be working with ports and distribution centers to 2 take a take-a-number system to reduce truck drivers having 3 to wait long periods of time in lines and idling while 4 waiting. 5 One other area that we really are concerned about 6 as well as ports in urban areas is our coalitions in the 7 Central Valley. They have asked me to urge you not to 8 forget about rural areas as you think about the 9 environment. This includes Tulare, Fresno, Merced, and 10 Mariposa Counties. The Central Valley has tremendous air 11 quality problems, and communities there also suffer from 12 high rates of asthma. And so they want your regulations 13 to be strongly enforced in the Central Valley. They 14 suggest that you focus rural enforcement efforts on 15 distribution centers and other areas in the Central Valley 16 where trucks idle. 17 We urge you to review these enforcement 18 suggestions, identify and implement those suggestions that 19 can best be enforced. And I just want to thank you for 20 your concern and for addressing this issue and for helping 21 to improve the health of California communities. 22 Who can I give this to? 23 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 24 Any questions? Board members have any other 25 questions? PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 116 1 STATIONARY SOURCE DIVISION CHIEF VENTURINI: 2 Mr. Chairman. 3 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Yes. 4 STATIONARY SOURCE DIVISION CHIEF VENTURINI: I 5 just wanted to provide a little more complete response to 6 Mr. Calhoun's earlier question. 7 I spoke to Mr. Livingston of our Legal staff, and 8 he's indicated that the districts do have the authority to 9 issue a citation for an idling violation. 10 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Okay. That's good. Thanks 11 for that clarification. 12 Any other comments, Ms. Witherspoon? 13 So I will now close the record on this agenda 14 item. However, the record will be reopened when the 15 15-day notice of public availability is issued. Written 16 or oral comments received after this hearing date but 17 before the 15-day notice is issued will not be accepted as 18 part of the official record on this agenda item. 19 When the record is reopened for a 15-day comment 20 period, the public may submit written comments on proposed 21 changes which will be considered and responded to in the 22 final Statement of Reasons for the regulation. 23 Any ex parte communications from my colleagues on 24 the Board? 25 Well, I have one. I spoke on Wednesday with PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 117 1 Stephanie Williams, Vice President with the California 2 Trucking Association, who calmly informed us that we were 3 misjudging the response and we'd not gone through due 4 process on the 2009. 5 So with that, we have the resolution before us 6 with the changes that came from the staff at last minute. 7 And then we also have several significant additions which 8 were brought up today, including the desire to work with 9 the ports and look at the various issues brought up by the 10 environmental community and by Dave Modisette and some of 11 the others and the military as well. 12 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: I move approval of 13 Resolution 04-23 with the approval of the additional 14 matters that were raised during this hearing. They 15 included the matters you mentioned. I believe we were 16 clarifying that military vehicles were exempt when they're 17 in training mode, whatever that language is. I'm sure 18 somebody was taking notes. 19 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: And we had, again, a 20 significant comment came up several times about the need 21 to outreach both to the regulated community and to the 22 community in general and do every effort there, not only 23 in English, but also in Spanish. 24 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: And I would hope 25 there would be something in there about target the areas PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 118 1 that are most victimized for enforcement, for monitoring. 2 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: And, again, to reiterate, I 3 think it may already be in there. But it is staff's 4 intention to come back next year and still targeting the 5 2009 implementation time frame. 6 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: The Resolution 7 refers to a rule making no later than September of '05. I 8 don't recall offhand if it also says retention of the 2009 9 date. That is our intent. I'm not sure that's captured 10 in the resolution. 11 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I wonder whether -- again, 12 the intent can change. But I think I heard that some lack 13 of confidence that we may not hold to that. But given 14 that we will go through due process, I presume it is our 15 intent to look at the effective date of 2009. 16 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: Mr. Chairman, just on 17 that point, re-emphasize, I think as far as communications 18 issued to both sides, what you're trying to do, which I 19 understand. And the other element of the NRDC and we 20 heard from other people in regards to queuing, we would 21 have some discussion as part of the direction today about 22 next steps and queuing, particularly around ports. 23 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: We think that's 24 principally going to end up happening under the heading of 25 cargo handling and air toxic control measures with the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 119 1 involvement of all the same stakeholders and the districts 2 and the ports. 3 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 4 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Ms. D'Adamo. 5 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: On the issue of queuing, I 6 think it would be helpful if possible to combine a report 7 back to us next year when you bring the sleeper cab issue 8 before us, even if it ends up splitting off into a 9 separate regulation. 10 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR WITHERSPOON: We can certainly 11 do that. We may actually have the cargo handling ATCM for 12 you at the same time, but we'll see how far we get. 13 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Mr. Chairman, I think you 14 need a second. I'll second the motion. 15 I do want to ask -- and to be sure that those 16 people who are interested in some of our amendments 17 through the 15-day process period, comment period, are 18 they all notified so that they -- 19 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Yes, they are. 20 GENERAL COUNSEL JOHNSTON: And if I may ask for a 21 clarification. It's the Board intention also that staff 22 be directed to consider modifications relating to 23 clarifying what a mixer is and also considering any need 24 to -- 25 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Yes. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 120 1 GENERAL COUNSEL JOHNSTON: Okay. Thank you. 2 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: So with that, I've got a 3 motion and second. 4 All in favor say aye. 5 (Ayes) 6 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Anybody against? 7 No. 8 Thank you. And, again, thank you, staff. 9 Excellent job, tough issue, and more to come. So thank 10 you to all the participant witnesses as well. 11 This hesitation here is that it was the intention 12 to take a half-hour lunch break, but there's no lunch back 13 there yet. So it may be there. I went back five minutes 14 ago. If there's lunch there, we will take a half-hour 15 break and then come back and continue on the briefing on 16 climate change. 17 So lunch is there, so we will take a half-hour 18 break which gives the court reporter time to take a break 19 and eat. At 12:15 by that clock there we will start with 20 the presentation on briefing on climate change. 21 (Thereupon a lunch recess was taken) 22 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: The next item on the agenda 23 is Number 04-7-4, special presentation on recent 24 developments in climate change research. 25 There's a new and stronger evidence that most of PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 121 1 the warming observed over the last 50 years is 2 attributable to human activity. Changes in the earth's 3 climate are real, and it's vital we begin to take steps to 4 address this issue. The Governor is very concerned about 5 protecting California's environment, and his Environmental 6 Action Plan sets forth several commitments directly and 7 indirectly related to global climate change. 8 The Governor appointed the Secretary of CalEPA, 9 Terry Tamminen, together with Mike Chrisman, the Secretary 10 of the Resources Agency, to co-lead the Governor's Action 11 Plan Committee that will recommend greenhouse gas 12 emissions reduction targets for the state and set forth an 13 implementation plan by August of this year. That's next 14 month. 15 California has also joined the Governors of 16 Oregon and Washington to form the West Coast Climate 17 Change Initiative, the objective of which is to develop 18 joint policy recommendations for regional cooperation and 19 action. And we're hoping that British Columbia will join 20 in that. 21 In California, a Joint Agency Climate Team, 22 consisting of the Resources Agency, CalEPA, and other 23 state agencies was formed to coordinate and integrate 24 program activities related to climate change. 25 Finally, the California Legislature has passed PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 122 1 several bills to address climate change. These include a 2 required inventory of the state's greenhouse gas emissions 3 from all sectors, the establishment of a registry that 4 allows California businesses to record voluntary 5 greenhouse gas emission reductions, and the mandate for 6 the Air Resources Board to adopt regulations that achieve 7 the maximum feasible and cost effective reduction of 8 greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles. The staff 9 proposal for those regulations was released to the public 10 last month. A final report will be issued on August 6th 11 and will be presented to the Board in September. 12 In fact, in that line, there was just a survey 13 that came out today reinforcing the commitments of 14 California's two climate changes and a recent poll by the 15 Public Policy Institute of California finds that 81 16 percent say they would back a state law requiring auto 17 makers to reduce the emissions of greenhouse gas from new 18 cars by the year 2009. 19 So again, continuing strong commitment from the 20 public to do that, to improve our understanding of climate 21 change -- and I've been participating in climate change 22 conferences for many years. And this year we had a very 23 successful symposium on climate change which featured two 24 of the speakers we are going to be hearing today, Dr. 25 Daniel Cayan and Dr. Kristie Ebi. And they gave PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 123 1 outstanding presentations earlier this year. And I think 2 they will be able to provide the Board with a great 3 overview of what's going on. 4 The first part is to give a primer on climate 5 change, what it means to California, and then the second 6 speaker, Dr. Ebi, talking about the critical link between 7 air pollution and public health. So I think both of these 8 presentations are going to be -- I think you'll see for 9 yourselves. But it's a great opportunity for us to come 10 up to speed on what's going on and see and confirm why, in 11 fact, we should be able taking this issue very seriously. 12 So with that, I will turn it over to 13 Ms. Witherspoon who will introduce the item. 14 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Thank you, 15 Chairman Lloyd. 16 As the Chairman indicated, the Air Resources 17 Board is required to adopt regulations that achieve the 18 maximum degree of emission reductions in greenhouse gasses 19 from passenger vehicles by the end of this year. 20 On August 6th, staff will be issuing a proposed 21 regulation for public comment, and that report will be 22 brought before the Board for consideration at your 23 September 22nd and 23rd meeting. 24 As a prelude to the Board's review of that 25 document, we invited two outstanding scientists in the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 124 1 area of climate, Dr. Daniel Cayan and Dr. Kristie Ebi to 2 share their perspectives with you today. And Dr. Lloyd 3 already discussed the content of their presentations. 4 I'll go straight to introductions. 5 Dr. Cayan is a research meteorologist in the 6 Climate Research Division at Scripps Institution of 7 Oceanography and in the Water Resources Division of the 8 U.S. Geological Survey. He also directs the California 9 Energy Commission's California Climate Change Center at 10 Scripps. Dr. Cayan's research interests include the 11 variability of coastal weather along the west coast, 12 particularly as it affects California. 13 So at this time, I'd like to ask Dr. Cayan to 14 speak, and then I'll introduce Dr. Ebi following his 15 presentation. 16 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 17 presented as follows.) 18 DR. CAYAN: Well, thank you. It's a pleasure to 19 be here. 20 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Turn the mic on. I don't 21 think it's on. 22 DR. CAYAN: I'm not sure I'm capable of that. 23 How's that? Sounds to me like it's working. Maybe I just 24 wasn't being aggressive enough. 25 This will be a rather brief overview of some of PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 125 1 the climate change background and issues. The way I 2 understand our interaction this afternoon is that we 3 intentionally were trying to be brief so that there was 4 time for some discussion afterwards. So this is sort of 5 setting stage and seeds, and I really don't have time, nor 6 am I attempting to be comprehensive here. 7 --o0o-- 8 DR. CAYAN: So just to proceed. Of course, this 9 issue has gotten worldwide attention. And, indeed, 10 there's been a number of scientific bodies that have 11 considered the evidence for climate change, both as it's 12 happened and as it presumably will happen. And probably 13 the most prominent body, the Intergovernmental Panel for 14 Climate Change, the IPCC, most recently reported in 2001, 15 which was the third such of that body's report. And each 16 one of these has gotten a bit stronger in terms of its 17 language. In this case, on the slide I've just lifted the 18 quote that makes the point there's been an increasing body 19 of observations that give evidence for significant changes 20 in the global climate system. 21 --o0o-- 22 DR. CAYAN: A lot of this evidence, of course, is 23 predicated on the fact that greenhouse gasses in the 24 atmosphere, which are, of course, a minor constituent of 25 the atmospheric content but critically important because PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 126 1 they're radiative active -- this is, they intercept 2 radiation. In this case, the radiation that's leaving the 3 earth's surface. Those gasses have increased quite 4 remarkably since the industrial period of human kind. 5 And this slide shows on the left the record of 6 carbon dioxide which has increased about a third in terms 7 of its concentration by mass since the pre-industrial 8 period. The pre-industrial period is known because of 9 gasses recovered from cores taken in the polar ice caps. 10 And the observational instrumental evidence goes back to 11 the early 1950s on Mauna Loa, and, of course, there's been 12 a steady increase in CO2 since then. 13 It's not only carbon dioxide that shows this 14 remarkable increase, but other gasses which are shown on 15 the right hand panel of the slides which also participate 16 in the greenhouse effect of the earth's atmosphere. 17 Again, that's essentially a blanket of gasses which 18 re-heat the earth, because they absorb infrared radiation 19 and re-radiate up to the earth's surface. That causes a 20 new equilibrium of temperature at the earth's surface. 21 And as those concentrations build up, the radiative 22 balance has to adjust. This is well known physics. And 23 this is the basis for projections into the future with 24 state of the art climate models. 25 Other of these concentrations, as you see on the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 127 1 right-hand side, have gone up more than CO2, but CO2 2 happens to be probably the most important of the 3 greenhouse constituents. 4 --o0o-- 5 DR. CAYAN: Along with that, if one looks at the 6 surface temperature as we can make it over the globe, 7 which is shown in the top panel here, we note that the 8 earth's surface temperature here referenced to a 9 climatological average from 1961 through 1990 has 10 essentially gone through two rather remarkable increases 11 since the middle part of the 1800s, the first of which is 12 the early part of the 1900s and more recently since about 13 1970. The earth's surface temperature has increased. 14 Together, these two increases amount to something 15 in the neighborhood of 6/10s of a degree Celsius, or a 16 little over a degree Fahrenheit. Now that doesn't sound 17 like much. But this is the average over the entire globe. 18 And with that average, of course, includes weather and 19 short period climate events and so forth. 20 Again, it doesn't seem like too much. But at the 21 bottom, this is put into the context of the Northern 22 Hemisphere record of temperature as inferred from proxy 23 climate indicators, such as tree rings and sediments and 24 the like. And the most remarkable thing about that is the 25 rate of increase that we see during the 20th century, PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 128 1 which appears to be unprecedented over this 1,000 years or 2 so of record. And in fact, from other indicators, much 3 longer inferences of temperature confirm that this is a 4 most unusual rate of rise that we're seeing in the recent 5 several decades of earth's history. 6 The red part of that trace is the record from 7 thermometers, and the blue-colored curve is that which is, 8 again, inferred from proxy paleoclimate information. Of 9 course, there's a great deal of uncertainty, but it 10 appears that our temperatures are rising above that 11 envelope of uncertainty. Just to give you a couple of 12 examples, 1998 was, as we know it, the warmest year in 13 this 1,000 or so years of record, and the decade of the 14 1990s was the warmest decade. 15 --o0o-- 16 DR. CAYAN: Taking this a bit closer to our 17 western setting here, I've superimposed the average 18 temperature for the far western states, which is shown by 19 the red colored plot on the annual temperature for global 20 land and ocean at the top part of the panel. And what you 21 notice there is that while the western temperatures have 22 fluctuated more than has the global average temperature, 23 they're a smaller region, and they're prone to more 24 regional ups and downs than if you were to average the 25 entire globe. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 129 1 But, in general, the western temperatures seemed 2 to have mimicked those from the global average quite -- I 3 would say quite remarkably. Again, they've shown this 4 relatively recent increase since the 1970s, I would say, 5 strikingly. 6 If one breaks that into a cool and warm season 7 subset, which is done at the bottom part of the curve, 8 you'd find that both our cool seasons in the west as well 9 as the warm seasons seem to be participating in the 10 increase in temperature. The amount of increase that 11 we're seeing over the west, something in the neighborhood 12 of a half to a full degree centigrade, is comparable to 13 that which we've seen over the globe. 14 --o0o-- 15 DR. CAYAN: Looking towards the future, the 16 future behavior of earth's climate, we think, depends 17 critically on the way that societies and economies behave. 18 And those behaviors, of course, can be represented with a 19 number of scenarios which are shown by the different 20 traces on these slides. 21 This is a projected time history since -- 22 relatively recent period through the end of the 21st 23 century. The more aggressive economic scenarios are shown 24 by the upper trajectories here. The so-called A1 25 scenarios in which CO2 emissions double the CO2 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 130 1 concentration by some time in the middle part of the 2 present century. 3 Other scenarios here are ones in which growth and 4 emissions are much more moderate or more regulated. And 5 they -- in some of them, they actually back off as the 6 decades wear on through the next century. 7 Another component of this whole story is the 8 behavior of aerosols, which is represented on the far 9 right-hand panel here, the so-called sulfate emissions. 10 And aerosols are another component of the global climate 11 puzzle which perhaps has a so-called negative feedback on 12 temperature because it reflects incoming radiation. And 13 again, there's a number of scenarios that are represented 14 here. 15 All of these then are imposed through climate 16 modeling to look at solutions for climate as it evolves 17 through the 21st century. And, again, the sorts of 18 activities that California is undertaking with proposed 19 legislation that was mentioned just a couple of minutes 20 ago could be greatly important in shaping the kinds of 21 emissions that we're seeing on a global basis here. 22 So while California is only an increment of the 23 total, I think the signals that are given by this state 24 are, indeed, a very important message that will be picked 25 up by the world community. So that's an important aspect PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 131 1 of the work that you folks are doing here. And I'm really 2 happy to be at least tangentially involved in that. 3 --o0o-- 4 DR. CAYAN: If those scenarios are now imposed in 5 the working of a numerical climate model that is allowed 6 to run forward in a simulation actually beginning in the 7 early 1900s and proceeding through the 2100 period and we 8 examine the outcome at a location from the climate model 9 that's sited over Northern California, we're giving you 10 here a picture of the different trajectories of 11 temperature departures at that point as time goes through 12 this period. 13 Again, what we have here are different emission 14 scenarios and actually different climate models. You have 15 to understand that there's a number of global climate 16 models that are run by different institutions across both 17 the academic and governmental science communities. And 18 several of those are represented here. They differ in 19 their portrayal of the physical processes and the 20 resolution of the detail of climate over the earth's 21 surface and so forth. And, consequently, they're not all 22 the same. 23 This leads to what you might think of as a swarm 24 of uncertainty as time goes on. I'm trying to give you an 25 idea here with the pointer. By 2100, what you notice is PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 132 1 that for temperature over Northern California, there's a 2 consensus there will be warming. But the magnitude of 3 that warming varies from something like 2 degrees Celsius 4 to as much as perhaps 8 or so Celsius above present day 5 levels, which are shown here by the models as wandering 6 around this so-called zero level of departure from the 7 present day through the 20th century. 8 So you note here that there's a good deal of 9 uncertainty. Again, part of that uncertainty depends on 10 the emissions of greenhouse gasses that are imposed in 11 these model simulations. And part of it is because the 12 models themselves differ. 13 If we look at precipitation, which is, of course, 14 an enormous issue to the southwest and to California, the 15 results aren't nearly as decided as those for temperature. 16 We find that some models actually portray precipitation as 17 increasing. There's a couple of outliers that have 18 rather, I would say, outrageous increases in precipitation 19 over time to the tune of almost double the present day 20 level. This is a percentage of the average over this 21 earlier climatological period. 22 And several of the models show a smaller but 23 somewhat unsettling drying in precipitation over the next 24 century. This is an issue that is a difficult one. 25 Precipitation, of course, occurs in rather complex PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 133 1 physical fashion. Occurs very episodically, and it's 2 really one of those issues that is at the cutting edge of 3 climate modeling. And I think this will be an ongoing 4 debate about how our regional precipitation will change 5 over the next several decades as we move into future 6 studies. 7 --o0o-- 8 DR. CAYAN: If you look at the behavior of 9 temperature and precipitation and probabilistic fashion 10 where today's probabilities are for annual precipitation, 11 departures from this average are shown by this rather 12 narrow bell-shaped curve. As time goes on -- the 13 different traces represent different segments in time 14 through these simulations with the different models. And 15 by sampling the models a number of times over these time 16 slices, we're able to construct a probability distribution 17 based on this model evidence. 18 You find that the average temperature, as we saw 19 in the previous slide, migrates further and further to the 20 right. That is warmer. And the distribution of annual 21 temperatures becomes broader. So we have more and more 22 evidence for both higher extremes as well as some that 23 take us back to the previous climatology. You might view 24 this as a measure of the amount of certainty in these 25 models getting less as time goes on. