1 MEETING 2 BEFORE THE 3 CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 BOARD HEARING ROOM 11 2020 L STREET 12 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 1999 20 9:30 A.M. 21 22 23 24 Janet H. Nicol Certified Shorthand Reporter 25 License Number 9764 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 ii 1 APPEARANCES 2 MEMBERS PRESENT: 3 Alan C. Lloyd, Ph.D., Chairman Joseph C. Calhoun 4 Dorene D'Adamo Mark DeSaulnier 5 C. Hugh Friedman Matthew R. McKinnon 6 Barbara Patrick Barbara Riordan 7 Ron Roberts 8 STAFF: 9 Michael Kenny, Executive Director 10 Tom Cackette, Chief Deputy Executive Officer Mike Scheible, Deputy Executive Officer 11 Lynn Terry, Deputy Executive Officer Kathleen Walsh, General Counsel 12 Kathleen Tschogl, Ombudsman 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 iii 1 INDEX PAGE 2 Call to Order 1 3 Pledge of Allegiance 1 4 Roll Call 1 5 Opening Remarks by Chairman Lloyd 2 6 AGENDA ITEMS: 7 99-9-1 Public Meeting to Consider the Approval of -- California's On-Road Motor Vehicle Emissions 8 Inventory (Postponed) 9 99-9-2 Public Meeting to Consider the 1999 10 Report to the Legislature - Progress Report on the Phase Down of Rice Straw Burning 11 in the Sacramento Valley Air Basin 12 Introductory Remarks by Chairman Lloyd 6 13 Staff Presentation: 14 Mike Kenny 7 Lesha Hrynchuk 9 15 Public Comment: 16 Chris Churchill 20 17 Steve Schaffer 22 Bob Herkert 23 18 Joe Carrancho 33 Robert Sutton 52 19 Ed Romano 52 William Waite 53 20 Les Fife 56 Chris McKenzie 58 21 Paul Knepprath 66 22 (continued) 23 24 25 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 iv 1 INDEX (continued) 2 PAGE 99-9-3 Public Meeting to Consider the Status 3 Report/Report to the Legislature on Implementation of California's Minor 4 Violation Program 5 Introductory Remarks by Chairman Lloyd 98 6 Staff Presentation: 7 Mike Kenny 99 Judy Lewis 102 8 9 99-9-4 Public Hearing to Consider Amending the Area Designations for State Ambient Air 10 Quality Standards 11 Introductory Remarks by Chairman Lloyd 81 12 Staff Presentation: 13 Mike Kenny 81 Marci Nystrom 82 14 Kathleen Tschogl 94 15 99-9-5 Public Meeting to Consider a Review of 16 Air Quality Legislation for 1999 17 Introductory Remarks by Chairman Lloyd 112 18 Staff Presentation: 19 Mike Kenny 112 Rob Oglesby 113 20 21 Open Session to Provide an Opportunity for Members 127 of the Public to Address the Board on Subject Matters 22 Within the Jurisdiction of the Board 23 Adjournment 135 24 Certificate of Reporter 136 25 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 1 1 P R O C E E D I N G S 2 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Good morning. The November 18th, 3 1999, public meeting of the Air Resources Board will now 4 come to order. 5 Would you all join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. 6 (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) 7 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you. 8 Will the clerk of the board please call the roll. 9 MS. HUTCHENS: Calhoun. 10 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: Here. 11 MS. HUTCHENS: D'Adamo. 12 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Here. 13 MS. HUTCHENS: DeSaulnier. 14 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: Here. 15 MS. HUTCHENS: C. Hugh Friedman. 16 BOARD MEMBER C.H. FRIEDMAN: Here. 17 MS. HUTCHENS: Dr. Friedman. 18 (No response.) 19 MS. HUTCHENS: McKinnon. 20 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: Here. 21 MS. HUTCHENS: Patrick. 22 BOARD MEMBER PATRICK: Here. 23 MS. HUTCHENS: Riordan. 24 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Here. 25 MS. HUTCHENS: Roberts. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 2 1 BOARD MEMBER ROBERTS: Here. 2 MS. HUTCHENS: Chairman Lloyd. 3 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Here. 4 Again, thank you very much. 5 First thing I'd like to mention this morning for 6 the benefit of the audience is that the Impact 2000 item 7 previously scheduled for today has been postponed to our 8 December the 9th board meeting. 9 The delay will give all the interested parties 10 some additional time for comment and review. I think this 11 reflects the concern we had from the constituencies that 12 they needed more time to review this important report. 13 Also, staff is conducting one more public workshop 14 on Impact 2000 on December 1 at our El Monte office so that 15 people can come and ask questions directly of staff about 16 the new data, how the revised model was put together, and 17 also staff will be able to assimilate additional concerns. 