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 134 1 Same kind of construct can be performed with 2 precipitation. You notice that the average precipitation 3 through these time slices does not change too much. But 4 the tails of the distribution, the chance that we could 5 get exceedingly heavy or quite dry annual precipitation 6 values in this model rendition becomes more likely. We're 7 getting heavier tails, if you like, as time goes on. So, 8 again, this is an indication that climate models are 9 expressing more and more disparity as we get further and 10 further ahead of the current period. Our forecasts are 11 far from certain. 12 This behavior in temperature and precipitation 13 has enormous implications about things that are critically 14 important to California, such as snow melt, such as 15 heating degree days, such as energy demand, and so forth. 16 --o0o-- 17 DR. CAYAN: If one looks at one of these 18 particular climate models and looks at a particular site 19 over the southwest here and charts the number of 20 occurrences of hot days, in this case days above the 21 mid-90s in temperature -- so every one of these dots is 22 the occurrence of a hot day beginning in 1970 and 23 proceeding through again about 2100, we find -- and this 24 is what you might call the climatological period shown in 25 the black colors here. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 135 1 The red dots are the future century beginning 2 with about 2000 and proceeding through 2100. What this is 3 expressing is the fact that hot days as time goes on begin 4 to happen earlier through the season. The season is 5 represented here across the x axis is at the bottom from 6 May through October, so that our first day in 2100 could 7 be expected to happen sometime in late May rather than 8 mid-June, compared to the climatological period in the 9 model. 10 And the intensity of hot days increases. If we 11 count the number of these hot day episodes, we find that 12 for this particular point that the number of those events 13 increases from about 20 to about 60. It about triples 14 over time. So this kind of extreme in temperature as 15 climate goes forward, of course, again has great 16 implication as far as impacts on the California 17 environment and Californians living in the environment. 18 --o0o-- 19 DR. CAYAN: We've done the same sort of exercise 20 here by looking at two locations, Los Angeles and 21 Sacramento, using four different model simulations and 22 looking at three-day heat waves, days in which temperature 23 at Los Angeles exceeded 90 degrees Fahrenheit or in 24 Sacramento exceeded something approaching 100 degrees 25 Fahrenheit. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 136 1 And you notice here how these heat waves 2 increase -- these three-day spells increase fairly 3 radically over time. Again, not as much in scenarios in 4 which the emissions are relatively low, and considerably 5 more in those scenarios where emissions are proceeding at 6 a high rate into the atmosphere. Of course, three-day 7 hate wave events have probably greatly detrimental 8 implications for human health. And I think Kris will talk 9 about examples along those lines in the next talk. 10 --o0o-- 11 DR. CAYAN: California is a coastal state. The 12 fact that we live on a coast where sea level has 13 historically been rising at something in the neighborhood 14 of 20 centimeters over the last century. That's about 15 eight or nine inches of higher mean sea level today than 16 it was in 1900. And with global change because the ocean 17 is going to expand thermally and it's also going to be 18 probably accumulating runoff from continental ice masses 19 as time goes on, it's estimated that the rate of sea level 20 rise will probably double or -- of course, estimates vary. 21 But, indeed, the rate of rise would amplify probably from 22 what we've seen historically. 23 And this purple-shaded part of this picture is 24 kind of a cartoon to represent what might happen at the 25 San Francisco Fort Point gauge, which is the longest sea PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 137 1 level record that we have along the west coast. 2 One thing to point out here is that these high 3 episodes in annual sea level that we've observed over the 4 historical record are cases in which there have been El 5 Ninos in which the eastern part of the Pacific Basin has 6 been warm. The sea level has been higher than you would 7 have expected from astronomical tide tables by something 8 like ten centimeters, four inches or so. And, oftentimes, 9 as we know during El Ninos, there's an incident of heavy 10 storms in which wave generated seas then have caused great 11 destruction along the California coast. 12 The San Francisco Bay Delta, the estuary that is 13 the confluence of the Sacramento/San Joaquin system is an 14 estuary where we draw much of our freshwater supply and, 15 of course, there's levied islands there. So these 16 increases in sea level have great implication for not only 17 coastal erosion, but California water concerns. There's 18 also coastal aquifers that are already encroached by 19 salinity problems in Central and Southern California. 20 And, presumably, that problem is probably going to be more 21 acute. 22 --o0o-- 23 DR. CAYAN: To give you just a snapshot of what's 24 going on globally in terms of the water cycle, this is 25 what's left on part of Kilimanjaro where there used to be PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 138 1 much more ice than there is today. Virtually all of the 2 middle latitude and low latitude glaciers are eroding at 3 an unprecedented rate. 4 --o0o-- 5 DR. CAYAN: In California, we're noticing that 6 snow melt is occurring earlier. This is the fraction of 7 the annual discharge from the Sacramento system. Many of 8 you probably know Maury Roos, the chief hydrologist for 9 the state who first constructed this chart. And whereas 10 the snow melt portion of the runoff in Sacramento, that 11 portion that occurs between April and July used to 12 approach 45 percent. It's now less than 35 percent. This 13 doesn't mean we're losing water, but it means we're losing 14 water during a period when the water is most needed and 15 the runoff tends to be most manageable, after the period 16 during which winter storms in the state have died down. 17 --o0o-- 18 DR. CAYAN: We're noticing these earlier springs 19 over the entire west and, in fact, beyond the terminus 20 U.S. now. We've seen it in the timing of snow melt from 21 stream gauges across virtually the entire western 22 mountainous watershed region. And we're also seeing it in 23 the timing of phenological features, the timing of lilac 24 blooms in spring that occur from a set of lilac plants 25 observed by cooperative observers across this western PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 139 1 landscape. And these two records are quite consistent 2 both with each other and with the temperature record for 3 spring. Whereas, today, we're seeing the spring time 4 indicators occurring a week to three weeks earlier than 5 they were in the 1950s and 1960s. 6 --o0o-- 7 DR. CAYAN: We're also seeing the demise of 8 spring snow accumulation across quite a broad footprint in 9 the west. 10 --o0o-- 11 DR. CAYAN: And looking forward, it's pretty 12 clear that if temperatures continue to rise, that we're 13 going to lose the springtime snow accumulation in 14 California. A fairly conservative scenario imposed upon 15 the California snow pack has us losing about a third of 16 our present day snow pack by the mid-2100s and -- the 17 mid-2000s, I should say, about 2050. And we'll lose 18 probably at least half by the end of the present century, 19 by 2100. 20 You notice here that the Sacramento part of the 21 system, the lower part, the warmer part of our mountainous 22 system, of course, erodes earlier than does the San 23 Joaquin. The warmer the colors here, the more snow loss 24 that we see. 25 --o0o-- PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 140 1 DR. CAYAN: So in terms of what we're seeing in 2 the observational record from this little fly-through this 3 afternoon, warming is already occurring over the last few 4 decades. We think it's underway and developing quite 5 strongly. The projections are quite uniform in indicating 6 that temperatures on the earth's surface will rise. The 7 magnitude depends on both what you might call the 8 uncertainty in the climate model, but also the uncertainty 9 in human and governmental behavior over time. So we have 10 an envelope of possibilities. 11 Precipitation is not clear. It's crucial to our 12 future, and it's something that will deserve and will 13 receive a lot of study as time goes on. There's likely to 14 be adverse impacts to our water ecosystems, coast lines, 15 and presumably human health. 16 I'm sure, by the way, there's going to be some 17 positive impacts with all of this. But I've tried to 18 emphasize the things that I think warrant your attention 19 here. And that's why I've focused on that part of that 20 side of the coin. 21 Finally, careful monitoring and modeling are 22 still critically needed, and I can assure you that that's 23 going on. 24 So with that, I'm going to leave the podium here. 25 Thanks. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 141 1 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Professor Friedman was just 2 saying maybe one of the positives would be his house would 3 become beach front. 4 DR. CAYAN: There we go. 5 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 6 Any questions from the Board? 7 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: I just would have a 8 question. You noted several things that had to do with 9 Northern California. I was quickly trying to go back. Is 10 that true -- could you say what is projected to happen in 11 Northern California would also happen in Southern 12 California in terms of the precipitation and increase of 13 perhaps heat, et cetera? 14 DR. CAYAN: Yeah. We chose Northern California 15 because it's in the seat of the snow laden areas for the 16 state which are critical for the water supply. But the 17 same kind of result could be drawn over the southern part 18 of the state. The one chart that I showed illustrated the 19 heat waves that might occur in Los Angeles and Sacramento. 20 And you saw that there was, indeed, a parallel there. 21 Details differ. But the general tenor is the same. 22 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I think one of the 23 interesting things, now the models are so much improved 24 you can look at a much better spacial resolution than you 25 could before. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 142 1 DR. CAYAN: That's indeed true. Our concern is 2 that we're looking at something that we have -- let me put 3 it this way. That we're not looking at the same wrong 4 answer in more detail. So that's the underlying quest for 5 a lot of the climate community is not only to satisfy the 6 need for more resolution, but also the need for truth. 7 And that is going to be slowly gained, I think, over time. 8 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Professor Friedman. 9 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Those who are 10 aggressively projecting an increase in precipitation -- 11 that is, a higher range of increased precipitation over 12 the future, would that be sufficient to supplant the loss 13 of snow pack in terms of water supply? I'm talking about 14 Northern California. 15 DR. CAYAN: Those two simulations that you saw 16 that were the outliers in that seventh slide or whatever 17 it was, were probably -- yes, they would offset -- they 18 would offset the loss in snow pack. 19 The other thing to be said if that scenario 20 materializes is that there would probably be a lot more 21 flood events than we've seen in our present climatology. 22 I happen to think that those particular model 23 runs which are now becoming probably the runs that we'd 24 say would be from the last generation of model runs, I 25 sort of think they won't be supported by future PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 143 1 experiments. But we've included them because they're part 2 of the population, and we sort of think we got to look at 3 all of the likelihood. But -- 4 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: If you eliminate the 5 outliers, there are two or three here that seem to be 6 prominent on your graph. Wouldn't there still be some 7 increase -- some measurable increase in precipitation 8 projected generally? 9 DR. CAYAN: Generally, I would say -- 10 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: There are also some 11 reductions I note at the bottom. 12 DR. CAYAN: What that -- I think what that 13 expresses is that certain decades are likely to be wetter 14 than average and others likely to be drier. But when we 15 look at the probability distributions, the change in the 16 drier tail becomes fairly decided in the several decades 17 from the future from at least a strong subset of these 18 models. 19 So one of the concerns is that as global warming 20 takes shape that the Pacific high becomes stronger and 21 more extensive. And we get the chance for prolonged dry 22 episodes, of which, of course, the southwest is living 23 through right now. And as the western population rachets 24 up, which, of course, it's by 40 years or so California's 25 population is projected to double, these sorts of episodes PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 144 1 again have perhaps even more consequence than they have 2 presently. 3 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 4 Of course, this morning we took action which 5 would reduce both CO2 and also black carbon. So we're 6 listening to your message here. 7 Thank you very much, indeed, Professor Cayan. 8 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: The second 9 presentation will be given by Dr. Kristie Ebi, Exponent 10 Consulting in Virginia. I apologize for mispronouncing 11 her name. Dr. Ebi is the Senior Managing Scientist in 12 Exponent's health practice and is based in Alexandria, 13 Virginia. Dr. Ebi, an epidemiologist, has worked on a 14 range of issues, including potential human health and 15 environmental impacts in the field of climate changes. 16 She specializes in research both on potential impacts 17 including those associated with extreme events, thermal 18 stress, vector borne diseases, and on the design of 19 adaptation response options to reduce negative impacts. 20 With that, I'm very pleased to introduce Dr. Ebi. 21 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 22 presented as follows.) 23 DR. EBI: Thank you. 24 Is the microphone on? 25 I want to thank Dr. Lloyd for inviting me. Thank PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 145 1 you very much. I appreciate the opportunity to speak with 2 you this afternoon. 3 --o0o-- 4 DR. EBI: I always like to start or end with a 5 quote from Hippocrates just to let everybody know that 6 public health and medicine has known for a very long time 7 that weather and climate has a very strong effect on human 8 heath. And it has been studied with greater degrees of 9 intensity for many centuries. 10 --o0o-- 11 DR. EBI: Fortunately, Dan went first, so I don't 12 have to go through these acronyms. But IPCC also looked 13 at impacts in its third assessment report. This is a 14 highlight of some of the health impacts that they said we 15 can expect over the next century. I'm going to focus on a 16 few of them that I think are important for California. 17 Unlike Dan, I don't have California-specific data, but I 18 have examples that relate to California. 19 Vector borne diseases are certainly going to be 20 very important. We've talked about heat waves for a 21 moment. Flooding has been mentioned. I'm also going to 22 talk about food borne diseases. As temperature goes up, 23 it's likely that we'll be seeing more food borne diseases. 24 One issue that I really want to highlight while I 25 talk is that from the public health point of view, we PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 146 1 really focus on adaptation, which is the fact we're 2 committed to climate change. The question is how severe 3 the impacts are going to be on various sectors such as 4 health or ecosystems and how well we adapt will really 5 depend on the severity of what we will see in the 6 population. 7 --o0o-- 8 DR. EBI: A group of us put this together for the 9 U.S. national assessment. It shows you the kinds of 10 health affects that you can see associated with climate 11 and weather. There are a lot of diseases, a lot of groups 12 of diseases that are affected by weather. We called them 13 climate-sensitive diseases. There are diseases that are 14 directly affected, diseases that are caused by heat waves, 15 by flooding, the kinds of things that you can imagine. 16 There's also diseases that have indirect pathways to 17 weather and climate. Air pollution and all the health 18 affects associated with air pollution are indirect, 19 because that weather affects something that affects the 20 air pollution. Contaminant pathways, such as food borne 21 diseases. And then the transmission dynamics for vector 22 borne diseases as temperatures change, then the vectors 23 have the opportunity to change their ranges, which could 24 then change the range and intensity of disease you'd see 25 in the population. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 147 1 Whether or not you see those diseases and the 2 degree to which you see those diseases depends on the 3 adaptation measures, the public health interventions that 4 are instituted in a particular population. 5 --o0o-- 6 DR. EBI: I also wanted to make clear that 7 although I'm talking about weather and climate, it's not 8 the only thing that drives these diseases. There's many 9 reasons we see these diseases in populations. And these 10 are some of them that I put down. Population density is 11 very important for person to person transmission. 12 Urbanization, the urban heat island makes a big difference 13 when you start talking about heat waves. The public 14 health infrastructure -- and you can read the rest. But 15 as I talk, I do want people to keep in mind there's other 16 factors that are very important. 17 When I talk about adaptation, we're thinking, in 18 essence, of two different groups. There's the existing 19 risks, things we already know about. And those are what 20 I'll be talking about today. 21 --o0o-- 22 DR. EBI: And to respond to those, there's 23 several things we can do. We can modify existing 24 strategies. We can put in heat health early warning 25 systems. A number of cities have done that. More are in PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 148 1 the process of doing so. We can reinstitute programs that 2 have been very effective in the past, but they've been 3 neglected or abandoned. I have to say that California has 4 got one of the best mosquito control programs in the 5 nation. I also know, knowing the people in those 6 programs, they're not quite getting the funding they need 7 to address some of the vector borne diseases. 8 And when we look at the strategies to implement, 9 Dan showed us the degrees of uncertainty. We want to make 10 sure that we institute measures that are win, win. That 11 if precipitation goes up or down, we're still doing 12 something that's effective for public health. It's a wise 13 use of the resources. 14 And, finally, we're going to see new risks. And 15 some of those we can probably guess at. Some of those we 16 can't. New risks, I'll talk later about the heat wave in 17 Europe in 2003 I would put in that category of seeing 18 massive extremes that we just have not experienced. And 19 we just -- in that situation, they were pretty much 20 completely unprepared for. 21 --o0o-- 22 DR. EBI: And when looking at adaptation, there's 23 a whole series of questions we look at. What specifically 24 are you adapting to? What you do depends on that. If 25 you're talking about heat-related illnesses, then you talk PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 149 1 about heat early warning systems. You talk about air 2 conditioning. You talk about a number of things. You 3 talk about vector borne disease. It's a whole other set. 4 You need to know how well our current programs 5 are in reducing the burden of disease. Can we improve 6 them? Almost always the answer is yes. But how much can 7 we improve them? 8 We try to look at future projections of that 9 particular health outcome, develop models to say what 10 could we expect in the future and who in particular is 11 vulnerable? For heat waves we know the elderly are one 12 group that are particularly vulnerable. And we know as a 13 whole, populations in developed countries are getting much 14 older, putting a much bigger pool of people into that 15 vulnerable group. 16 Who adapts? Who is going to be making these 17 changes? Are you talking about individual level changes? 18 Are you talking about institutional changes? Are you 19 talking about new departments? So you have to think about 20 how you're going to make those things happen. You can 21 think about when should those adaptations be implemented. 22 For some of these diseases, we have windows before which 23 we have to take some action. 24 And, finally, we need to evaluate those 25 interventions to see how good and how likely they are. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 150 1 There's a number of instances in public health, as in 2 other sectors, we've instituted programs without really 3 evaluating effectiveness. And that needs to be done 4 better than has in the past. 5 --o0o-- 6 DR. EBI: To switch to vector borne diseases, 7 this is some excellent work that has been done by 8 Elizabeth Lungren in Sweden looking at tick borne 9 encephalitis. This is a study that was looking at the 10 incidents of encephalitis. And you can see just over 11 ten years the large increase in density of spots and the 12 range over which those spots are located. The exhibit 13 looked at this in relation to weather and found it is 14 related to the fact in Sweden they're getting much wilder 15 winters and springs are coming much earlier. So a big 16 portion of this is very clearly related to weather changes 17 in Sweden. 18 There's been some nice work going on in 19 California, but it doesn't have a really pretty graphic. 20 It's a table with numbers, so I thought this would be a 21 better choice. 22 --o0o-- 23 DR. EBI: To show another example -- and this is 24 not because we're worried about malaria. This is some 25 modeling work that's been done. But just to give you a PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 151 1 sense of the sensitivity of vectors to smaller changes in 2 temperature or precipitation, this is some modeling work 3 we've done on what could happen with falciparum malaria in 4 Zimbabwe. 5 I'll go just though a couple of slides to show 6 you how much things can change. The major changes are 7 going to be in the highlands, which is where most of the 8 population lives. So it's a major issue for much of 9 Africa to see vectors moving up to highlands and 10 threatening population centers. 11 --o0o-- 12 DR. EBI: This is a baseline. I can tell you 13 later if you're interested how we developed this. What's 14 really critical is the red. The red is the area where 15 right now the climate is suitable for stable malaria 16 transmission. Another pretty much a mid-range climate 17 scenario. This is what happens by 2025, and this is what 18 happens by 2050. By 2100, the entire country is red. But 19 already by 2025, the two major population centers 20 including the capitol have a climate where you could have 21 stable malaria transmission. 22 --o0o-- 23 DR. EBI: Heat waves. And Don said I'd talk 24 about heat waves and he was right. Heat waves are very 25 important. It actually is the leading cause of PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 152 1 weather-related death in the U.S. And California and all 2 of the western region is one of the areas where deaths 3 from heat waves have not been falling. They've been 4 falling in other areas of the country with more people 5 installing air conditioning. 6 This event was just a huge anomaly. It was so 7 different than previous weather. I've got some 8 information later on that. As you can see, I put up there 9 the excess morality in France has been estimated around 10 15,000. In Portugal, it was around 1300. Portugal is a 11 much smaller country, but Portugal a couple years ago 12 instituted an early warning system, so they notified their 13 public that there was a heat wave going on. And it seemed 14 to have made a really big difference in the effect. 15 This is what's considered a one in 500 year 16 event. You would expect to see this about one every 500 17 years. We've not had an event this large in the U.S. At 18 the height of the heat wave in and around Paris, there was 19 more than 2,000 excess deaths per day. That's over and 20 above what you would have expected. 21 I didn't put it in, but there's a lovely slide 22 that Mike McGein from the CDC likes to use for the heat 23 wave of 1995 in Chicago. And the Chicago heat wave was 24 not anywhere as big an anomaly. About 800 excess deaths, 25 something like that. And it happened during a time when PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 153 1 they have a street fair called Taste of Chicago where the 2 restaurants put food out and people come out. And Mike 3 took a photograph of the back of the coroner's office, 4 because the coroner's office had confiscated the 5 refrigerated vans that people were using for the food and 6 had eight of them lined up behind the coroner's office to 7 hold all the bodies. 8 --o0o-- 9 DR. EBI: This particular heat wave in Europe, 10 the issue is not just the heat. It was the air pollution. 11 Very high ozone levels. These are two studies that have 12 come out recently taking a look at the contribution of 13 heat versus air pollution in the number of deaths. 14 You can see in the UK the record temperature was 15 38 and a half degrees. That's about 95 degrees. That was 16 the maximum temperature, the highest temperature they've 17 seen since they began collecting records. And a quarter 18 to a third of the deaths were probably attributable to air 19 pollution. 20 The Netherlands did not have temperature records 21 broken. The highest temperature was lower. And they also 22 estimated that a fair proportion of their excess deaths 23 were due to air pollution. 24 --o0o-- 25 DR. EBI: This is a nice piece of work done by PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 154 1 somebody in Bosel looking at the 2003 heat wave, which in 2 Bosel was the warmest summer they had since 1540. And if 3 you look at the baseline, as Dan mentioned, there's a 4 climate normal that's used as a baseline. It's usually 5 1961 to '90. And that gives you the distribution of 6 temperatures -- maximum temperatures in Bosel. Right 7 now the total spread of temperatures in Bosel -- usually, 8 the high temperatures range about 35, maybe 40 degrees. 9 So up to about 100 degrees. 10 This is what is projected under a fairly 11 aggressive climate change scenario for 2071 to 2100. So 12 quite a huge shift. In fact, you're saying the maximum 13 temperatures would shift from 30 to about 80, up to 48 14 degrees. That's almost 120 degrees would be expected in 15 some summers by 2100. And this is what was seen in 2003. 16 So you can see that it's pretty much on line with 17 what's expected for the future. And so this heat wave is 18 being used as an analogue for what things might look like 19 in the future. The last really hot summer they had was in 20 1947, and you can see there is quite a big difference in 21 terms of the maximum temperatures. 22 --o0o-- 23 DR. EBI: To switch to flooding, there's lots of 24 health impacts of flooding. This is a photograph of 25 downtown Dresden in the summer of 2002. Europe has had PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 155 1 two one-in-500 year events in five years; the flood of 2 2002 and the heat wave of 2003. 3 Floods are associated with lots of different 4 health outcomes from the direct impacts of the flood 5 causing deaths and injuries, infectious diseases. There's 6 been a number of cases of outbreaks of infectious diseases 7 in various cities. Leptospirosis in the Czech Republic 8 associated with flooding. 9 There were problems of toxic exposures because 10 flood waters go everywhere. They go into buildings they 11 shouldn't go into. They go into five-gallon drums you 12 wish they didn't. And people have adverse health affects 13 from that. 14 There is increasing amounts of research looking 15 at the mental health impacts showing that the mental 16 health impacts are quite significant and last for a long 17 time. And everywhere in Europe they saw increased demands 18 on the health systems with flooding. 19 --o0o-- 20 DR. EBI: These are some photographs in Dresden 21 in 2002. The top one shows the train station to give you 22 a sense of the disruption there was. People use the train 23 for commuting. It was impossible to get to work. 24 If you look at the photograph on the right-hand 25 side, the line on the wall at somebody's home is where the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 156 1 flood waters went to. 2 But what I want to focus is on the photograph on 3 the left. Dresden had to evacuate at four of its 4 hospitals. And there's two things that happened they 5 weren't expecting. 6 The first is an institutional issue. The flood 7 waters were coming. The city said we've got to evacuate. 8 We've got to get these people out of the hospitals. And 9 one of the hospitals said, "But we're in charge of making 10 that decision," at which point there was some 11 institutional wrangling over who got to make the decision 12 about whether or not to evacuate while you've got 13 critically ill patients in the hospital. And they have 14 subsequently developed plans for when the next flood comes 15 who's in charge, who does what, who makes the decisions, 16 and how it's going to work, because everyone was quite 17 unhappy with how that worked. 18 The second was equipment. The hospitals were 19 flooded. And they discovered as they got the patients out 20 the equipment was not flood proof. So they have all the 21 equipment that patients need for their care is 22 contaminated, and it's contaminated with dirty water. 23 They weren't prepared for what they had to do to get the 24 equipment back in stream to take care of the patients. 25 --o0o-- PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 157 1 DR. EBI: Also want to mention salmonella, food 2 poisoning in general. This is from some work that's being 3 done, again, in Europe from climate change adaptation 4 strategies in human health project. Looked at the rate of 5 Salmonella in ten countries in Europe and the temperature 6 one week before the onset of the illness. I picked Spain 7 for this one because the temperatures are the closest to 8 California. Most of the other temperatures are much 9 cooler. 10 And you can see there's no threshold. 11 Temperatures start rising, and the number of cases start 12 rising. The U.S. estimates there's around eight million 13 cases of food borne illness every year. Much of it is due 14 to food handling. And there's not specific instructions 15 to people as temperatures get warmer to improve their food 16 handling. Overall, the study estimated about 35 percent 17 of the cases of Salmonella were due to changes in 18 temperature. 19 --o0o-- 20 DR. EBI: I want to finish up describing a study 21 that was done for the World Health Organization. It's the 22 global burden of disease study that was estimating the 23 global health impacts of climate change and looking at the 24 health impacts from the year 2000 to 2030 and how much of 25 the risk could be reduced by reducing or stabilizing PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 158 1 greenhouse gas emissions. 2 --o0o-- 3 DR. EBI: The study took various scenarios of 4 greenhouse gas emissions. Dan showed you some of those. 5 Put them into a climate model to get a range of changes 6 and temperature and precipitation. Put those into human 7 impact models and looked at how things change, like the 8 slide I just showed you with salmonella about how things 9 change with temperature and how they change with 10 precipitation. 11 From the model, they then estimated DALYs, which 12 are disability of life years lost. They can sort of -- 13 they're a combination of premature mortality, people die 14 from diseases earlier than what you expect. And they 15 assume a life expectancy of the life expectancy of Japan. 16 That's the country with the longest life expectancy. But 17 they also take into account morbidity. They take into 18 account serious chronic diseases. And, basically, what 19 they do is estimate how many years you are dead with the 20 disease. So if you're schizophrenic, they figure that if 21 you're schizophrenic for ten years, you've got really five 22 years of full life and five years where they put more or 23 less in the deceased category. There's not really a 24 better way to explain it, but that's what they do. 25 --o0o-- PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 159 1 DR. EBI: These are the diseases they looked at, 2 and it's important to notice that the diseases were 3 selected based on three criteria. One is the disease has 4 to be sensitive to climate. It has to be an important 5 burden to global health. And there has to be a model 6 available. And there's not many models available for 7 diseases. There's lots of diseases we'd like to have 8 looked at but cannot because we don't have the modeling 9 available. So these are the ones that are looked at. 10 --o0o-- 11 DR. EBI: Then look at various scenarios on 12 mitigated emissions, stabilization at two different CO2 13 equivalents, and looking at the baseline. 14 --o0o-- 15 DR. EBI: And these are the results for year 2000 16 and year 2020. 2000 is in green. 2020 is in red. Deaths 17 are on the left. DALYs on the right. You can see that 18 these diseases are currently causing a tremendous amount 19 of burden of disease in the world. And that's going to go 20 up, unless ranges are made to both mitigate greenhouse gas 21 emissions and to adapt to the consequences of the climate 22 change. 23 --o0o-- 24 DR. EBI: These are the conclusions from that 25 study. They broke it down by developing countries. As PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 160 1 you can imagine, much of the impact is in the developing 2 countries. The largest impacts, as you saw are, from 3 diarrhea, malnutrition, and vector borne diseases. As Dan 4 noticed, there is a tremendous amount of uncertainty in 5 those. But unless we do something, it's likely these 6 diseases will go up. 7 --o0o-- 8 DR. EBI: With that, I'd like to say thank you. 9 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much indeed. 10 Questions? 11 I have a couple of questions. 12 Ms. Riordan. 13 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Mine isn't really a 14 question. It's just to say thank you very much, because I 15 thought your report offered some very interesting things 16 for people to think about. Not only those of us who are 17 involved in air quality, but health management. Very 18 interesting. And I'm glad to know people are thinking 19 about this and trying to make the right decisions for the 20 future. 21 DR. EBI: Thank you. 22 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Couple things. Clearly, from 23 what you were saying, and Professor Cayan, it seems that 24 climate change is underway. That's the impression. From 25 what you're saying, there's clearly a link at least PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 161 1 between climate change and public health. And I 2 understood what Dr. Cayan also said, that it is important 3 what's happening in California. What's your perspective? 4 Because we get the argument, well, what's the point of 5 doing anything in California? Really, climate change is a 6 global issue, and it's not going to be really significant. 7 DR. EBI: Completely agree with Dan. If you look 8 at what's written in other regions, people say, "And 9 California is." That's held up not only in other states 10 within the U.S., but in Europe, as an example of things 11 that can be done, programs that can be successful, changes 12 that can be made. 13 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. And, 14 again, I think that it's great to hear some of these. You 15 brought some real world experiences and knit them together 16 as well. 17 Thank you very much, Dr. Cayan. Thank you very 18 much, indeed. 19 And thank you to staff for inviting them. 20 Take just a moment while we change staff. 21 The next item is 04-7-5, Proposed Amendments to 22 the Unihose Dispenser Requirements in the Regulation for 23 Certification of Vapor Recovery Systems of Dispensing 24 Facilities. That's for gasoline service stations. 25 In March 2000, this Board approved the enhanced PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 162 1 vapor recovery, or EVR program, which made major changes 2 to certification standards for vapor recovery systems at 3 service stations. Existing service stations are in the 4 process of updating their vapor recovery systems to meet 5 the new standards. The proposed amendments to the EVR 6 program to be presented today are intended to reduce costs 7 to service station operators to comply with the EVR 8 standards. Again, I think it's a great example of staff 9 monitoring and seeing what's going on. 10 So I'd like to turn it over to Executive Officer 11 Ms. Witherspoon to introduce the item and begin staff 12 presentation. 13 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Thank you, 14 Chairman Lloyd. 15 The proposed amendment before you today is 16 staff's response to comments the gasoline marketers made 17 earlier this year during the Administration's five-year 18 retrospective regulatory review. At that time, the oil 19 industry gave us data that indicated the cost of making 20 gas station's vapor recovery systems compatible with 21 on-vehicle vapor recovery systems would be higher than we 22 initially thought because of the way the compatibility 23 requirements interacted with other rules we had related to 24 unihoses. Staff has identified a way to remove that 25 conflict and to reduce compliance costs without PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 163 1 sacrificing emission reductions. 2 At this time, I'd like to turn the presentation 3 to Cindy Castronovo of our Monitoring and Laboratory 4 Division who will review staff's proposed changes. 5 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 6 presented as follows.) 7 MS. CASTRONOVO: Thank you, Ms. Witherspoon. 8 Good afternoon, Chairman Lloyd and members of the Board. 9 Today, I will present proposed revisions to the unihose 10 dispenser requirement for gasoline dispensing facilities. 11 --o0o-- 12 MS. CASTRONOVO: Our presentation will begin with 13 some background on the vapor recovery program, including 14 the current implementation schedule for enhanced vapor 15 recovery, or EVR, which the Board approved in March 2000. 16 We will discuss how staff's proposed amendments relate to 17 the EVR requirement for compatibility with vehicles 18 equipped with on-board refueling vapor recovery, or ORVR. 19 We'll cover the cost impacts of the proposal and discuss 20 changes in the cost effectiveness. We'll provide a 21 summary of comments received and our plans to resolve 22 stakeholders' concerns in future EVR actions. 23 --o0o-- 24 MS. CASTRONOVO: Vapor recovery is an important 25 program for control of reactive organic gas emissions. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 164 1 This chart compares the emission reductions in tons per 2 day for the South Coast Air Basin for three major emission 3 strategies. As shown here, the emission reductions 4 attributable to vapor recovery are estimated at 108 tons 5 per day, more than the reductions for low emission 6 vehicles and cleaner burning gasoline. 7 --o0o-- 8 MS. CASTRONOVO: The EVR regulations effect two 9 types of gasoline transfer which take place at service 10 stations, which are characterized as Phase 1 and Phase 2. 11 As shown on the slide, Phase 1 vapor recovery returns 12 vapors shown in pink from the service station underground 13 storage tank to the cargo tank truck and eventually to the 14 terminal vapor control system. 15 Phase 2 vapor recovery routes the vapors 16 displaced from fueling vehicles back into the underground 17 storage tank. Phase 1 and Phase 2 equipment must be 18 certified by ARB to meet emission standards. The ARB 19 certification is the standard for most other states and 20 many countries around the world. 21 --o0o-- 22 MS. CASTRONOVO: The enhanced vapor recovery, or 23 EVR, regulations established new standards for vapor 24 recovery systems to reduce emissions during storage and 25 transfer of gasoline at gasoline dispensing facilities. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 165 1 The ERV program is divided into six EVA modules. Each 2 module represents one or more standards for vapor recovery 3 systems. The first module applies to Phase 1 vapor 4 recovery systems. Modules 2 through 6 are requirements 5 for Phase 2 vapor recovery systems. Our proposal today 6 relates to efforts to comply with Module 3 ORVR 7 compatibility, which I'll discuss in the next few slides. 8 --o0o-- 9 MS. CASTRONOVO: On-board refueling vapor 10 recovery, or ORVR, provides for collection of the 11 refueling vapors in a carbon canister on the vehicle. It 12 performs the same function as a Phase 2 vapor recovery 13 system and has the potential to compete with the Phase 2 14 vapor recovery system at service stations. If you drive a 15 newer car, chances are it has ORVR. Here's the schedule 16 for ORVR vehicles. The schedule shows the percentage of 17 each vehicle class that must meet the ORVR requirement per 18 model year. According to the chart, all 2004 model 19 passenger light-duty and medium-duty vehicles less than 20 6,000 pounds are now equipped with ORVR. 21 --o0o-- 22 MS. CASTRONOVO: Using the ORVR phasing schedule 23 and data on the current vehicle population, we can project 24 the average percentage of the ORVR vehicles in California. 25 As of 2004, we are averaging about 30 percent ORVR PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 166 1 penetration. 2 --o0o-- 3 MS. CASTRONOVO: Why are we concerned about ORVR 4 vehicles? Field tests show that some types of Phase 2 5 vapor recovery systems are not compatible with ORVR 6 vehicles. During the fueling of an ORVR vehicle, vapor 7 that would normally be recovered by the Phase 2 system is 8 instead collected on the vehicle canister. However, Phase 9 2 assist systems with vapor pumps are still trying to draw 10 in vapors. Since vapor is not available, the Phase 2 11 system draws in air through the nozzle. The air becomes 12 saturated with gasoline, which leads to an increase in 13 vapor volume in the underground storage tank, which, in 14 turn, causes excess emissions out the service station vent 15 valve shown on the left. 16 --o0o-- 17 MS. CASTRONOVO: We estimate that four and a half 18 tons per day of gasoline vapor emissions would be reduced 19 in 2010 if all Phase 2 systems were ORVR compatible. ARB 20 certified the first ORVR compatible system in 1998, and 21 currently, there are three ORVR compatible systems 22 available. These are the Healy, the Balance, and the 23 Hertz systems. However, we estimate that about half of 24 the systems or stations in California are not yet ORVR 25 compatible and will need to upgrade their current systems PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 167 1 by April 2005. 2 --o0o-- 3 MS. CASTRONOVO: Here's the current ERV 4 implementation time line. New stations must comply with 5 the requirements in effect at the time of installation. 6 Under state law, existing systems or stations have up to 7 four years to comply. The final compliance date for all 8 facilities to meet a standard is the date at the end of 9 the colored bar. As you can see, all stations must comply 10 with the ORVR compatibility standard by April 2005. 11 As indicated by the time line, the ORVR deadline 12 overlaps the unihose dispenser implementation period. 13 Unihose dispensers are required for stations installed 14 after April 2003, but are not required for existing 15 stations until the gasoline dispensers are modified or 16 replaced. 17 So what is a unihose? 18 --o0o-- 19 MS. CASTRONOVO: The unihose dispenser 20 configuration has one nozzle that is used for all grades 21 of gasoline, as shown in the photo on the left. The 22 six-pack configuration shown on the right provides a 23 separate nozzle for each gasoline grade. 24 As I already mentioned, under the EVR 25 regulations, new installation must be unihose. Stations PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 168 1 using six-pack dispensers must upgrade to unihose upon 2 dispenser modification or replacement. The rationale 3 behind the unihose requirement is that reducing the 4 nozzles and the associated hoses and fittings at each 5 dispenser reduces the potential for fugitive vapor leaks. 6 During the Governor's regulation review, gasoline 7 marketers commented that the unihose dispenser regulatory 8 language would force a costly change to unihose dispensers 9 when upgrading systems to be ORVR compatible. This was an 10 unintended consequence that was intended to occur when 11 dispensers are replaced at the end of their useful life. 12 Staff proposes to amend the unihose requirement 13 to allow continued use of the six-pack dispensers, and 14 thus reduce costs associated with the ORVR upgrades. 15 --o0o-- 16 MS. CASTRONOVO: The intent of the unihose 17 requirement is to encourage the use of unihose dispensers 18 when a station is upgraded to comply with all of the ERV 19 requirements as fully implemented in 2008. Staff did not 20 anticipate that the unihose configuration would be 21 required in order to meet the April 2005 ORVR 22 requirements. 23 Reducing the number of nozzles from six to two 24 would minimize the sources of potential gasoline vapor 25 leaks, thus reducing fugitive vapor emissions. Although PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 169 1 continued use of the six-pack dispensers would allow more 2 possible leak sources, emissions are limited by existing 3 leak standards. Since the emissions benefits related to 4 the unihose configuration are based solely on leak 5 standards and these have not been changed, there is no 6 quantitative loss of emissions reductions for staff's 7 proposal. Thus, continued use of the six-pack dispensers 8 does not effect our SIP commitment for EVR emission 9 reductions. 10 --o0o-- 11 MS. CASTRONOVO: This slide shows how staff's 12 proposal results in ORVR upgrade cost savings for stations 13 with the Gilbarco six-pack dispensers. The cost estimates 14 were provided by the Western State Petroleum Association 15 and the California Independent Oil Marketers Association 16 in their January comments. 17 The upgrade cost depends on the number and type 18 of the original dispensers. Newer six-pack dispensers 19 cost less to change to unihose under the existing 20 regulation, as retrofit kits are available. 21 According to industry comments, the older 22 six-pack dispensers cannot be retrofitted, and the entire 23 dispensers must be replaced for the ORVR upgrades. This 24 leads to the high cost of up to $80,000 for upgrades 25 requiring dispenser replacement. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 170 1 Under staff's proposal, the costs are reduced 2 most dramatically for stations with the older dispensers, 3 which result in a $50,000 cost savings. As was presented 4 in the staff report, substantial cost savings would also 5 occur for the other major assist system, the Wayne Vac 6 system. 7 --o0o-- 8 MS. CASTRONOVO: Calculating the cost 9 effectiveness is a way to compare alternatives in emission 10 controls. The cost effectiveness is the ratio of cost to 11 comply with the regulation to the emission reductions 12 achieved. As we just discussed, the cost to comply with 13 the ORVR standards that were provided by industry are 14 higher than staff's original estimates, which leads to a 15 higher cost effectiveness of $7.05. Under staff's 16 proposal, the ORVR cost effectiveness would be reduced 43 17 percent to about $4 per pound. 18 --o0o-- 19 MS. CASTRONOVO: We have worked closely with the 20 stakeholders identified here in preparing the staff's 21 proposal. A summary of the outreach efforts will be 22 presented by the Ombudsman following this presentation. 23 --o0o-- 24 MS. CASTRONOVO: Staff has received only positive 25 comments in support of our proposal to amend the unihose PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 171 1 dispenser requirement. As part of the public input to 2 this proposal, gasoline retailers have also questioned the 3 feasibility of the April 1st, 2005, deadline for modifying 4 all stations to be compatible with most 1998 and newer 5 vehicles that are equipped with on-board refueling vapor 6 controls. 7 CAPCOA has also expressed concern about this 8 deadline. They have suggested a delay of one year. Our 9 legal counsel advises that this subject matter is outside 10 the scope of the notice for the unihose proposal. Thus, 11 this issue cannot be resolved at today's Board meeting. 12 On a more pragmatic note, other stakeholders such 13 as manufacturers of ORVR compatible vapor recovery systems 14 and public interest groups may not be aware of the 15 suggested delay, and we want to get their input. 16 --o0o-- 17 MS. CASTRONOVO: A bit more on this issue. All 18 those certified ORVR certified compatible systems are 19 available. Some station owners have been waiting for a 20 full enhanced vapor recovery system to be certified so 21 that only one modification to the station meeting all new 22 vapor recovery requirements can be made. 23 Certification of EVR systems has taken longer 24 than expected, and the first full complete system is 25 expected to be certified by September. As a result, we PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 172 1 have a large number of stations that need modification, 2 and the time remaining to achieve compliance with the ORVR 3 compatibility deadline is tight. Staff's preliminary 4 assessment is that a delay of up to one year may be 5 warranted. However, we need to collect more information 6 from stakeholders in order to fully assess the impacts of 7 a delay in the ORVR compliance date. We can do this and 8 meet all process requirements by bringing a proposal to 9 you at your November Board meeting. 10 --o0o-- 11 MS. CASTRONOVO: In conclusion, this amendment 12 will lower costs for many station owners to comply with 13 the EVR requirements. The proposal was developed with 14 extensive outreach to affected parties with no adverse 15 comments to staff's proposal. 16 We recommend adoption of the proposed amendment 17 with the request that you approve immediate adoption of 18 the unihose change as an emergency regulation so that 19 station owners may realize these cost savings as soon as 20 possible. 21 This concludes my presentation. 22 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much, indeed. 23 Madam Ombudswoman, would you please describe the 24 public participation process that was followed during the 25 development of this regulation and share with us any PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 173 1 observations or concerns at this time. 2 OMBUDSMAN TSCHOGL: Thank you. 3 Mr. Chairman and members of the Board, this rule 4 has been developed, as you heard, with the input from the 5 vapor recovery equipment manufacturers, gasoline marketers 6 and associations, including the Western States Petroleum 7 Association, the California Independent Oil Marketers 8 Association, the San Diego Service Stations Association, 9 California Service Station Association, Automotive Trade 10 Organizations of California, and vapor recovery equipment 11 contractors. Staff also worked closely with the air 12 pollution control districts, including the CAPCOA Vapor 13 Recovery Committee. 14 The proposed amendments were prompted by comments 15 submitted by WSPA and CIOMA on January 30th, 2004, as part 16 of the Governor's five-year regulation review. 