18 Secondly, I would like to mention, and board 19 members have there on the chair here, an event I attended 20 yesterday with an ultra low NOx boiler at the Department of 21 General Services central heating plant. And, again, this 22 was a result of one of the innovative clean air technology 23 programs supported by the board and supported by the 24 Research Division. I think it was an excellent example of 25 partnership here with the Gas Research Institute, with the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 3 1 other members of private sector. 2 I think Coen, who was leading this with their 3 boiler, developing an ultra low NOx boiler, getting down 4 nominally should be less than nine PPM, actually I think 5 it's getting less than eight PPM. 6 I think this is just the type of developments and 7 technology development we need to see, so we're not only 8 going down on the mobile side, but also on the stationary 9 side. 10 And I think this is also without any after 11 treatment and that's an important issue, so we don't have 12 any SCR after treatment. Clearly you can go further with 13 that. 14 But, again, I want to congratulate the staff here, 15 Dr. Holmes, Dr. Barham, Manjit Ahuja, who led the effort 16 here, and other staff and Coen and the other entities, 17 including I think the Energy Commission was involved. I 18 think it was a great example of what can be done with 19 cooperative work, and also with some seed money with helping 20 where we actually were able to leverage minimum dollars on 21 our effort, I think to about a question of ten to one. So 22 we had about a ten-to-one leverage for this program, or 23 maybe a little greater, which is, I think, great. 24 I just want to draw your attention to that, I 25 think, great example. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 4 1 Third thing this morning, again it gives me a 2 great pleasure to call upon the Mohave Desert Air Quality 3 Management District Representative, Ms. Barbara Riordan, to 4 share with us a very special project the district has just 5 completed. 6 Barbara. 7 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 8 As is the responsibility of not only the ARB, but 9 our partners in our local air quality management districts, 10 we do outreach to the public in the form of education. 11 And a very exciting thing happened in my district, 12 because the ARB funded us to do a video that was a marvelous 13 tool by which we are going to share educational interests to 14 the local people, as well as throughout our school districts 15 and through our cable TVs, a video that was prepared by the 16 students at Saltana High School, and that is in the Hesperia 17 School District. 18 The grant came to us from the ARB. We managed it. 19 And the individual that's really responsible for 20 managing it so well with Mohave District is Violette 21 Roberts, who is here today, and I'll just ask Violette to 22 stand, because she's sort of the local director. 23 We've tried to make this a fun project, but also a 24 wonderful educational tool. So I invite you to sit back and 25 to watch "Let's Clean the Air in the Mohave Desert." PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 5 1 So if we can roll this film, we will share this 2 with you today. 3 (Video started.) 4 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: We have very clean air out 5 in Mohave, you can see. 6 (Video concluded.) 7 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Mr. Chairman, thank you 8 very much. 9 (Applause.) 10 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: I think that 11 acknowledgment, Violette, is really for you and the 12 students, so if you would express to them our appreciation 13 for a job well done. 14 And I do want to thank the ARB not only for the 15 funding, but the invitation to bring the video up today. I 16 think this was a real opportunity to show what a smaller air 17 pollution control district can do in terms of outreach and 18 public education. 19 So thank you, Mr. Chairman. 20 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you very much, Barbara. 21 And, again, I'd like to express my appreciation 22 and congratulations to the district for indeed a job 23 extremely well done. 24 I'd also like to thank our ombudsman, Kathleen 25 Tschogl, for bringing this to my attention, when she went PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 6 1 down there. I think it's just the type of thing we need to 2 see and am delighted. 