17 Consequently, staff began meeting with stakeholders to 18 discuss their concerns in April. And in April, they 19 initiated preparation of the draft regulation. 20 A public workshop was held in Sacramento on June 21 16th, 2004. There were approximately a dozen people in 22 attendance, mostly gasoline marketers and district 23 representatives. The workshop was made available by web 24 broadcast. Staff also held more than twelve meetings with 25 various stakeholders during the months of March through PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 174 1 May. 2 The staff report and the hearing notice were 3 released on June 4th, 2004. The notice was mailed to the 4 vapor recovery mailing list, which includes all air 5 pollution control districts. The documents were also 6 posted on ARB web pages, and an announcement was sent to 7 the vapor recovery list serve advising where to access 8 these documents via the Internet. There are nearly 400 9 individual companies on the vapor recovery mailing list 10 and approximately 700 on the vapor recovery list serve. 11 Thank you, and this concludes my comments. 12 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 13 Questions from the Board? 14 With that, I'd like to call the first three 15 witnesses who are signed up to speak. Larry Greene, Jay 16 McKeeman, and Steve Arita. 17 And congratulations, Larry, on your appointment 18 to head of the Sacramento Air Quality Management District. 19 MR. GREENE: Thank you, Dr. Lloyd. That will 20 happen at the end of the month. So right now I'm still at 21 Yolo Solano, but I'm the President of CAPCOA, the 22 California Air Pollution Control Officer. 23 That's the capacity I'm here to speak today. 24 Chairman Lloyd and members of the Air Resources 25 Board, I'm here to support this proposal and to make one PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 175 1 other comment. We support the proposal up here. We also 2 support the idea of bringing back in November the question 3 of moving the deadline from April 1st, 2005, out a year on 4 installation of the ORVR compatible Phase 2 recovery. We 5 feel like there's sufficient justification for that move. 6 We are, however, concerned that since this is 7 such a large emission source in all the districts, that we 8 don't end up in 2006 with a situation where we then 9 started installing. Rather than get to that point, we 10 feel like there's going to be systems available long 11 before that. So we are asking and will and have sent a 12 letter to the Air Resources Board and will in our efforts 13 over the next several months in discussions at the 14 workshops talk about a compliance schedule. 15 We've worked with WSPA on this, and we believe 16 that they are okay with this. We've done a lot of staff 17 work. The compliance schedule would require for 18 stations -- or owners of ten or less stations, they would 19 simply look to the March 1st, 2006, date. And that would 20 be their date for compliance. Owners of ten or more 21 stations would by August 1st, 2005, commit to have 40 22 percent of their stations have the system in place. By 23 December 1st, 2005, 70 percent. And then by the 24 April 1st, 2006, would have 100 percent. 25 So we are proposing a compliance schedule where PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 176 1 those people who own a lot of stations can go ahead and 2 work with the districts. And it's important to spread 3 that out, because this is going to be an extensive 4 installation and there's going to be a limited number of 5 contractors. So we need to spread that out over a period 6 of time so we're able to get those installed in a 7 reasonable manner. The districts can do the permitting 8 and everything. So rather than wait until 2006, we want 9 to spread that out over a year's time or so, so we have, 10 by the time we get to 2006, all the systems in place. 11 That's our proposal, and we will be talking with 12 you more about that and with the Air Resources Board all 13 about that. 14 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Who would enforce the 15 schedule? 16 MR. GREENE: The owners of ten or more would 17 commit to the district. They would work with the district 18 to establish a percentage. And then we would work with 19 them. 20 The districts are also going to have to commit to 21 process the permits in a timely manner, too. This would 22 not be a proposal where they would come in and work with 23 you and commit that. They would work with local 24 districts. We generally know who -- we are very familiar 25 with those people, the station owners. And usually it's PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 177 1 BP or Texaco or somebody who centrally locates. It's the 2 company that has that. And we can work with their central 3 folks to make it happen. Say they have 100 stations, they 4 would do 30-30-30 over that year's time, rather than wait 5 until the end of the time, and then we have all those to 6 process at the last minute. 7 That's our proposal for a compliance schedule. 8 And we think -- the industry is okay with that. They're 9 willing to trade that for the extra year, and I think we 10 can work with each other in that regard. 11 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Is staff okay with that? 12 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: We're okay with 13 the concept. We need to explore it with the stakeholders. 14 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I thought you said it was 40 15 percent you wanted first of all. 16 MR. GREENE: Well, the schedule that we initially 17 put in our letter was 40-30-30. 18 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Okay. 19 MR. GREENE: 40 initially, and 30-30 at the next 20 two time frames. 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: So you'll work with staff to 22 explore that? 23 MR. GREENE: We've spent some significant time 24 over the last couple of months to get to this point with 25 industry and staff here. So we'll continue talking about PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 178 1 that. But I think this seems to be a pretty acceptable 2 proposal between everybody here. 3 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Okay. Supervisor DeSaulnier. 4 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: This is separate, but I 5 just wanted to congratulate you as well and say we're 6 keeping a long tradition of having easy to get along with 7 APCOAs downwind from the Bay Area. 8 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Professor Friedman. 9 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Well, this has not 10 been workshopped, has it? 11 MR. GREENE: We put in this piece because what we 12 would like to have the staff do is have it considered over 13 the next -- 14 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: Another 15-day 15 notice. 16 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Part of the 17 November rule making. 18 MR. GREENE: No. This is not part of the 15 day. 19 BOARD MEMBER FRIEDMAN: Okay. 20 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. Jay McKeeman, 21 Steven Arita, and Mark Kravis. 22 MR. McKEEMAN: Good afternoon, Chairman Lloyd, 23 Board members, staff. 24 We're here to support this measure. We think 25 it's a good step in the right direction. As already has PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 179 1 been brought up by CAPCOA, we do believe there is a need 2 for a year delay on the ORVR deadline. Our members are 3 small businesses. They provide fuel delivery services 4 throughout the state, but are prominent in rural areas. 5 We provide fuel to local governments, to emergency 6 services, to agriculture. But most importantly, our 7 members are small businesses. And they need economic 8 flexibility. 9 An important point to remember in this discussion 10 is that our members have been waiting for an EVR 11 compliance system. As small businesses, they can only 12 spend a limited amount of money on upgrading their 13 facilities. Having to spend money twice, first to meet 14 ORVR and then having to meet EVR, is not an economically 15 viable consideration for them. So although this ORVR 16 requirement has been around for a while, our members have 17 been waiting for the simple solution, the most direct 18 solution. And I have to say that that solution is 19 still -- at the time of this hearing still not available. 20 So that extra year is critically important to give our 21 members adequate choice. 22 We've looked at the CAPCOA compliance schedule. 23 We're very comfortable with that. We especially 24 appreciate the flexibility given to those who have ten 25 stations or under. And the reason for that is when our PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 180 1 members get involved in a fairly compressed time line, we 2 don't have the volume to secure advanced scheduling or 3 preferable scheduling with the installers. There's only 4 so many installers around. So we have to wait until the 5 end of the line or get pushed until the end of the line in 6 terms of doing the compliance. So we appreciate that 7 extra flexibility. But I think that this is really an 8 opportunity for the Air Board and the regulated community 9 to work in a cooperative manner and get things done. 10 I need to remind everybody that this is really a 11 discussion about when things are getting done, not 12 necessarily if they're getting done. Because by the end 13 of the EVR requirement, everybody is going to have to have 14 an ERV system in place. So I appreciate your time and am 15 here to answer any questions. 16 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. Thank you very 17 much. 18 Steve Arita and Mark Kravis. 19 MR. ARITA: Good afternoon, Chairman Lloyd and 20 members of the Board. My name is Steve Arita with the 21 Western States Petroleum Association. On behalf of WSPA, 22 we strongly support staff's proposed regulatory amendments 23 to the unihose dispenser requirements. 24 As noted in staff's presentation, the proposed 25 amendments will significantly improve the cost PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 181 1 effectiveness of converting systems to be ORVR compatible. 2 We also appreciate staff's analysis of the information we 3 provided. And I would just like to note if there are any 4 questions or issues related to the information that we 5 provided, we do have available here Mr. Todd Tomura of 6 Sonoma Technology who conducted the analysis on behalf of 7 the WSPA and COIMA. Having said that, we do urge the 8 Board to adopt the proposed amendments. 9 Secondly, as noted at the end of staff's 10 presentation and the presentation by Mr. Greene 11 representing on behalf of the CAPCOA, clearly meeting the 12 ORVR deadline date is going to be problematic. And we 13 strongly recommend the deadline be extended at least one 14 year. You have heard all the reasons why one year is 15 necessary, but I would just like to add a few more. 16 Since the EVR program was adopted in 2000, we 17 have commented on the fact that the separate deadlines for 18 ORVR and full EVR compliance may require stations to have 19 to retrofit twice unnecessarily. The issue of having to 20 retrofit more than one time to comply with the ORVR and 21 EVR requirements was discussed back in December of 2002 22 when the Board in their adopting resolution addressed the 23 double retrofit issue. 24 As you have heard, unfortunately, we all had 25 expectations that by now we would have a full Phase 2 EVR PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 182 1 system. Unfortunately, that is not the case. However, as 2 noted by staff's comments, we do expect that there will be 3 a full Phase 2 EVR system available sometime this fall. 4 In that regard, we do believe a one-year 5 extension will provide the time necessary to allow a 6 system to become available and allow operators the 7 opportunity to install a system one time, one retrofit. 8 As you had heard from Mr. Greene and CAPCOA strictly from 9 a practical timing standpoint, clearly, it's going to be 10 very problematic again to meet the April 1st, 2005, 11 deadline date for meeting ORVR requirements. 12 I could go on and describe in detail the need to 13 get the permits and the districts requiring to process the 14 permits and issuing them and retaining contractors and 15 scheduling contractors and getting district testing done 16 in a timely manner. Clearly, a one-year extension is 17 going to be needed. And I would like to add, even then, 18 it's going to be a very tight time schedule. 19 As Mr. Greene indicated, clearly there is a very 20 stringent milestone compliance schedule that CAPCOA has 21 proposed. I will tell you, it's going to be a very 22 challenging schedule to meet. However, having said that, 23 we do accept the milestone requirements and conditions. 24 While we understand that the Board does not meet 25 next month, we do understand that staff is required to PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 183 1 comply with noticing and public workshop requirements, the 2 effort to extend the ORVR deadline date, we would urge, 3 where possible, the Board take action on our request for a 4 one-year extension when it returns in September. The 5 longer we go into the year, the more compressed the time 6 line becomes. Therefore, again, we would urge that, if 7 possible, when you return in September you take up this 8 issue. 9 To summarize, we support and urge the Board to 10 adopt the unihose dispenser amendments. As noted in the 11 staff presentations and in CAPCOA's letter, we support and 12 request the Board extend the ORVR deadline date one year. 13 We, again, commit and agree to the proposed milestone 14 requirements and conditions set out by CAPCOA. And, 15 lastly, again, where possible, we urge the Board to adopt 16 the one-year extension when it returns in September. 17 Thank you, and I'm available to answer any 18 questions. 19 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 20 Staff have any comments? 21 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Only that it's 22 not feasible for us to return in September with the 23 regulation for you, because the noticed deadline and the 24 full staff report would have to be published on August 25 6th. It's not written. We haven't held any workshops. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 184 1 We're striving to come back as quickly as possible. We 2 belive that's November. That's backing up from a prior 3 December schedule. And the same staff that are going to 4 complete this emergency regulation and get it filed with 5 AOL, as soon as that's done, will turn around and start 6 writing the other report. So it will be as expeditious as 7 possible. 8 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Okay. 9 GENERAL COUNSEL JOHNSTON: In fact, the notice 10 for the September hearing is due this next Tuesday, so the 11 27th. So we would have to write the notice. 12 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 13 Mark Kravis. 14 MR. KRAVIS: Good afternoon, Board members. My 15 name is Mark Kravis, and I'm a sales rep for a vapor 16 recovery equipment manufacturer, Healy Systems. I'm here 17 today to give you a perspective of the manufacturer. 18 Whenever the ARB needs to change a vapor recovery 19 system to make it better, they come to the manufacturing 20 industry to produce the product. But it's not as easy as 21 it sounds. Many of the items -- most of items are not 22 items on a shelf. The items have to be conceived. They 23 have to be produced. They have to be tested. They have 24 to pass that testing. And then they have to be in 25 production and sold. All of that with the hope that PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 185 1 someone will buy it and that the Board will implement the 2 rule that was being discussed at the time. 3 In February of 2000, the ARB staff published a 4 report that was to require ORVR compatibility linking the 5 new cars with a new vapor recovery system. These new 6 systems would prevent vapor generation and reduce tank 7 pressure. At that time, the vapor recovery manufacturers 8 proceeded to produce this device, and some products were 9 available in that year. 10 Originally, the new station requirements were to 11 be implemented in the year 2000. But that was changed -- 12 I'm sorry, in the year 2001. That was changed and made 13 effective in the year 2003. During those two years, more 14 non-ORVR systems were installed into the California base 15 of retail stations. I say this to make you aware of how 16 important it is for your stance on a deadline to convert 17 to ORVR compatibility. 18 A great example of a firm stance is the Bay Area 19 Air Quality Management District. On June 1st, 2000, the 20 Bay Area Air Quality Management District had their own 21 rule, and the rule stated that no non-ORVR systems be 22 installed. So only ORVR systems would be installed after 23 that date. As a result of that, they now presently have a 24 lower base of non-ORVR systems than other districts, in 25 contrast to something like South Coast, which has a 41 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 186 1 percent base of non-ORVR systems. These are 2 pressure-generated systems. In Bay Area air quality, it's 3 only one-third of their base. So you have 50 percent and 4 almost one-third. 5 I'm going to make the case in a little while that 6 stations -- this can be done. All these stations can be 7 converted. But first I'd like to make a point about 8 information. 9 Accurate information is important to you, because 10 that's the way you make your decisions. In the recent 11 past, we've noticed some ARB numbers that appear to be 12 inaccurate. They appear to be staged or aligned in a way 13 where they're one sided. An example of this would be a 14 comparison of two systems. One system was shown at list 15 price and the other system was shown at a price of cost. 16 This gives the reader of that report an incomplete -- or 17 inaccurate view of the cost of those systems. 18 I brought this to the attention of the ARB staff, 19 and we have agreed to work closer. And we will start 20 giving them information to compare with the information 21 they're getting from other sources. 22 Now I'd like to speak to you about some recent 23 ARB conclusions. Information was given to the ARB staff 24 concluding there were 4- to 5,000 stations that have 25 non-ORVR systems in use today. Concluded from that was PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 187 1 this belief that we were seeing today that there is not 2 enough time to change the non-ORVR systems to compatible 3 ORVR systems, which are available today. 4 I've gathered exact data from the largest 5 districts in the state. I used public information 6 requests or spoke to the permitting people involved that 7 have those numbers. That data shows that there are about 8 3,000 non-ORVR stations in operation today. You have that 9 information in front of you and my sources, and I've given 10 that to the ARB staff as well. I've shared that with 11 them. 12 Now that leads me to the next step. How long 13 does it take to convert these stations? From my 14 experience, working side by side with contractors in the 15 field, it takes a crew of three men two days to convert 16 five MPDs from non-ORVR systems to ORVR compatible Balance 17 systems or ORVR vac systems. That's six-hose MPDs or 18 single hose MPDs. Using 25 contractors -- we're going to 19 do a little math -- with three-men crews available, 20 supplying 50 crews, you can complete all the installations 21 in 120 days, about four months, allowing three months for 22 permitting and four months for the installations. Seven 23 months from today, all of the non-ORVR stations can be 24 converted to ORVR compatible stations. And that leaves an 25 additional month and a half, about, to do anything else PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 188 1 that's needed to be done, something that we left behind. 2 Please remember that we, the vapor recovery 3 manufacturers, have geared up. We've hired people. We 4 have bought raw materials. We are stocking our shelves 5 getting ready to implement and sell these products on the 6 April 1st, 2005, deadline for ORVR compatibility. If we 7 extend this date, we reach the inevitable conclusion that 8 those pressurized tank stations will stay in use for that 9 one additional year we're talking about. 10 These systems have been in long enough, and we 11 would like to stay with this date and keep it and not be 12 changed. Thank you. 13 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 14 Does staff want to respond to that? 15 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Well, a couple 16 comments. The first is that this testimony is really 17 directed at the November rule making and not the unihose 18 requirement before you. But it is interesting and useful 19 to the staff. 20 Also, it's not just a matter of whether it's 21 possible to achieve ORVR compatibility by the current 22 schedule, but whether it's desirable to give some gas 23 stations the opportunity to go all the way to ERV and to 24 avoid the double retrofit. And we have an ERV system 25 about to be certified, and enabling them to do that might PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 189 1 take more time than the quicker ORVR upgrade. I'm not 2 sure the staff would dispute anything this witness is 3 saying, but there's other considerations that weight in, 4 too. But we'll certainly look at it as part of our 5 preparation for your November hearing. 6 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Supervisor DeSaulnier, you 7 were out when you missed a nice quote about the Bay Area 8 being used as an example of good rule making. 9 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: I can't take too many 10 positive reinforcements. I knew that was coming and I 11 left. 12 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: It wasn't from staff. It was 13 from a witness. 14 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: I didn't expect it from 15 staff. 16 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Mr. Chairman, I would just 17 say to Mr. Kravis he needs to be involved with the 18 workshops that are going to happen. 19 MR. KRAVIS: Absolutely. I'll be bringing data 20 and information. I've already told the staff that I would 21 do that. Thank you. 22 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 23 That's the end of our witness. 24 Any other comments from the staff? 25 Any other questions from the Board members? PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 190 1 Since all the testimony, written submissions, and 2 staff comments for this item have been entered into the 3 record and the Board has not granted an extension of the 4 comment period, I'm officially closing the record on this 5 portion of the Agenda Item 04-7-5. Written or oral 6 comments received after the comment period has been closed 7 will not be accepted as part of the official record on 8 this agenda item. 9 Any ex parte communication to be divulged? No. 10 Seeing none, we have -- 11 SUPERVISOR PATRICK: Mr. Chairman, I have one. 12 Steve Arita called me just a couple days ago just to let 13 me know he would be making testimony today. It wasn't an 14 extended conversation, but it mirrored some of his 15 comments today. 16 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 17 So we have a resolution before us. So we have -- 18 BOARD MEMBER HUGH FRIEDMAN: So moved. 19 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: A mover and a seconder. 20 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Second. 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: We have motion and a second. 22 All in favor. 23 (Ayes) 24 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Anybody against? 25 Thank you, staff. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 191 1 Take a moment while we go on to the next item, 2 which is Agenda Item 04-7-6. The Board will consider 3 approval of an update to the carbon monoxide maintenance 4 plan as a revision to the state implementation plan or 5 SIP. 6 One of the Board's important responsibilities is 7 to ensure that the state complies with the federal SIP 8 requirements. The SIP provides the framework for 9 attaining federal air quality standards by required 10 deadlines. For standards like carbon monoxide that we are 11 now meeting statewide, the focus shifts to maintaining 12 compliance into the future. The good news is we can 13 easily demonstrate substantial compliance margins even as 14 California continues to grow. 15 This success is due to California's regulation 16 for cleaner vehicles, equipment, and fuel. Last winter, 17 the entire state met the federal carbon monoxide 18 standards, including the last remaining hot spot in South 19 Coast. 20 I would like to turn it over to Ms. Witherspoon 21 to introduce the item and begin the staff presentation. 22 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Thank you, 23 Chairman Lloyd. 24 The plan before you demonstrates how ten areas 25 that achieved the federal carbon monoxide standard in the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 192 1 early 1990s will continue to comply through 2018. 2 And Lucille Van Ommering, who is going to give 3 the staff presentation, will also spend a moment chatting 4 about two additional areas that aren't part of this SIP, 5 but have also attained the carbon monoxide standard and 6 will later have attainment and maintenance plans for you. 7 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 8 presented as follows.) 9 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST VAN OMMERING: Good 10 afternoon, Chairman Lloyd and members of the Board. 11 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Put your mic on, please. 12 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST VAN OMMERING: Am I on 13 now? 14 Good afternoon, Chairman Lloyd and members of the 15 Board. 16 Today, we are requesting that the Board adopt a 17 2004 revision to the carbon monoxide maintenance plan for 18 ten areas in California. The revision updates the CO 19 emission inventories for these areas and fulfills a Clean 20 Air Act requirement to ensure continued maintenance of the 21 federal CO standard through 2018. 22 --o0o-- 23 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST VAN OMMERING: The 24 United States Environmental Protection Agency established 25 two national ambient air quality standards for CO. The PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 193 1 one-hour standard of 35 parts per million, 35 parts of CO 2 per million of air, is achieved in all areas of the state. 3 The eight-hour CO standard of 9 PPM is more 4 protective. Virtually all areas in California now meet 5 this standard. Ten areas of the state made this 6 demonstration in 1995. The L.A. urbanized area has shown 7 attainment since 2002. We will touch upon L.A. in a later 8 slide. 9 Unlike ozone and particulate matter, CO tends to 10 be a more localized pollutant. CO is a key byproduct of 11 motor vehicle exhaust, particularly under stagnant winter 12 conditions in busy transportation corridors. 13 --o0o-- 14 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST VAN OMMERING: Happily, 15 because of California's aggressive motor vehicle control 16 program, CO emissions have dropped dramatically statewide 17 and will continue to do so throughout the decade. 18 --o0o-- 19 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST VAN OMMERING: Once an 20 area achieves a federal air quality standard, U.S. EPA 21 requires a maintenance plan that shows how clean air will 22 be ensured over a 20-year period. The maintenance plan 23 must provide for continued air quality monitoring to 24 identify any future violations, an inventory demonstration 25 that emissions will stay below attainment levels for at PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 194 1 least 20 years, and contingency measures that can be put 2 into place if needed -- 3 --o0o-- 4 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST VAN OMMERING: -- to 5 respond to a future violation of the standard. 6 Ten areas in California that have formally 7 violated the Federal eight-hour CO standard have been 8 redesignated to attainment and are covered by this 9 maintenance plan. Beginning in the north, they are Chico, 10 North and South Lake Tahoe, and San Francisco, Oakland, 11 San Jose urbanized area. In the Central Valley, these 12 areas include Sacramento, Stockton, Modesto, Fresno, and 13 Bakersfield. And in Southern California, San Diego. 14 --o0o-- 15 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST VAN OMMERING: There are 16 two additional areas that have violated the federal 17 eight-hour CO standard. The Los Angeles urbanized area is 18 still officially labeled as non-attainment for the federal 19 CO standard, but now complies based upon monitored air 20 quality. 21 The CO problem in South Coast has been limited to 22 the localized area around the Lynwood monitor. The 23 Lynwood station's topography forms a slight sink that 24 concentrates CO in the winter. With this monitor now 25 attaining the standard, the South Coast District is PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 195 1 currently preparing a redesignation request and 2 maintenance plan for consideration later this year. 3 Likewise, the town of Calexico in Imperial County 4 has also had a history of CO levels above the federal 5 standard, although U.S. EPA has not officially designated 6 the region as non-attainment. Calexico is adjacent to the 7 much larger city of Mexicali on the other side of the 8 border. Emissions from vehicles at the busy border 9 crossing and burning activities are likely responsible for 10 the elevated CO levels. Last year, for the first time, 11 Calexico did not exceed the federal CO standard. 12 --o0o-- 13 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST VAN OMMERING: Between 14 1992 and 1995, each of the ten areas compiled a record of 15 attainment based on air monitoring. 16 In 1996, the Board adopted the first CO 17 maintenance plan for these areas. The plan covered the 18 period through 2010. 19 ARB submitted the maintenance plan to U.S. EPA 20 and requested that each area be redesignated to 21 attainment. U.S. EPA approved California's request in 22 1998. 23 Also in 1998, the Board changed one of the 24 underlying control measures that contributed to CO 25 attainment. The Board rescinded a requirement that PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 196 1 oxygenates be added to wintertime gasoline to cut CO 2 levels for all the areas that had attained the CO 3 standards. The Board made corresponding revisions to the 4 CO maintenance plan demonstrating the change would not 5 interfere with attainment in the ten areas because 6 additional reductions from other ARB regulations more than 7 made up the difference. 8 --o0o-- 9 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST VAN OMMERING: The Clean 10 Air Act requires states to submit a second maintenance 11 plan expanding the maintenance demonstration to cover a 12 full 20 years. The CO or the 2004 plan does exactly that. 13 It extends the clean air demonstration to 2018, which is 14 20 years from U.S. EPA's attainment redesignation in 1998. 15 It incorporates the latest changes to the emission 16 inventory, and it updates the motor vehicle emissions 17 budgets used to assess transportation conformity. 18 --o0o-- 19 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST VAN OMMERING: This 20 slide shows the extent of air quality improvement in the 21 ten urban areas under discussion today. Based on 2003 22 monitoring statistics, CO levels in these areas were 23 between 31 and 90 percent below the Federal eight-hour 24 standard, a significant margin of safety for continued 25 maintenance. This comparison also provides evidence that PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 197 1 removal of the wintertime oxygenates in fuel did not 2 interfere with the ability of these areas to maintain the 3 standard. 4 --o0o-- 5 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST VAN OMMERING: The same 6 can be said for the decline in emissions since 1993. 7 Using today's updated inventory, CO emissions in 2003 and 8 2018 are significantly lower than the 1993 levels that 9 resulted in attainment. This occurs despite growth in 10 population and vehicle miles traveled because of the 11 benefits of cleaner engines and fuels. 12 --o0o-- 13 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST VAN OMMERING: In 14 conclusion -- the check marks aren't there, that's what 15 confused me. That should be checks there. 16 In conclusion, the 2004 plan update demonstrates 17 that CO air quality levels remain well below the federal 18 standard and will continue to do so through the 20-year 19 horizon. CO emissions will continue to decrease through 20 2018 in response to the Board's mobile source emission 21 controls. Moreover, existing contingency measures in the 22 original plan as well as the growing benefits of other 23 adopted regulations are more than adequate to ensure 24 continued maintenance of the standard. Therefore, no 25 additional measures are identified in the update. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 198 1 --o0o-- 2 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST VAN OMMERING: In 3 conclusion, for all these reasons, staff recommends that 4 you adopt the proposed 2004 CO maintenance plan update for 5 submittal to U.S. EPA as a supervision. Thank you, and 6 this concludes my presentation. 7 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 8 Board members have any questions? 9 Delighted to see the Lynwood problem has been 10 solved. I remember dealing with that in the Research 11 Screening Committee for many years. So that's wonderful. 12 I guess you did such a wonderful job on this we 13 have nobody signed up for testimony. We have one letter 14 of support from the Bay Area. 15 So I guess with that, it's not a regulatory item. 16 We do have a resolution before the Board. So -- 17 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Mr. Chairman, I'll move 18 approval of that resolution. 19 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Second. 20 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Second, Ms. D'Adamo. 21 All in favor say aye. 22 (Ayes) 23 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Nobody against. 24 Thank you. 25 Now we move ahead to Agenda Item 04-6-2, status PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 199 1 report on the implementation of the ARB's environmental 2 justice policies and actions. 3 In December of 2001, the Board approved 4 environmental justice policies along with a number of 5 actions to implement the policies. The most fundamental 6 policy is to integrate environmental justice 7 considerations in all ARB programs. And as Chairman, I 8 have closely tracked this process. Today is an 9 opportunity for the public and the Board members to also 10 be updated on the staff's environmental justice efforts. 11 And, again, I'd like to reiterate comments I made 12 at the last Board meeting to thank former Board Member 13 Matt McKinnon for his outstanding efforts in working with 14 the staff and stakeholders on the EJ program. 15 Understanding and responding to the community 16 concerns is at the heart of environmental justice. I 17 continue to be committed to that goal as we carry out our 18 mission to achieve clean air. I'm also pleased to see the 19 progress made in improving the scientific basis of our 20 actions to protect public health in all California 21 communities. And, again, as we discussed this morning, a 22 significant additional stride for our goal to reduce 23 exposure to diesel emissions was taken in the anti-idling 24 regulation. 25 With that, I'd like to turn it over to PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 200 1 Ms. Witherspoon to introduce the item and begin the staff 2 presentation. 3 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Thank you, 4 Chairman Lloyd and members of the Board. 5 The Air Resources Board's environmental justice 6 policies are an important aspect of our community health 7 program and every program that we have. State law defines 8 environmental justice as the fair treatment of all 9 individuals with respect to the development, adoption, 10 implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, 11 regulations, and policies. ARB's policies provide a 12 framework for incorporating environmental justice into our 13 programs consistent with the statutory directive. 14 During the last year, ARB staff has worked with 15 community members, local air districts, and other 16 stakeholders on several environmental justice related 17 efforts. This includes new regulations to reduce public 18 exposure to toxic air contaminants, strengthening 19 enforcement, improving techniques to assess cumulative air 20 pollution impacts, developing information for land use 21 decision makers, and continuing our public outreach 22 efforts. 23 With that introduction, I'll ask Karen Buckley to 24 present the status report. 25 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 201 1 presented as follows.) 2 MS. BUCKLEY: Thank you, Ms. Witherspoon. 3 Good afternoon, Chairman Lloyd and members of the 4 Board. 5 My presentation will provide an update on the 6 actions we have taken to implement ARB's environmental 7 justice policies as adopted in 2001. 8 The stakeholders' process has played a key roll 9 in the implementation of the policies over the past two 10 and a half years. We appreciate the participation of all 11 involved. ARB's policies reflect the environmental 12 directives in state law and are also consistent with the 13 broad goals recommended by CalEPA's Environmental Justice 14 Committee. 15 --o0o-- 16 MS. BUCKLEY: State law defines environmental 17 justice as follows: The fair treatment of people of all 18 races, cultures, and incomes, with respect to the 19 development, adoption, implementation, and enforcement of 20 environmental laws, regulations, and policies. The 21 Board's first policy embodies this concept and sets the 22 framework for our environmental justice efforts. 23 --o0o-- 24 MS. BUCKLEY: Our first policy states: It is the 25 ARB's policy to integrate environmental justice into all PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 202 1 of our programs, policies, and regulations. Our primary 2 focus of our implementation efforts has been to make this 3 consideration part of our every day thinking in each 4 program area. 5 --o0o-- 6 MS. BUCKLEY: This slide lists some of the key 7 areas where we have been integrating environmental justice 8 into our activities. As we go through the presentation, I 9 will highlight how environmental justice considerations 10 come into play in our key programs and regulatory actions. 11 This includes environmental justice training for ARB 12 staff, improved community access to air pollution 13 information, community assessments, and targeted 14 enforcement in communities. For example, over 300 ARB 15 staff have participated in environmental justice training, 16 and our next round of training will begin soon. 17 --o0o-- 18 MS. BUCKLEY: The second policy calls for 19 strengthening our outreach and education efforts in all 20 communities, especially low income and minority 21 communities. This is important because we want community 22 members to feel they can effectively participate in our 23 regulatory process. With that goal in mind, we developed 24 a public participation guidebook and have expanded public 25 access to community-specific air quality information. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 203 1 --o0o-- 2 MS. BUCKLEY: The public participation guidebook 3 was designed for use by the general public and describes 4 in detail how to become involved in the air pollution 5 regulatory process. It discusses the roles of air 6 pollution agencies, how to file a complaint, how to 7 participate in public hearings and meetings, and key air 8 quality terms. 9 --o0o-- 10 MS. BUCKLEY: We've also expanded our community 11 health website to include descriptions of our 12 environmental justice program and other community health 13 related projects. In addition, this website contains a 14 list of documents and fact sheets which are available in 15 Engine and Spanish. By pressing the button you are 16 directed to the Spanish version of the web page. 17 --o0o-- 18 MS. BUCKLEY: With respect to community outreach, 19 we meet regularly with our environmental justice 20 stakeholders group to solicit input on our environment 21 justice activities. We schedule workshops at times and 22 locations to promote community participation. An example 23 is the four workshops scheduled for the Climate Change 24 Emission Reduction Program. These workshops were held in 25 areas with environmental justice concerns and at times to PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 204 1 facilitate the participation in community members. We 2 also offer translation services at meetings when 3 appropriate. 4 --o0o-- 5 MS. BUCKLEY: This policy focuses on taking 6 action to reduce unhealthful air pollution exposures in 7 all communities. ARB's regulatory programs play a key 8 roll in reducing community exposures to toxic air 9 pollutants as well as ozone and particulate pollution. We 10 also work with districts to reduce pollution from sources 11 under local jurisdictions. 12 --o0o-- 13 MS. BUCKLEY: ARB's highest priority is reducing 14 air pollutant emissions in communities statewide. The 15 Governor's Environmental Action Plan sets a goal of 16 reducing air pollution by 50 percent. We also have the 17 overarching state implementation plan for achieving 18 federal air quality standards for ozone and particulate 19 matter, including specific commitments to reduce 20 emissions. The strategies in our diesel risk reduction 21 plan ensure continued reductions in diesel particulate 22 emissions, the biggest known air toxic risk in California 23 communities. 24 As we develop control measures for other toxic 25 air contaminants, we are also looking at near source PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 205 1 impacts as we did with diesel engines near schools. 2 Lastly, environmental justice considerations are 3 a key element in the Carl Moyer incentive program. The 4 next few slides briefly highlight the status of each of 5 these efforts. 6 --o0o-- 7 MS. BUCKLEY: ARB's most recent statewide SIP 8 element identifies ARB measures to be developed as part of 9 California's ozone and particulate matter strategy. It 10 includes 20 ARB measures to be considered by the Board 11 through 2006 as well as a process for developing longer 12 term measures. These measures will provide a foundation 13 of new emission reductions as we transition to new federal 14 air quality standards. 15 --o0o-- 16 MS. BUCKLEY: This slide lists five diesel 17 control measures adopted over the past year that will 18 reduce air toxic risk and particulate matter exposures in 19 California communities. These regulations will reduce 20 diesel particulate emissions from garbage trucks and 21 school buses, from transport refrigeration units used on 22 trucks and rail cars, from stationary engines, such as 23 generators and pumps, and from portable engines, such as 24 cranes and welding equipment. In each of the rule 25 makings, we considered the community and environmental PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 206 1 justice impacts. We also prioritized our rule making 2 efforts by starting with the categories likely to be most 3 important from the standpoint of community exposure. 4 --o0o-- 5 MS. BUCKLEY: This slide lists six diesel control 6 measures that will be considered by your Board over the 7 next two years. These measures involve critical community 8 health issues because they address activities that occur 9 in many areas with environmental justice concerns, such as 10 commercial vehicle idling, ports, and construction 11 activities. 12 --o0o-- 13 MS. BUCKLEY: In addition to our diesel measures, 14 we are also developing a number of other air toxic control 15 measures. Several of these measures will address 16 activities that emit hexavalent chromium in operations 17 that may be located near people's homes or other sensitive 18 locations. As we develop these measures, we will take a 19 close look at the localized impacts of these toxic sources 20 as well as evaluations of the regional and statewide 21 benefits of the measures. 22 --o0o-- 23 MS. BUCKLEY: The Carl Moyer Program is an 24 incentive program that cleans up the diesel fleet by 25 replacing or adding air pollution control equipment to PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 207 1 heavy duty diesel engines. Since 2003, 50 percent of the 2 Carl Moyer funds are targeted for low income areas in 3 large urban centers. The Governor has proposed $60 4 million annually for this important diesel reduction 5 program. 6 --o0o-- 7 MS. BUCKLEY: Now let's look at how the Board's 8 environmental justice policy addresses the issue of 9 enforcement. Policy Number 4 emphasizes the importance of 10 strong enforcement in all communities, and we have taken a 11 number of actions to implement this policy. I will 12 briefly discuss the status of each starting with the 13 complaint resolution protocol. 14 --o0o-- 15 MS. BUCKLEY: One of the first issues addressed 16 by the environmental justice stakeholders was concern by 17 community representatives about follow-up on air pollution 18 complaints. The complaint resolution protocol describes 19 the respective responsibilities of air agencies. It 20 recognizes that air districts have the primary 21 responsibility for complaints concerning facilities in 22 their local area with ARB playing an oversight role. The 23 protocol was a joint effort by ARB, the California Air 24 Pollution Control Officers' Association, and the 25 Environmental Justice stakeholders. It was designed to PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 208 1 promote timely response and ensure that complainants are 2 informed of the outcome of the investigation. 3 --o0o-- 4 MS. BUCKLEY: During the development of the 5 complaint resolution protocol, community members expressed 6 the importance of ensuring that the complaint process is 7 accessible to everyone, including those who do not speak 8 English. ARB arranged for an over-the-phone translation 9 service that provides verbal translations in 140 languages 10 and is available for use by ARB and all local air 11 districts. ARB has provided training on the use of this 12 system to local air districts. 13 --o0o-- 14 MS. BUCKLEY: An important aspect of our 15 enforcement program is the program evaluation process for 16 local air districts. While these evaluations cover a 17 variety of district programs, a high priority is placed on 18 reviewing the enforcement program and facility violations. 19 We are looking into ways to more specifically incorporate 20 environmental justice into future program evaluations. 21 --o0o-- 22 MS. BUCKLEY: Our enforcement activities include 23 the targeted roadside inspection program which is designed 24 to reduce the number of smoking trucks on the road. This 25 program has shifted its focus to include inspections in PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 209 1 low income areas with high diesel truck traffic. Trucks 2 are cited and required to make necessary repairs. Our 3 commitment to this program will continue to help reduce 4 diesel emissions in communities. 5 --o0o-- 6 MS. BUCKLEY: This policy is intended to address 7 the complex issue of cumulative impacts. The policy 8 reflects the need to both identify and reduce cumulative 9 impacts. It also reflects the inherent connection between 10 emissions exposure and health risk. 11 While in the broadest sense every emission 12 reduction strategy the Board adopts reduces cumulative 13 impacts, there is also a desire to look closely at 14 cumulative impacts on a neighborhood scale. That's the 15 real technical challenge we have been working on. 16 Our first step was to develop a way to display 17 the available emissions information for individual 18 communities. That system is called CHAPIS. 19 --o0o-- 20 MS. BUCKLEY: Within the last few months, we have 21 publicly released the Community Health Air Pollution 22 Information System, or CHAPIS. This system displays 23 emissions data statewide and at the community level. It 24 is an interactive mapping system that includes emissions 25 from cars, trucks, industrial and commercial facilities, PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 210 1 consumer products, and other air pollution sources. 2 The local air districts provided the facility 3 information starting with the largest sources. A number 4 of outside groups involved with testing CHAPIS recommended 5 the addition of demographic and socioeconomic information. 6 To address this, staff is analyzing data from the 2000 7 census and plans to add demographic data to CHAPIS by the 8 end of the year. We will also be working with the local 9 air districts to phase in additional air pollution 10 sources, such as small neighborhood facilities. Let's 11 look at an example of a CHAPIS map. 12 --o0o-- 13 MS. BUCKLEY: On this map you can see roads and 14 city names. The triangles on the map represent industrial 15 and commercial facilities that are sources of air 16 pollution. The shading provides information on cumulative 17 emissions, meaning the total emissions from all types of 18 sources. By clicking on a particular community, the user 19 can focus in on a much smaller area. The program maps 20 both sources of emissions and locations people are 21 interested in, such as schools and individual facilities. 22 --o0o-- 23 MS. BUCKLEY: We have also made statewide cancer 24 risk maps assessable on our website. These maps display 25 relative cancer risk from air toxics at the census track PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 211 1 level and is based on the U.S. EPA ASPEN model. These 2 maps provide information on the contribution of source 3 categories or individual pollutants to overall cancer risk 4 from air toxics. For example, risk from diesel 5 particulates can be shown separately, and the projected 6 benefits of our 2010 diesel risk reduction goal can also 7 be displayed. 8 --o0o-- 9 MS. BUCKLEY: In an effort to better understand 10 air pollution exposures at the community level, ARB 11 conducted special air monitoring projects in six 12 communities. The most important outcome of that effort 13 was the finding that regional air pollution generally 14 dominated exposures unless the monitor was in close 15 proximity to an air pollution source. Given the potential 16 importance of near source exposures within communities, we 17 began an effort to develop neighborhood scale assessment 18 tools. Neighborhood assessments of Barrio Logan, a 19 community in San Diego, and Wilmington, a community of 20 Los Angeles, are being conducted. Our final technical 21 report for Barrio Logan will be completed in September, 22 and the Wilmington neighborhood assessment is underway. 23 --o0o-- 24 MS. BUCKLEY: Earlier we talked about the 25 importance of understanding the cumulative impacts of PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 212 1 emissions from multiple facilities, and we have developed 2 a modeling tool that can help us do this. The Hot Spots 3 Analysis and Reporting Program, or HARP, calculates health 4 risks from toxic air pollutant emissions from single or 5 multiple facilities. The health risks are calculated 6 using the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment 7 Risk Methods. This tool can be used for the analysis of 8 new or existing facilities. We are providing training to 9 the local air districts on the use of the program. 10 --o0o-- 11 MS. BUCKLEY: Policy 6 reflects the needs for 12 local agencies to play a roll in reducing cumulative risks 13 from air pollution. Air districts, land use planning 14 agencies, and transportation agencies all make planning 15 and permitting decisions that can impact air quality. 