3 I did have one note here which was passed to me 4 towards the end of the video, the South Coast is demanding 5 equal time to respond. 6 (Laughter.) 7 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: You see, Mr. Chairman, 8 we're trying to teach our young people early whose problem 9 it really is. 10 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you very much indeed. 11 Congratulations. 12 Now I'd like to move on to agenda item 99-9-2. 13 I'd like to remind people in the audience who 14 would like to present testimony to the board on any of the 15 items today to please sign up with the clerk of the board. 16 Also, if you have any written statements, please give 20 17 copies, if you can, to the clerk of the board. 18 The first item today, as I mentioned, is 99-9-2, 19 public meeting to consider the 1999 progress report to the 20 Legislature on the phase down of rice straw burning in the 21 Sacramento Valley Air Basin. 22 As you know, this is the third biennial report. 23 As before, it's a collaborate effort with the Department of 24 Food and Agriculture. 25 I understand Mr. Steve Schaffer is here from the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 7 1 department here today and was the primary contact for this 2 report. 3 Welcome and thanks for your help. I hope that 4 Steve is here. 5 Oh, he's hiding behind there. Thank you. 6 As we consider the rice straw program, it is 7 important to review both the public health and economic 8 aspects of the current burning practices. Everyone agrees 9 that the public should be protected from excessive smoke and 10 we've seen many examples of this this year without the help 11 of rice straw burning. And so there's no disagreement about 12 that. 13 By the same token, I don't think there's any 14 question that the rice industry is willing to consider 15 burning alternatives, providing that they are truly workable 16 and do not put the rice crop at greater risk of disease. So 17 we need a common understanding about how the alternatives 18 are coming along and what we can do together to speed that 19 progress along. 20 At this point, I would like to ask Mr. Kenny to 21 introduce the item and begin staff's presentation. 22 MR. KENNY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of 23 the board. 24 I'm going to start with pretty much the obvious, 25 which is the key issue, and the key issue really is the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 8 1 phase down is continuing and the real probably crucial 2 aspect of that is the alternatives that are being developed 3 for rice burning. 4 The rice straw grant program has certainly 5 improved the prospects for economically viable uses for rice 6 straw. Just last month one of the grant projects came on 7 line. Fiber Tech USA in Colusa has become the first major 8 commercial user of rice straw by manufacturers participating 9 in our different programs. 10 In today's presentation, staff will discuss the 11 status of other promising projects now underway. 12 Also, over the next few months we'll be soliciting 13 proposals for the final increment of the rice straw grant 14 program. The focus will be on ethanol production projects. 15 With the phase-out of MTBE, significant quantities of 16 ethanol will be used in the future in California's 17 gasolines. 18 To the extent that ethanol is used in California, 19 we definitely want to encourage its production from 20 California sources, specifically biomass from rice straw 21 would be one of the best alternatives. 22 This is an example where financial incentives may 23 be needed to make alternatives economically feasible. 24 With that introduction, I'd like to introduce 25 Ms. Lesha Hrynchuk, and she will make a presentation. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 9 1 Lesha. 2 MS. HRYNCHUK: Good morning, Chairman Lloyd and 3 members of the board. 4 As the chairman and Mr. Kenny already stated, this 5 draft report is being presented to you today for your 6 consideration and approval so that we may send the report to 7 the Legislature to inform them about the progress of the 8 phase down of rice straw burning as required by the act. 9 This is the third biennial report to the 10 Legislature and is a joint effort of the Air Resources Board 11 and the California Department of Food and Agriculture. 12 This slide shows the outline of my presentation. 13 A summary of the public comments we've received on 14 the proposed report will be made after my presentation. 15 Introduction. 