16 --o0o-- 17 MS. BUCKLEY: We have been working with the 18 environmental justice stakeholders group developing an 19 informational document on land use from a community health 20 perspective. The primary intent of the document is to 21 inform land use decision makers about the potential air 22 quality impacts of siting projects like homes and schools 23 too close to an air pollution source. We also think that 24 encouraging land use agencies to consult the local air 25 district when questions arise will result in more informed PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 213 1 decision making. 2 --o0o-- 3 MS. BUCKLEY: The seventh policy addresses the 4 need to support research and data collection needed to 5 reduce cumulative emissions exposure and risk in all 6 communities. 7 --o0o-- 8 MS. BUCKLEY: We have incorporated environmental 9 justice into our research activities over the last several 10 years. Examples include research on the impacts of air 11 pollution on asthmatics, a study of children's exposure to 12 air pollution during school bus commutes, a study of the 13 impacts of air pollution on the health of children 14 attending low income schools, and the development of low 15 cost, easy-to-use air monitoring equipment that 16 communities can use to track air pollution levels. 17 --o0o-- 18 MS. BUCKLEY: Our research planning process has 19 established a new environmental justice category to 20 encourage the research community to propose environmental 21 justice related research ideas. This spring we solicited 22 the scientific community and the general public for 23 research ideas and have received several promising 24 proposals. The proposals have been available for public 25 comment and are currently under review by a Research PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 214 1 Screening Committee. A proposed research plan, including 2 an environmental justice component, will be brought to the 3 Board in October for approval. 4 --o0o-- 5 MS. BUCKLEY: In addition to ARB's environmental 6 justice efforts, we are working with CalEPA on their short 7 and long term environmental justice strategies. Secretary 8 Tamminen kicked off this year's CalEPA environmental 9 justice activities by releasing its draft EJ action plan 10 and strategy. The short-term environmental justice action 11 plan identifies actions to promote environmental justice 12 that can begin immediately. The long term broad based 13 strategy is being developed on a parallel tract. CalEPA 14 staff is currently evaluating public comments on the plan. 15 --o0o-- 16 MS. BUCKLEY: ARB's mission is to protect public 17 health by reducing air pollution in all communities. To 18 that end, we will continue our regulatory efforts focused 19 on SIP measures, diesel particulate control measures, and 20 other toxic air controls. We will incorporate 21 environmental justice incentive programs and use 22 Wilmington as a case study to develop community-based 23 strategies. Each of these approaches will reduce 24 cumulative impacts of air pollution and provide meaningful 25 public benefits consistent with ARB's commitment to PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 215 1 environmental justice. 2 Thank you. And we would be happy to answer any 3 questions you may have. 4 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much for that 5 excellent summary. Shows how much activity is going on. 6 Mr. Calhoun. 7 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: I'd like to go to the 8 slide that you used entitled "Complaint Resolution 9 Protocol." This morning we had an example of a complaint 10 verbally presented to the Board from the lady from 11 Oakland. And as I go -- as you went through the 12 presentation, I started thinking about that and wondered 13 if we really intend to follow up on the complaint that she 14 made. I heard Supervisor DeSaulnier said he'd give her a 15 telephone number. But if this is going to be the protocol 16 we're going to follow, then -- I guess that's really what 17 I'm interested in. Are we going to follow up on that 18 particular complaint? 19 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Well, I don't 20 know with whom she lodged her complaint when that incident 21 occurred. 22 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: It's a verbal. 23 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: This complaint 24 resolution protocol has to do how districts and ARB will 25 operate together. Because what happens is when citizens PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 216 1 call the air district and do not get a response, they call 2 the Air Resources Board next. And they ask us to come 3 out. And there's sensitivity all the way around about 4 whether or not the district has exhausted the remedies 5 available to it, whether we're stepping into their turf 6 prematurely. 7 So the thrust of the protocol is to have the 8 district do due diligence on the issue and the Air 9 Resources Board to back them up and help with issues they 10 might take on statewide significance. And also sort of 11 the timing by which you come to a joint conclusion with 12 the district, when it's out of their hands and it's 13 appropriate for the Air Resources Board to step in. 14 Because what the community groups had wanted to 15 do is have the Air Resources Board handle all the 16 complaints. We don't have the resources to do that. We 17 don't have the relationships with the sources. We don't 18 know the complaint history and the steps that were already 19 taken to abate odors at a landfill, for example, or to 20 deal with breakdown conditions at a refinery, whatever it 21 might be. We weren't going to quit the field. We just 22 wanted to be sure we used our two resources in the most 23 effective possible way. 24 And then as staff discussed, the other issue that 25 came up is sometimes the districts weren't clear on what PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 217 1 the complaint was because the person calling in spoke a 2 language other than English. So that's why we devised the 3 translation service. 4 But in terms of the witness earlier on her truck 5 complaint, she would call her local air district first and 6 then call us next. And now that you've adopted the idling 7 rule, call the 1-800-CUT-SMOG line -- 8 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: End smog. 9 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Cut smog is South 10 Coast number. Call either one. 11 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: Not if you're in the Bay 12 Area. 13 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: You must have a 14 hot line in the Bay Area. 15 When the districts get a complaint about a source 16 that's our responsibility, you know, mobile categories, 17 they'll refer to us, and vice versa. So that was really 18 the nature of it. 19 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: Why couldn't we send 20 someone -- ask the local district, not the state? 21 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: We can, and we do 22 all the time. We call them up and say there's an issue 23 that we're aware of. It came in to our Ombudsman's 24 office. It came into our Mobile Source Office. It came 25 into our hot line. Have you heard of this complaint PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 218 1 before? Can you send someone out to check on it? We do 2 that every day. 3 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: The question is if they don't 4 take appropriate action or if the community is not 5 satisfied. 6 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: We also used to 7 send our inspectors immediately, and the districts have 8 asked us to give them a chance to resolve the problem 9 before we send our inspectors to the site. 10 PLANNING TECHNICAL AND SUPPORT DIVISION CHIEF 11 FLETCHER: If I might add something to that. This is Bob 12 Fletcher. If I might add something to that. 13 One of the other provisions of the complaint 14 resolution protocol is feedback to the person making the 15 complaint. That was one of the major areas of discussion 16 during the development of that, is people log a complaint 17 and then they never get any feedback of what happened. So 18 there's very specific provisions in the protocol that 19 requires folks to notify them of the status of the 20 investigation. 21 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: Thank you. 22 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I wanted to, again, say this 23 is a very important issue. And I say, to me, it's really 24 nice to see all the progress that's been made. It's a 25 good reminder in one place to see that. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 219 1 I did hold an off-site with staff to discuss the 2 EJ progress and the challenges ahead. And one of those 3 areas which staff highlighted, of course, was the land use 4 guidance document, which needs quite a bit more work. 5 Last week, I did go down with Dr. Prasad and met with some 6 of the stakeholders in L.A. and saw firsthand some of the 7 reasons, some of the land use decisions. And I think that 8 having done that and seeing some of the facilities, it's 9 clear that we need to try to address that issue. 10 But I also recognize that different stakeholders 11 have different views on this. It's a very complex issue. 12 And, therefore, I've asked staff in conjuction with the 13 Executive Officer to hold a public workshop in September 14 to explore both the policy options and the methods that 15 might be used to develop some siting criteria. Very 16 important issue. And hopefully then the public process 17 will allow us to move this item ahead. We can't ignore 18 it. It's a key issue. It's a key issue with all the 19 stakeholders. 20 So one of the things I'd like to do as I look at 21 the witness list since we've got some of the stakeholders 22 here, to maybe comment in addition to the comments to see 23 whether a public workshop to explore that issue and try to 24 move this ahead in September would be seen as a positive 25 step in moving the agenda ahead. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 220 1 Any other comments from my colleagues? 2 Seen none, we'll call up the -- we have four 3 witnesses. 4 Diane Bailey, Jane Williams, Joe Lyou, and Cindy 5 Tuck. 6 It's interesting, by the way, I don't know 7 whether the community in back feels that we're a toxic 8 source. I don't know why all the community is clustered 9 at the back as far away from the Board as possible. 10 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: They want a real buffer, 11 I think. This a land use decision. Stay as far away from 12 us as possible. 13 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Backs to the wall. 14 MS. BAILEY: I think as sources go, you're on the 15 less toxic end of the spectrum. 16 But good afternoon, Chairman and members of the 17 Board. My name is Diane Bailey. I'm a scientist with the 18 Natural Resources Defense Council. And I want to talk 19 briefly today about the importance of ARB's environmental 20 justice policies and activities. 21 Before I do that, I just want to go back to the 22 idling rule for one minute and say that, again, it was a 23 little disappointing to see half of the rule disappear a 24 day before the Board hearing. And I hope that in the 25 future that in cases such as this where half of the rule PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 221 1 is about to disappear, that the modified rule can be 2 workshopped or the public can be made aware of the changes 3 in advance of the Board hearing. 4 So with that said, I'll get back to environmental 5 justice. I've been participating in the environmental 6 justice work group for several years now alongside a 7 number of other members from the environmental health and 8 community groups throughout California, some of whom are 9 here today. And I'm very committed to moving these 10 policies forward and working with this group working 11 through our troubles. However, I'm very concerned about 12 the effectiveness of this group moving forward into some 13 of the more difficult aspects. 14 And Chairman Lloyd, you mentioned the Land Use 15 Planning Handbook. And I want to thank you for your 16 participation and help in getting us back on track with 17 that handbook. And I'm hoping we can move forward on that 18 in a more positive light and in a more productive way with 19 your help and you guidance. 20 So I just want to illustrate some of the reasons 21 why we're so concerned about land use planning and why 22 land use planning has such an enormous impact on public 23 health and on air quality. We're living with the legacy 24 of some very poor land use decisions. 25 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: On the other items, do you PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 222 1 have anything positive to say on the other items? I know 2 you saw staff's presentation. 3 MS. BAILEY: Well, I think in staff's 4 presentation a lot of the positive things that have been 5 done towards air quality are maybe being viewed with an 6 environmental justice lens. That in itself is very 7 positive. So we're very pleased with the series of ATCMs 8 to reduce diesel and so forth. 9 But I want to talk specifically about the Land 10 Use Planning Handbook because the work group is dealing 11 with that right now, and it's so very important to us. 12 We're living with the legacy of poor land use 13 decisions, not just here in California, but throughout the 14 country. And these come with a large public health risk, 15 particularly in lower income areas in communities of 16 color. So I just want to point out a few outside of 17 California, because you're going to hear a lot of 18 California examples after me. 19 Port Arthur is a refinery town in Texas that's 20 predominantly African American and economically depressed. 21 And most of the parents there think that it's normal for 22 their children to have skin rashes, which we all know is 23 not normal. 24 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Let's not compare Texas to 25 California, please. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 223 1 MS. BAILEY: I'm just trying to illustrate some 2 land use decisions that were ill advised. 3 However, these parents do wonder about other 4 health ailments that are plaguing them and the 5 relationship of those health ailments with the pollution 6 coming from refineries and chemical plants that are 7 sometimes right across the street from their homes. 8 And I'm also wondering if you've ever heard of a 9 public housing development on the south side of Chicago 10 called Altgeld Gardens. I'm asking because this public 11 housing development is considered the hole in the toxic 12 doughnut. The reason is that they're ringed by a number 13 of toxic sources, including steel mills and chemical 14 plants, landfills, and even a sewage treatment plant. 15 These are extreme examples, but they do exist 16 throughout the U.S. And it's very important to note here 17 because what California does is noted throughout the 18 country. So the decisions that are made on this Land Use 19 Planning Handbook will be watched from outside of 20 California as well, though they're very important here, 21 too. The list of bad land use goes on and on, and the 22 common threat of health problems stemming from these 23 developments include asthma, cancer, skin rashes, and 24 kidney and liver problems. 25 This Board has the opportunity to take a PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 224 1 leadership roll and help prevent land use planners and 2 local officials from repeating these poor land use 3 planning mistakes of the past and perpetuating them. Many 4 of these mistakes exist throughout California, as I've 5 noted, schools next to metal platers, public housing along 6 the freeways, and homes in the shadow of refineries. And 7 even though there are so many beneficial rules to clean up 8 these sources, we know that the cleanup will not occur 9 right away. We can't ask people to hold their breath. 10 I hope that you will direct your staff to include 11 clear recommendations against incompatible land uses, such 12 as those in the Air Quality Use Planning Handbook. I hope 13 you'll accept nothing less than decisive and effective 14 recommendations in the handbook when it comes before you. 15 Thank you. 16 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 17 So responding to my question then, do you think a 18 workshop in September to air all these issues and try to 19 come to some conclusion would be helpful? 20 MS. BAILEY: Yes. We look forward to a workshop 21 or a study session. 22 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 23 MS. WILLIAMS: Good afternoon -- now it's the 24 afternoon -- members of the Board, Chairman Lloyd. Jane 25 Williams, California Communities Against Toxics. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 225 1 I was interested in the staff presentation 2 mentioning the process I've been involved with for the 3 creation of the regulations on greenhouse gasses from 4 cars, which I see actually as a model for other regulatory 5 processes involving environmental justice stakeholders. I 6 think it's been an extremely beneficial process. 7 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 8 MS. WILLIAMS: I'd like to see more of that 9 process in some of the other rule making processes. 10 Certainly, as a group, we've had some successes. We got a 11 successful complaint resolution created for the state and 12 successful public participation manual. But I have to say 13 now we are at an impasse. And my view of this impasse is, 14 in the face of uncertainty, how will this body act? In 15 the face of the uncertainty that we have around the lack 16 of toxicity data and all, we're acting as if there's no 17 risk that's present when we know that's irrational. And 18 what I'm going to do is go through a number of different 19 actual case examples right now. 20 I got a call about three weeks ago from a person 21 who lives in Carson. They have held public hearings on a 22 proposed new school next to the gasoline tank farm in 23 Carson. He's asking for our help on this. Well, the Los 24 Angeles Unified School District, as you know, is governed 25 by very strict criteria when it comes to actual PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 226 1 contamination on the school sites by legislation. But 2 there's actually no recommendation or requirement in that 3 legislation of air toxic impacts from contiguous or nearby 4 sources. So now we have this school proposed next to a 5 tank farm. We know that's not a good idea. But there's 6 nothing clear in Board policy or in regulatory statute or 7 in the structure of rules that lets LAUSD know that's 8 really a bad idea. 9 A couple years ago I worked on the Golden Valley 10 School, which is now being built, under construction. On 11 one site contiguous to the property is a very highly 12 contaminated site on the State Superfund List, with an 13 incinerator on the other side, is the national testing 14 center, which is a top secret private weapons testing 15 facility. Recent ambient air monitoring at the Golden 16 Valley School site shows it carries in air from the 17 ongoing pollutions next door. Again, local community 18 tried to stop this. They did stop it for a while. But 19 now it's being built. 20 In South Central, we have Vanguard Junior High 21 School which is now next to homes, but L.A. County is 22 going to rezone and get rid of the residential and change 23 it into an industrial use. 24 Across from the port, they raised some old 25 commercial facilities and now are going to build a PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 227 1 community called New Hope, which L.A. City Council is very 2 excited about. And it's contiguous. It's right across 3 the street from the activities of the port. 4 These are current land use decisions that are 5 being made. While we are working on a Land Use Planning 6 Handbook over the last year and coming to an impasse, 7 local land use planners, school districts, cities, and 8 planning commissions, are making decisions that we know 9 are putting people at risk. And because there's not a 10 clear direction from this body, from the Air Resources 11 Board and from local air districts that these are 12 incompatible land uses, planners, again, in the face of 13 uncertainty, make decisions as if there's no risk. 14 So we believe that the Board needs to take a more 15 direct involvement in this particular issue. And we need 16 to be taking a look at what we settled on a number of 17 years ago was reducing emissions exposure and risk. And 18 in the face of a lack of toxicity data on most of the 19 toxic air contaminants, we need to be taking a look at 20 some principles and some ideas in this Land Use Planning 21 Handbook that are going to give planners real tools to 22 make real decisions, better decisions than we have now. 23 So with that, I'm going to turn this over to Dr. 24 Lyou, who's going to make a closing statement for us. 25 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 228 1 Dr. Lyou and Cindy Tuck. 2 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 3 presented as follows.) 4 DR. LYOU: Good afternoon, Chairman Lloyd, 5 members of the Board. I'd like to thank you again for the 6 opportunity to talk about this issue. 7 This is a map. And Chairman Lloyd is familiar 8 with it because I showed it to him last week. 9 Falcon Foam, which is in the center of the map, 10 is the area that I took him to, a facility that generates 11 19 tons of VOCs in the last report. Evidently, the prior 12 reporting year was 72 tons of VOCs, and it's located right 13 next door to an elementary school. In fact, the 14 elementary school is closer than I am to you as Board 15 members. 16 As Chairman Lloyd witnessed, there are school 17 children playing just outside that. This is a facility 18 that's been perpetually out of compliance with the rule, 19 except for the fact they continually go to the hearing 20 board at South Coast AQMD for variances and have been 21 getting them continually for quite some time. This is one 22 of the examples of a bad land use that we want to get at 23 with this Land Use Handbook. 24 If you look at the top left-hand corner of the 25 slide, you see the number 1/I. This slide is taken from PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 229 1 the L.A. County Planning Department proposed general plan 2 update. The 1 means that it is currently single-family 3 housing. All these places in yellow with the 1 are all 4 single-family housing. The "I" means it's proposed to 5 become industrial. 6 Just immediately to the right is Vanguard Junior 7 High School. They are currently proposing to change 8 single-family residential next to a junior high school and 9 turn it into an industrial use. And as you can see, 10 Avalon Garden Elementary School near Falcon Foam is 11 surrounded at least on its south border and somewhat to 12 its east by industry and industrial zoning. And McKinley 13 Elementary School at the bottom right-hand corner of the 14 slide also has its entire west boundary with industrial 15 uses. 16 These are the type of issues we'd like to get at 17 with these recommendations. And we are hopeful that the 18 Board can assist us to work with staff and other 19 stakeholders in doing that. 20 Go to the next slide, please. 21 --o0o-- 22 DR. LYOU: When Jane talked about what to do in 23 light of uncertainty, I just wanted to point out that 24 there is some very clear legislative intent language in 25 the toxics air control law about this issue. And I think PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 230 1 the Legislature was extremely clear on what to do. But 2 it's necessary to take action, even in light of some 3 unanswered questions. 4 Now what we're asking you to do is to use what 5 knowledge you have -- scientific knowledge about health 6 impacts, scientific knowledge about emission inventories, 7 and distribution of toxic air contaminents in 8 neighborhoods and to use that to make certain 9 recommendations. 10 The impasse really comes around mostly over a 11 single issue, although we have several others we'd like to 12 have addressed in this document: Buffer zones or no 13 buffer zones, and what's the default assumption about 14 what's done when people are either co-locating, 15 contaminating facilities next to sensitive receptors, or 16 sensitive receptors are being located next to polluting 17 facilities. And that's the issue that we think that the 18 Board has to take a more active roll in deciding. This is 19 a tough policy question, and I don't believe that it's 20 really, I mean, staff's discretion to make this. And I 21 think that we've come to the point where without your 22 involvement and leadership on this issue, we will not be 23 able to overcome this impasse. 24 So I also want to make it very clear that we're 25 very much involved in this process. We continue to be PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 231 1 involved. We continue to look forward to the next draft 2 of this document and to get it from staff and work with 3 them and to see where we are based on our last 4 conversations. And we very much appreciate the 5 involvement of the Chair and obviously the long term 6 involvement of former Board Member Matt McKinnon on this 7 mater. 8 And we haven't given up hope. We still hope that 9 we can resolve this and move on to the issue of cumulative 10 impacts and emissions and exposures. And we do look 11 forward -- I think we'd rather call it a study session 12 than a work group. When I ran into Linda at the coffee 13 shop this morning, that's what she called it. That, to 14 me, sounded a lot better. We are definitely open to that. 15 We would like to have that in Los Angeles for -- I mean, 16 maybe Diane doesn't. But Jane and I definitely would and 17 other of our colleagues, because many of the experts from 18 academia who would be willing, I think, to participate in 19 such a study session would not be able to travel to 20 Sacramento. And so we would ask that if you do that, that 21 there would be a commitment to do it in Los Angeles or 22 close by. 23 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. Just on that 24 point there, as I said this morning, we did intend for 25 this discussion of EJ to be down in L.A. We changed the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 232 1 plans. I think I heard this morning, and I think hear you 2 now, maybe tougher for us. But on the other hand, I 3 realize you come up here, a number of you. I would 4 recommend to staff that we try to hold that study session 5 in the L.A. area, give you a chance to come there. 6 DR. LYOU: I very much appreciate it. 7 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Having gone down and met with 8 several you and your colleagues down there, I do 9 understand it's much easier for them to participate down 10 there. And this is a major issue we're facing down south, 11 although there's major issues we're facing up here. So 12 I'd recommend staff do that. 13 DR. LYOU: Thank you. 14 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Any comments or questions? 15 Mr. Calhoun. 16 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: I have a question, but 17 more of a -- I was just thinking about policy and how it's 18 going to be applied. I think about the local district. 19 This is just a policy. There's no regulatory binding on 20 anybody. 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Well, I think what Dr. Lyou 22 was talking about is, and what I was recommending, this is 23 a tough issue. That the staff, together with the 24 stakeholders, bring some policy option to the Board. And 25 so this is still a very tough issue. And I think we'll PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 233 1 hear from Cindy representing CEEB, she's got some -- I 2 think she's in favor of it but has some concerns about how 3 we're going to be implementing it. 4 At the moment, I don't see -- clearly, we have 5 the EJ policies. But when we're talking about this, we 6 need to come up with some options. And it's not an easy 7 issue. It's one of those you dig into. But on the other 8 hand, you can argue both sides. Because you can argue -- 9 you can see we need some help on this issue. People need 10 some guidance. We're the experts in those areas, but then 11 how people would interpret that. So it's many, many 12 dimensions. I don't know whether that helped. 13 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: We're faced with a 14 problem. That's what it boils down to. And I live in an 15 area -- and the church just recently was sued by the city 16 because the church owned the land. And they wanted to 17 build a school there. And the city said, "Well, I want to 18 put a big box, get more taxes, something like that." And 19 this thing went back and forth and back and forth. And, 20 finally, it was resolved by someone giving the church 21 property to build fairly close to that. But they had this 22 whole thing tied up for over a year. And I can see us -- 23 at least I can envision a similar type thing when you 24 start enforcing a lot of this type stuff. 25 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Well, I mean, we're giving PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 234 1 guidance. I don't think we'll necessarily enforce that. 2 But some of the concern is with the document, how that 3 would be utilized. So it's very complex. 4 Supervisor DeSaulnier. 5 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: Matt was so great at 6 this. This is one of those areas where I'm tempted if I 7 had -- going back to the schizophrenia comment. And I do 8 want, for the record, for everyone to notice that when 9 that comment was made by the Professor, that our Chairman 10 immediately looked at me. I just want to note that for 11 the record, and also acknowledge I'm not schizophrenic. I 12 have multiple personalities and disorders. 13 But all kidding aside, unfortunately, I don't 14 have the time to put into it as Matt did and because most 15 of the hearings were up here in Sacramento. But coming 16 from a perspective of a County Supervisor in a county that 17 is home to a large amount of industrial facilities in the 18 Bay Area -- we've got four refineries that produce 25 19 percent of the CARB certified fuel in the state of 20 California. And having seen and having voted on a few, 21 and having seen more the history, for instance, on the 22 fence line at the Phillips Refinery in Crockett, there is 23 a school. And every time that we have an alert, it's in 24 the paper. 25 And so the comment about the history of mistakes, PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 235 1 and as a local land use person, both Barbaras can relate 2 to this. But in a county like that, the absence of a 3 policy from a public health standpoint, I think, tends to 4 give to the land entitlement jurisdiction, particularly 5 the Planning Commissioners and the City Council, the 6 Supervisors, this feeling that it's all right. The 7 absence of that kind of policy. 8 And to Joe's comments, that's where I think the 9 Handbook could be very, very forceful from a public policy 10 standpoint, you know, being aware of litigation 11 perspectively and other issues. But I think it's really 12 important. 13 And, Catherine, you're looking at me like, you 14 know how we are about land use decisions. That's one of 15 the problems in California, not just for air quality, but 16 for speaking from a transportation standpoint. Being on 17 MTC, we never want to get involved in the fight of the 18 third rail of don't tell the locals how to do land use. 19 But that kind of perpetuates the problems we have. 20 So I hope we take this from a purely -- and I 21 know we have in the past. And I know Matt felt very 22 strongly about this from a public health perspective. And 23 not be afraid of saying from a public health perspective 24 that's more important than multiple other things. So when 25 you go to consider this as a land use decision, it's about PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 236 1 life or death. And it is about social equity. So, 2 hopefully, we will do what we've done so many times in the 3 past on multiple other issues and not be timid about 4 thoughtfully putting this land use strategy together. And 5 I know with our staff, that's the way it will end up. 6 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: What's 7 interesting about this from the staff's perspective, 8 interesting and agonizing, is we were able to find 9 consensus not immediately, but after a lot of diligence on 10 the other projects we were working on thus far, and this 11 one has been fundamentally different. 12 And the aspiration you just expressed that we be 13 able to define scientifically, technically, so that it's 14 irrefutable what our recommendations are and we can stand 15 behind them in a professional organization, that approach 16 also is not finding the common ground either because of 17 the uncertainties that Jane alluded to and Joe, that there 18 are places in which the environmental community feels if 19 we were to base our decision on the scientific data we 20 have, it wouldn't be protective enough. 21 So it's pushing us into that subjective 22 territory, which is the same place where cities and 23 counties found they're trying to decide what's the right 24 thing to do and outside our comfort zone, to describe it 25 one way. So I don't know that it's about boldness, per PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 237 1 se. It's really trying to pick our way through these 2 uncertainty questions and where your presumption lies and 3 how strongly you can support it. And when people question 4 you closely, "How did you arrive at that decision," and if 5 it works for this case, is it accurate for the other? 6 Because we drive by the Crockett School every time we go 7 to the Bay Area, and my God, who put that there? It's 8 ridiculous. 9 But there's many others on the margin, on the 10 border trying to solve them. And we're not sure yet 11 whether sweeping policy that makes it all generic will 12 accomplish it or a tailored policy built on nuanced risk 13 assessment project specifics, which gets very expensive 14 and cumbersome and is data driven and how to bridge those. 15 So that's the gap that we've been struggling with for 16 several months now. And we'll plunge right back in and 17 struggle some more in a very public way. 18 Because a lot of this, too, is that this has been 19 an internal struggle, and we haven't shared all the 20 analysis we've done so far with all the stakeholders and 21 the questions it raises in our mind and then the questions 22 and conclusions other people draw looking at the same 23 stuff. So we're very much looking forward to this study 24 session in September. 25 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: It just strikes me just PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 238 1 listening, and I know we've had a long day. But I know 2 just my own personal experience. And I had voted early 3 on, ten, eleven years ago when I first got on the Board 4 for a housing development that wasn't low income, which is 5 a statement about the cost of real estate in the Bay Area, 6 downwind of Philips which was then UniCal. And I wish I 7 hadn't, you know. But, fortunately, the market forces 8 drove they didn't build it because they didn't think they 9 could get people to buy market-rate product there. But 10 afterwards I thought -- we were going through land use 11 hearings and dealing with community development people. 12 And in hindsight I thought, I should have had the public 13 health officer here. I should have had the physician 14 who's responsible for public health testify and say what's 15 the likelihood of, you know -- we should have had a Dr. 16 Friedman there. 17 I know it's really tough. I know you folks have 18 worked really hard at it. I know Lynn has worked very 19 hard and diligent. And I know in the Bay Area we had some 20 really tough meetings where people walked out there, too. 21 And I think mostly it's just sticking with it, and I 22 appreciate you're going to continue to do that. 23 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: And, again, you started your 24 response, Catherine, to the question. And I thought that 25 Joe's comment there, the quotation he had from California PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 239 1 Public Health and Safety Code really addressed the issue. 2 We don't have to know those things, everything. We 3 realize there's still some unknowns. But we've been 4 directed to take action to protect public health. 5 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: In our 6 regulation, I would agree with you 100 percent the Board 7 has that power for the sources it regulates. We're trying 8 to change the hearts and minds of other actors. 9 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: We're talking about an 10 advisory document. 11 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: But also 12 persuading all the other actors they should read those 13 statutes or our suggestions in the same fashion. And how 14 we arrived at the decision matters to them, too. 15 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: We'll give Ms. Riordan a 16 chance. We won't beat this to death. 17 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: I think, Mr. Chairman, 18 that sometimes some case studies -- and we're going to 19 have some case studies from some of the work that we've 20 done. And maybe just, you know, certain things that have 21 happened over the years, that sometimes is more persuasive 22 than your scientific data, which I'm sure a lot of people 23 would like to think would be, you know, the overriding. 24 But I do think case studies oftentimes are much more 25 effective with individuals that have the ability to PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 240 1 approve or disapprove of land use decisions. 2 And so I'm thinking that if a document could site 3 some of these things in a positive way in the sense that 4 here's what can go wrong. Here's what we've discovered. 5 Here's Barrio Logan's story. Here's whatever is in the 6 north near Richmond. That sometimes is a little more 7 persuasive. And I think we might think about things like 8 that. 9 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: One of the things to ask, and 10 maybe as I understood either from Joe or from Jane, was 11 L.A. city was contemplating doing something -- L.A. County 12 of city? 13 MS. WILLIAMS: It's actually L.A. city. New Hope 14 across the street from the port. 15 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Is it true that 16 Counselman Cardenas -- 17 MS. WILLIAMS: This is Janice Hahn. Janice Hahn 18 went down for the ribbon cutting for New Hope. 19 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: But the point is, I was 20 saying, Assemblyman Cardenas was very instrumental in 21 getting us to adopt some strong policies. So I would hope 22 that -- clearly, he's committed to this, there's a chance 23 for involvement at the local level. But I recognize he's 24 only one of many. 25 MS. WILLIAMS: I think it's going to be very PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 241 1 difficult to get them to act. They're going to turn to 2 Barry or turn to you and say, "Well, is it okay for us to 3 build this affordable housing across the street from the 4 port?" And you're not going to say no and Barry's not 5 going to say no; right? 6 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: You've got a study session 7 coming up. 8 MS. WILLIAMS: We've got the study session coming 9 up. I'm saying without a clear shot across the bow, we're 10 going to continue to have these land use decisions that 11 are made that we know are not protective of public health. 12 The Legislature said take action. We haven't. So we're 13 saying let's do it. 14 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 15 DR. LYOU: And the examples I showed on the slide 16 were all L.A. County general plan update examples. And 17 that's ongoing and probably going to keep going on for the 18 next year or year and a half before it's adopted. 19 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thanks. 20 Cindy. 21 MS. TUCK: Thank you, Dr. Lloyd and members of 22 the Board. Cindy Tuck with the California Council For 23 Environmental and Economic Balance. Appreciate the 24 opportunity to speak on this today. 25 We certainly continue to support having the EJ PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 242 1 stakeholders' process. And I think having the idea of a 2 study meeting or workshop in September is a good one. We 3 will participate in that, and we will participate 4 constructively. 5 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. 6 MS. TUCK: I think one thing that hasn't come out 7 in this section so far is that there is a lot of common 8 ground that is very positive and, for example, in the Land 9 Use Handbook, which we think will be an important document 10 and we think it needs to go forward. It's providing air 11 quality information to planners that has not been there 12 before. It's also hopefully going to encourage the 13 planners to work more with the air districts who have more 14 the technical expertise relative to the land use folks in 15 local government. No offense. Hopefully, the air 16 districts do have more technical expertise -- 17 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: You can't offend us in 18 local government. 19 MS. TUCK: And, also, it's important to 20 businesses and the community groups to avoid incompatible 21 land uses. It can be a problem for the businesses as well 22 as the public. 23 And then, finally, I think we said we recognize, 24 obviously, it's important to protect public health, and 25 that's the bottom line for this document. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 243 1 So then the key is always in the details and what 2 is an incompatible land use? What is next to? And, of 3 course, the communities aren't saying put it 100 miles 4 away. So how do you decide what is a right distance in 5 order to protect public health? And if you go too far, 6 you start really mismanaging land. You start taking away 7 land for low income housing that could be there and still 8 protect public health. So how do you -- where do you draw 9 the line? How do you solve this? 10 And we have been saying that we don't think 11 having generic buffer zones based on worst case 12 assumptions make sense. We think that's going to go too 13 far and end up in wasting some land. We also in this 14 workshop -- some of the issues that might ought to be 15 touched on are things like how do you manage limited land? 16 How do you look at in-fill development, one of the steps 17 in the Governor's Action Plan. How does that fit in with 18 this? And the low income housing question. 19 But getting down to the real nub of this, 20 Catherine called it the gap, we would support more of a 21 tailored approach looking case by case at specific 22 information. We don't want that to take a huge amount of 23 money. We don't want that to take a huge amount of time. 24 That's not in the business community's interests as well. 25 But, hopefully, there's a way where stakeholders PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 244 1 and the Board, with Board leadership -- and that's another 2 thing. I certainly support having Board leadership in 3 this process. And Joe had suggested that as well, 4 something we agree on. And hopefully we can come to a 5 solution that makes sense and this document can go 6 forward. 7 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. Thank you for 8 your participation in this process. 9 SUPERVISOR PATRICK: Mr. Chairman. 10 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Supervisor. 11 SUPERVISOR PATRICK: Can I just make a quick 12 comment? 13 This is a very interesting discussion to me. And 14 it's probably more interesting to some of us who routinely 15 make land use decisions than it is to other folks. 16 As I look at this map that Joe gave to us, I see 17 various situations that have arisen. We have situations 18 where you have a school next to industrial, which has been 19 there for 50 years, 25 years, whatever. They both have 20 the right to be there. But then we also have a situation 21 where a general plan designation is going to change or is 22 proposed to change. And you wonder where are the school 23 district officials? Are they not up in arms over this? 24 I mean, I'm on a Board of Supervisors. Mark is 25 on a Board of Supervisors. Barbara used to be on a Board PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 245 1 of Supervisors. If we had all of our elected school folks 2 up here saying, "Don't even think of changing any zoning 3 to industrial next to our school," I can't imagine that 4 any of us would want to commit political suicide and do 5 that. 6 So it's not just us. It's the school folks, 7 certainly, community-based organizations, and so forth. 8 But very, very intriguing, very, very complicated. And 9 there are a whole lot of players that have a 10 responsibility in this. But certainly among them are 11 school district officials who certainly should be weighing 12 in at the prospect of having industrial property adjacent 13 to any school. We have folks that complain about liqueur 14 stores, you know, all kinds of uses. So I can't even 15 imagine the circumstances under which we would allow 16 industrial property to go in next to a school. 17 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I think this is one of the 18 comments that Joe made to me, some of the stakeholders, 19 that these things are going on. But unless you're aware 20 of them, there's only so many people and only so much 21 time, only so many resources. So trying to keep track of 22 these can be really difficult and can sneak up on you. 23 But, again, I think we have some good suggestions 24 here today to come before us in September. 25 Do I see any questions from the Board? PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 246 1 We'll move on to the next item. The cast is the 2 same, similar. 3 Thanks, staff very much, indeed. And thanks, 4 Lynn and staff for an excellent involvement there. 5 We now move on to the last noticed item is 6 04-6-3, a report on the independent evaluation of the 7 ARB's environmental justice program by our Hewlett 8 Executive Fellow, Ms. Teresa Villegas. 9 Again, this one-year fellowship was sponsored by 10 the Hewlett Foundation, and we thank them for their 11 support. 12 I'm delighted to see Teresa back, coming back. 13 Really appreciate you coming back from L.A. Teresa moved 14 back down there after she got married with her spouse. So 15 delighted. Again, I'd like to officially thank you for 16 all the excellent work you provided here. I know 17 sometimes it was tough because people got confused with 18 shooting the messenger with the message. But you survived 19 well. And we know you'll do well in the future here. 20 But I know for her more formal introduction I'm 21 going to ask Dr. Prasad to introduce the item and to 22 introduce her. But I'll also say that Dr. Prasad worked 23 very closely with Teresa, and he was the one who basically 24 spent a lot of time working on this issue. And, again, 25 I'd like to compliment him on his continued dedication and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 247 1 commitment and working with the stakeholders to move this 2 ahead. I know how important this issue is to him and with 3 his medical background. Again, I know he sees it 4 professionally and personally. So Dr. Prasad. 5 DR. PRASAD: Thank you, Chairman Lloyd and 6 members of the Board. 7 You may all recall that I first introduced Teresa 8 Villegas to you in May of last year. She came to us from 9 Trust for Public Land and worked in the Chair's office of 10 the Hewlett Foundation for over a year. 11 Incidentally, was about two years back this Board 12 took the initiative and the bold step of adopting the EJ 13 policies on that long evening in December of 2001. You 14 may all recall also the long heated dialogue about the 15 single word "especially," which took more than a couple of 16 hours on that evening. 17 Being an infant program in the agency, the 18 program does face a lot of challenges both from inside and 19 outside. And Ms. Villegas was given the task of 20 independently reviewing the program status and 21 recommending some constructive steps that can be pursued 22 in the future. 23 She will present her findings and recommendations 24 to improve the program. And you must also remember that 25 her findings are essentially based on the number of PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 248 1 interviews she conducted with various types of 2 stakeholders and the views expressed by those 3 stakeholders. She interviewed both the staff inside and 4 people outside as well. 5 After her presentation, staff will present their 6 views on the report and their future actions planned. 7 And it has been a great pleasure for me to have 8 been working with you, and I wish you all the best in your 9 future and hope you remain in touch. And please go ahead. 10 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 11 presented as follows.) 12 MS. VILLEGAS: Good afternoon, Dr. Lloyd and 13 members of the Board. My name is Teresa Villegas. This 14 afternoon I'll present a summary of my findings concerning 15 the Air Resources Board's Environmental Justice Program 16 and offer some recommendations that I feel are important 17 to build upon the good work that ARB has undertaken to 18 date relative to the EJ program in California. 19 --o0o-- 20 MS. VILLEGAS: After Dr. Lloyd was appointed 21 Chairman of the ARB in 1988, he identified EJ as a 22 priority for the agency. His Health Advisor, Dr. Shankar 23 Prasad, and ARB staff developed a document entitled 24 "Policies and Actions for Environmental Justice in 2001," 25 which the Board adopted as a road map for the Board's EJ PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 249 1 program. 2 In early 2003, about two years after the Board's 3 EJ policies were adopted, Dr. Lloyd decided to conduct an 4 independent evaluation of the Board's EJ effort to 5 objectively assess the progress. Through his professional 6 relationships, Dr. Lloyd contacted Mr. Hal Harvey at the 7 William and Flora Hewlett Foundation to see if the 8 Foundation would support an evaluation of this kind. 9 Dr. Lloyd then sought the assistance of the state 10 Legislature Latino Caucus to identify an individual who 11 understood the range of EJ issues in California and could 12 perform the evaluation that he sought. It was an honor to 13 be recommended by Senator Martha Escutia and 14 Assemblymember Marco Antonio Fireball for the one-year 15 project. 16 The purpose of my fellowship was to evaluate the 17 work being done by ARB and offer, as appropriate, 18 recommendations that might expand upon the good work 19 pursued by ARB staff. This was done by working side by 20 side with program and Executive staff to understand both 21 the science and policies upon which ARB's EJ efforts are 22 based on. 23 --o0o-- 24 MS. VILLEGAS: In my opinion, ARB's EJ effort to 25 date has far surpassed that of any other state agency. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 250 1 Moreover, I believe that ARB is moving in the right 2 direction and is very proactive, as evidenced by the 3 preparation and the adoption of the Policies and Actions 4 for EJ, and providing the complaint resolution and 5 providing community oriented guidebook for public 6 participation. 7 Presently, the staff is working, as we've all 8 heard today, on the Air Quality Land Use Handbook, with 9 the intent of providing essential air quality impacts 10 information to land use planners. 11 From these efforts, I feel that ARB is committed 12 to the EJ cause, and in creating the EJ section in the 13 Planning and Technical Support Division has dedicated 14 staff specifically for addressing EJ issues. 15 --o0o-- 16 MS. VILLEGAS: To evaluate ARB's EJ program, I 17 consulted with Dr. Lloyd and his Health Advisor, as 18 mentioned before, Dr. Shankar Prasad, and decided upon a 19 ten-question survey to interview representatives from 20 constituencies concerned with EJ in California. They 21 included ARB staff, air district staff, community-based 22 organizations, industry associations, legislative staff, 23 and other state and local agencies. 24 The survey was conducted in this matter because 25 EJ means different things to different people. For PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 251 1 interviewing those that created the policies, those that 2 oversee their implementation, and most importantly, 3 gathering feedback from those directly affected by these 4 policies, I reasoned that I could make an assessment -- a 5 balanced assessment of ARB's EJ program. 6 My ten-question survey probed the following 7 themes: How to integrate EJ in the daily activities of 8 ARB; addressing gaps in data through research; building of 9 framework for meaningful public participation; 10 strengthening partnerships with local stakeholders; and 11 improving public health. 12 The ten-question survey are listed in the 13 Appendix A of my report. All of these themes are 14 consistant with the policies the ARB adopted as well as 15 the goals identified by CalEPA's Advisory Committee for 16 EJ. 17 The questions were centered on policy issues that 18 I felt were key in creating movements on the ground, those 19 policies being Policies III, IV, V, and VII. 20 --o0o-- 21 MS. VILLEGAS: This slide shows the conceptual 22 evaluation structure that I envisioned for my project. It 23 was my intent to interview as many representatives from 24 the various constituencies as possible. However, because 25 of limited time, I was able to conduct 50 interviews for PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 252 1 my project. The various constituencies are listed in the 2 figure and major portions of respondents were either from 3 ARB or community-based organizations. Approximately 16 4 ARB management and staff; 18 community groups; about 7 and 5 state and local agencies, 2 industry representatives, and 6 7 state legislative staff participated in the survey. 7 --o0o-- 8 MS. VILLEGAS: For the most part, each of the 9 constituencies I interviewed identified their views with 10 regard to a take-home message concerning ARB's EJ program. 11 ARB management expressed a commitment to continue 12 implementing all seven policies adopted along with the 13 action items. However, it was not clear what their 14 timetable for implementation was, nor if they had a budget 15 to fund the implementation of their short or longer-term 16 goals. ARB staff felt that more needs to be done to 17 improve conditions on the ground in EJ communities. 18 Industry representatives indicated a willingness 19 to stay fully engaged with ARB's EJ program, however, were 20 interested in having the necessary science-based research 21 conducted prior to making decisions and taking actions. 22 Local and state agencies, such as Southern 23 California Association of Governments, and the California 24 Energy Commission, stated the work ARB is conducting on EJ 25 at times helps with their efforts on other transportation PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 253 1 and energy projects. 2 While community groups felt strongly that ARB's 3 stakeholder process has helped level the playing field by 4 giving them a seat at the table in the decision making 5 process, they strongly believe that more can be done and 6 needs to be done on the ground. I will discuss this 7 further when I present my recommendations. 8 --o0o-- 9 MS. VILLEGAS: From the interviews and my 10 observations of ARB's effort to date, it appears that the 11 current EJ program is focused primarily on providing the 12 guidance to avoid potential EJ problems from recurring in 13 the future, such as the draft for Air Quality Land Use 14 Handbook. 15 While laying the foundation for the future is 16 important, some effort is also needed with respect to 17 addressing existing EJ problems. The people I interviewed 18 from community groups noted that although a lot of 19 principles and concepts have been advanced in ARB's 20 program, their current work is focused on achieving major 21 benefits on the ground with today's problem. In my view, 22 real progress towards EJ requires state agencies to do 23 both: Reduce impacts in areas with existing EJ problems, 24 and to learn from what has happened so that the future EJ 25 problems will not occur. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 254 1 I encourage ARB to consider establishing a 2 modified action plan that includes parallel tracks for 3 addressing existing and future EJ problems. Short-term 4 and long-term goals could be identified with input from 5 previously mentioned constituencies. Potential short-term 6 goals could include creating a grant program for community 7 groups to support their participation in ARB's meetings 8 and technical assistance. Long-term goals could include 9 research on neighborhood scale air quality and health 10 impacts and include public health information as a day 11 layer in community scale mapping tools. 12 --o0o-- 13 MS. VILLEGAS: From my interviews, I learned that 14 only about a third of the 1,000 employees have received 15 training in EJ. Staff needs to understand why they should 16 be concerned about EJ in order to effectively address both 17 existing and future EJ problems. A number of ARB managers 18 noted that the toxic tour conducted by CBE, Communities 19 for a Better Environment, and others were very informative 20 and should possibly be continued. 21 My second recommendation is based on community 22 groups' responses calling for ARB to work more closely 23 with air districts on the connection between public health 24 and industrial emissions. As a first step, a database 25 needs to be created that identifies all permitted PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 255 1 facilities in the district. This information could be 2 used to evaluate the proximity of sources to sensitive 3 receptors and were focused on enforcement actions where 4 they may be needed. Over time, the information could be 5 included in CHAPIS, the mapping tool for ARB that ARB is 6 developing. 7 To understand what a community with an existing 8 EJ problem is like, pilot projects could be initiated in 9 cooperation with air districts and target milestones for 10 establishing or achieving results on the ground. 11 My third recommendation stems from the many 12 positive responses concerning ARB's outreach effort. I 13 encourage ARB to continue building their relationships and 14 to not take them for granted. For example, efforts to 15 provide documents in a non-technical manner is critical 16 for community group participation. Hosting public 17 meetings with legislative staff on EJ issues is another 18 suggestion that I included amongst others in my report to 19 the Hewlett Foundation. 20 --o0o-- 21 MS. VILLEGAS: My fourth recommendation is based 22 on responses from the legislative staff and community 23 groups. The usefulness of manuals based on statewide or 24 regional scale data has not trickled down to local 25 decision makers in ways that will bring about improvements PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 256 1 on the ground. 2 To date, not enough financial or personal 3 resources have been allocated to study near root scale air 4 quality related to health impacts that are needed to guide 5 local permitting decisions. A permitting guidance manual 6 for local government that considers existing facilities, 7 EJ, cumulative impacts, the need for additional control 8 measures, incentives, et cetera, is essential to make 9 decisions on the ground that will lead to improvements now 10 and avoid problems in the long run. 11 My fifth and last recommendation is to develop an 12 outcome-oriented five-year plan that includes timelines 13 for addressing the action items for all the seven 14 policies, such as EJ training for some manager staff or 15 technical staff, improved research, outreach, education, 16 stronger partnerships with local districts for achieving 17 progress on the ground, and perhaps a proactive approach 18 to reducing cumulative emission exposures. This would add 19 a measure of accountability to the EJ program and provide 20 a road map for making systematic progress towards making 21 EJ in California. 22 --o0o-- 23 MS. VILLEGAS: In summary, I feel that ARB's 24 effort to address EJ is sincere, but the pace of progress 25 could be increased, especially for communities with PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 257 1 existing problems. A lot of good work has been done by 2 the many talented staff and managers working in the EJ 3 program. And I commend all of you for your effort to date 4 and encourage you to continue these efforts on behalf of 5 those communities where problems are most severe. 6 Through the establishment, perhaps, of parallel 7 tracks to address both existing problems and avoid future 8 problems, I believe that ARB can improve the effectiveness 9 of its EJ program and ultimately fulfill its mission to 10 provide clean area for all Californians. Thank you. 11 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you very much. 12 Anybody have any questions or comments from the 13 Board at this time? I think staff was going to comment 14 or -- 15 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: We had an 16 opportunity in the off-site with the Chairman to talk 17 through these recommendations, talk through the 18 connections between the work we had underway, the CalEPA 19 initiatives, and then how to integrate all of these ideas 20 as well. And Lynn Terry is going to go through a point by 21 point response to the recommendations and what staff is 22 recommending so far as the preliminary response, of 23 course, and more will be filled in over time. 24 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I must say I was very pleased 25 with the progress staff has made very quickly in PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 258 1 addressing some of the issues raised with Teresa. 2 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 3 presented as follows.) 4 DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER TERRY: First of all, 5 I'd like to personally thank Teresa for her input. It 6 certainly was a pleasure to have her around our office and 7 our stakeholders meeting during her tenure. 8 She also had some very good recommendations, and 9 I'll kind of step through each one of them, and also some 10 additional items that came up in the course of our 11 discussions at the off-site that we'd like to pursue as 12 well. 13 --o0o-- 14 DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER TERRY: Starting with 15 the first recommendation, we regrouped on the training, 16 and we had a valiant effort. We trained about 300 17 staffers and got preoccupied with other issues. So we're 18 back on track to reinstate our training aggressively 19 starting this September. And, certainly, toxic tours can 20 be part of that mix as well. With our travel restrictions 21 over the last year, we've done less of that, but hopefully 22 we can do better. 23 In terms of research, there's also been a lot of 24 activity. We actually touched on this in the staff 25 presentation, so I won't elaborate. We expect to see an PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 259 1 EJ major proposal in the research plan this fall for the 2 Board's consideration. 3 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I want to express my thanks 4 to staff for pushing on this. I think this is going to 5 move us ahead in a major way. I think it demonstrates 6 commitment that I know we talked to Teresa and 7 stakeholders, is a significant financial commitment to get 8 the type of data we need to develop some better policies 9 in the future. So I appreciate that. 10 DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER TERRY: I just have to 11 put in a plug. Much of the scientific work we do as staff 12 we like to put out for peer review. So certainly in the 13 EJ arena, we think it will be extremely helpful to have 14 outside researchers working on the issue. 15 --o0o-- 16 DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER TERRY: The second 17 recommendation, demographic data and enforcement, we 18 talked about adding the demographic data into our current 19 CHAPIS system. 20 Enforcement, also we talked about trying to 21 evaluate enforcement as part of the program evaluations. 22 So staff in that program area are going back to look at 23 what they can add to the program and will, of course, work 24 with CAPCOA on that issue. 25 Certainly looking at enforcement on a case by PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 260 1 case basis. This kind of goes back to the discussion 2 about the complaint resolution protocol. And that, I 3 think, represents a substantial commitment on the part of 4 CAPCOA to follow up on enforcement actions and 5 responsiveness to the community. But we will be 6 monitoring that closely to make sure that protocol is 7 actively used. And, in fact, even our current 8 evaluations, that was sort of the first step we took in 9 the program evaluations to look at whether or not the 10 districts' enforcement staff were aware of the protocol, 11 number one, and number two, making use of it. 12 And as we -- I'll talk a little bit more about 13 pilot projects. But certainly as we do a major pilot, 14 that we'd like to in Wilmington, looking at enforcement 15 opportunities and in addition to more conventional control 16 strategies seems like a really good sort of case study 17 location to do that. And we have talked to the South 18 Coast District about our intentions there. 19 --o0o-- 20 DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER TERRY: Recommendation 21 three, community access and involvement. Again, we can't 22 do too much of that. We need to be out in the 23 communities. And I think the regulatory staff has tried 24 to do that with major regulations this year. We will, in 25 terms of the EJ community health programs, try to do more PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 261 1 of it, and particularly in the context of these pilot 2 programs. Those absolutely have to have the input of the 3 community. And as CalEPA kicks off their near-term 4 strategy, we'll certainly be active in that and expect 5 that to have some community outreach aspects to it as 6 well. 7 On the issue of grants, we absolutely agree that 8 providing money for those kinds of activities is 9 important. We have legal restrictions in terms of doing 10 it directly. But we're searching the web pages of the 11 world to find foundations that we can tap for that purpose 12 and plan to work with community on helping them solicit 13 grants to deal with community outreach. 14 --o0o-- 15 DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER TERRY: Recommendation 16 four, again, building on our website in terms of 17 emissions, linking the health outcomes is something we had 18 planned to do as well. Department of Health Services has 19 been working on an environmental tracking system. We've 20 provided some in-kind staff to work with them on that 21 project. So we will proceed with that one. 22 Another recommendation related to enforcement and 23 permits, and that one is one that will certainly have a 24 lot of coordination with CAPCOA. So we plan to bring that 25 issue up and look at whether or not there's ways to PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 262 1 strengthen permit language so that in addition to 2 enforcement, follow-up on complaints, that we're sure 3 there's a very strong and clear legal foundation for 4 ensuring enforcement in terms of what's in the permit. 5 --o0o-- 6 DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER TERRY: And then, 7 lastly, recommendation five, the five-year action plan. 8 We're planning on developing that. And, of course, we'd 9 have a public process in the stakeholders group and so 10 on to provide input. So we expect that would build on 11 some of the comments we've heard today, not only from 12 Teresa, but also from the broad stakeholders group. I 13 expect input from the CalEPA EJ process as well can come 14 into play in terms of what ARB is able to do as part of a 15 five-year plan. Certainly, a major element of that would 16 be the pilots that we expect are under the osmosis of the 17 CalEPA EJ strategy development. 18 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I like that one except the 19 date. 20 DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER TERRY: Sorry? 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: I like that one except the 22 date. Change the 5 to a 4. 23 DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER TERRY: Actually, I 24 thought we were planning the end of the year. 25 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: That's right. Good. That's PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 263 1 right. So you were and I were -- 2 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: As soon as 3 possible. 4 DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER TERRY: Lastly, we 5 actually covered research pilot projects. Wilmington is a 6 major one. But, certainly, as we do more outreach, I 7 think we may hear ideas from the communities about 8 additional pilots. And, certainly, I would expect we 9 build into the five-year work plan some kind of process 10 for prioritizing and adding additional pilot projects over 11 time. 12 Land use, we'll have a study session. And I 13 appreciated the comments today about policy, because I 14 think we haven't fully explored the concept of this issue 15 from more of a policy standpoint. We've looked at it 16 pretty much from a conventional risk assessment, this is 17 how we currently do business point of view. So I think 18 with encouragement from the Board, perhaps we can come up 19 with some more broad-based policy options to put forth for 20 the study session. 21 And then toxic air contaminants control, we went 22 through that pretty much in the staff presentation. 23 In terms of SEP funds, we will go back to look at 24 our policy, which as currently constructed would need a 25 little polishing to open up the door here. But, PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 264 1 certainly, if people agree to that as an alternative and 2 are willing to fund a particular project, we certainly 3 will put forth that concept. 4 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Okay. And thank you very 5 much. I think that was -- really pleases me to see as 6 much response. Thank you, Teresa, for those suggestions. 7 We do have one person signed up. Cindy, did you 8 really want to say something? 9 MS. TUCK: I can pass. 10 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: No. I just -- the way you 11 looked at me as if you were surprised I was calling you 12 up. 13 MS. TUCK: Am I the only one signed up? 14 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Yeah. You're signed up. 15 MS. TUCK: Am I the only one? 16 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Yeah. 17 MS. TUCK: Okay. I'll try to be very quick. 18 I'd like to make two quick general comments and 19 three specific comments. 20 First, if you look on page 30, 31 of the 21 document, there's a list of all the people who were 22 interviewed. I just want to note there were only two 23 people from the business community interviewed. With that 24 said, I was glad I was interviewed and had a chance to 25 meet with Teresa. And she was very pleasant to talk with, PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 265 1 and, you know, I appreciated that opportunity. 2 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: But recognize also we ran 3 into an issue because our colleague Matt McKinnon thought 4 he should be interviewed and wasn't interviewed. So don't 5 feel -- 6 MS. TUCK: Understood. 7 One of the main comments I wanted to make was 8 when I saw the slides and I was concerned that somebody 9 who's in their office looking at the web and just seeing 10 the slides would see the industry position was investing 11 in science before acting, and they might think that 12 industry has been at the table saying don't do anything on 13 environmental justice, and that has not been the case. I 14 think the Board knows that and staff and the other 15 participants in the stakeholder group know that. 16 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Yeah. I think that's one of 17 the things you always run into when you try to condense 18 things. I don't think that was the intent on that. 19 MS. TUCK: Exactly. It's hard to put a 20 perspective in one line. 21 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: But, in fact, Ms. Riordan and 22 myself were musing how it was that the Executive staff 23 deserved a star and a bear. I don't know what the 24 connotation was on that piece. 25 MS. TUCK: There is the reference to needing PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 266 1 science. And I think that the two key areas where we've 2 been strongly supporting the use of good science is in the 3 discussions on cumulative impacts and moving ahead in that 4 area and then also in land use planning. 5 Moving specifically to the three specific 6 comments, the first one is just an observation that in the 7 document there's references to CHAPIS and the analysis you 8 can do with CHAPIS. I just want to mention that CHAPIS is 9 a very useful tool and there's a lot of great information, 10 but the focus is on emissions. To really know if you've 11 got a problem in an area, you need exposure information 12 looking at what is the concentration of pollutants and 13 pollutants in the air. You need to look at risk 14 information. So it doesn't have everything, but it is an 15 important tool. Just wanted to note that. 16 And then the last two quick other things. On the 17 grant program issue, certainly EPA has a grant program for 18 environmental justice, and CalEPA -- CEEB worked with 19 CalEPA and the Legislature on the small grants program. 20 There's probably a funding issue right now for that, but 21 there is a program in place. And we don't think there 22 needs to be a duplicative program. So what staff was 23 suggesting as far as looking at other opportunities and 24 existing grant programs, that made sense. 25 Final point was in Teresa' report she suggests -- PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 267 1 not in the recommendation, but other places in the 2 document, that the EJ stakeholder group should continue, 3 and we fully support that. Thank you. 4 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thanks, Cindy. 5 Again, I'd like to thank you all, and things are 6 progressing. As I said before, we've made significant 7 progress. There's a long way to go, but I think it's been 8 very helpful dialogue today and very encouraging to see as 9 we move ahead for the one thing, we will look for the 10 five-year plan by December 2004. 11 Also, I'd like to thank Teresa for coming up. I 12 know we may well see you as you continue in the activities 13 down in L.A., so but very important. 14 So thank you all. Look forward to that. I guess 15 we have not set a date for the study group yet. We're 16 probably exploring dates. 17 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: We're still 18 working on that. 19 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you, all. 20 I guess the open session -- although no formal 21 Board action may be taken, the Board will allow an 22 opportunity to address the Board on items of interest 23 within the Board's jurisdiction but that do not appear on 24 the agenda. Each person will be allowed a maximum of five 25 minutes to ensure that everyone has a chance to speak. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 268 1 Is there anyone signed up to speak in the open 2 session? If yes, come forward. I guess we expected 3 somebody. 4 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: Don't encourage them. I 5 see Cindy starting to make a move. 6 (Laughter) 7 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Well, seeing no one signed up 8 then -- 9 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: I just have to thank you 10 and Lynn. Recently, unbeknownst to me, I sent a letter in 11 my capacity as co-Chairman of something called the 12 Inter-Regional Partnership asking for financial help. And 13 I got a letter back from you and Lynn saying due to the 14 budget, CARB couldn't afford to give any money to this 15 group, but we would continue to support it with in-kind 16 service of Supervisor DeSaulnier's participation. Back to 17 the schizophrenic thing. Lynn, that was hilarious. 18 (Laughter) 19 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: What dollar value did he put 20 on that? 21 SUPERVISOR DeSAULNIER: It's like the Master Card 22 commercials, priceless. Thank you. 23 CHAIRPERSON LLOYD: Thank you. Thank you, all. 24 We'll officially bring the July 22nd meeting of the Air 25 Resources Board to a close. And I guess since we don't PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 269 1 have a meeting next month, I wish all the staff and anyone 2 else who's going on vacation, including myself, a good 3 vacation. And we'll see you all in September. 4 (Thereupon the California Air Resources Board 5 adjourned at 3:54 p.m.) 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 270 1 CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER 2 I, TIFFANY C. KRAFT, 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 hearing was reported in shorthand by me, 7 Tiffany C. Kraft, a Certified Shorthand Reporter of the 8 State of California, and thereafter transcribed into 9 typewriting. 10 I further certify that I am not of counsel or 11 attorney for any of the parties to said hearing nor in any 12 way interested in the outcome of said hearing. 13 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand 14 this 3rd day of August, 2004. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 TIFFANY C. KRAFT, CSR, RPR 24 Certified Shorthand Reporter 25 License No. 12277 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345