16 The original law required that rice straw burning 17 be reduced annually based on percentages of rice acres 18 planted. 19 In 1997 the law was amended, setting new limits 20 for the years 1998 through 2000. For these three years the 21 annual burn limit is 200,000 acres, and this includes a 22 limit of 90,000 acres during the fall. 23 Beginning September 2001, burning will be allowed 24 only for disease control. The limit will be 125,000 acres, 25 or 25 percent of planted acres, whichever is less. This is PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 10 1 an annual limit and there is no fall limit in the law. 2 Staff will develop regulations governing the disease burning 3 and will present them for the board's consideration next 4 fall. 5 Public health. 6 Smoke contains fine particles which affect public 7 health, as well as visibility. The state PM 10 standard is 8 exceeded in the Sacramento Valley as it is in most of the 9 state. The fall is a season of concern because of the 10 greatly stagnant weather conditions. Smoke episodes can 11 result in short-term exposures that cause respiratory 12 distress. Individuals especially sensitive to smoke include 13 people with respiratory illnesses such as asthma, 14 bronchitis and allergies. 15 Our goal is to minimize the public's exposure to 16 smoke. Smoke management programs are essential for this 17 purpose. 18 To better understand the short-term health effects 19 of smoke exposures, the ARB is sponsoring controlled 20 clinical studies to look at the specific health effects of 21 burning agricultural waste. The first part of these studies 22 is focusing on the effects of breathing rice straw smoke, 23 and the studies have just started. 24 This graph shows the high levels of particulate 25 matter on November 1st, 1994, a day when a sudden change in PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 11 1 weather conditions caused smoke from rice fires to inundate 2 the Sacramento urban area. As you can see, exposures can be 3 very high during these smoke episodes. At these three 4 Sacramento monitoring sites, the maximum concentrations 5 ranged from 100 to 200 micrograms per cubic meter. This 6 compares to the state standard of 50 micrograms per cubic 7 meter averaged over 24 hours. 8 This example helps illustrate the need for the 9 current research studies focused on the effects of 10 short-term exposures. 11 The Sacramento Valley Smoke Management Program is 12 the most sophisticated in the state. The Sacramento Valley 13 Basin-wide Air Pollution Control Council, called the BCC, 14 develops a yearly agricultural burning plan which specifies 15 the conditions for burning. The burn plan specifies the 16 criteria to be used in deciding when, where and how much 17 agricultural burning may be done on a day-to-day basis based 18 on prevailing meteorological and air quality conditions. 19 The smoke management program is designed to minimize smoke 20 impacts. 21 Next year in March the board will consider 22 revisions to the smoke management program for the entire 23 state. 24 Progress of the phase down. 25 The phase down limits have been met. Growers are PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 12 1 burning less than the maximum allowed by law. For the 1998 2 burn year, about 141,000 acres were burned. The maximum 3 allowed to be burned was 200,000 acres. Most of the 4 unburned straw has been incorporated into the soil during 5 the fall. The reduction in burning has taken place during 6 the spring. 7 This graph shows how the acres planted and acres 8 burned have changed since the phase down began in 1992. 9 In the first year of the phase down, about 303,000 10 acres were burned. 11 In the latest burn year, 1998, about 141,000 acres 12 were burned. 13 Burning has decreased by more than 50 percent. 14 Acres planted have increased since 1992 and now 15 hover around 500,000 acres per year. 16 With the next several slides I will discuss the 17 progress of finding alternatives to burning. 18 As in the previous report, the primary alternative 19 to burning is currently soil incorporation, plowing the 20 straw into the soil. 21 However, several promising recent developments 22 have started to improve the long-term outlook for finding 23 alternative uses for rice straw. 24 In the next several slides I'll be discussing the 25 potential for making ethanol from rice straw, the rice straw PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 13 1 grant program demonstrating the new rice straw technologies, 2 and the Alternatives Advisory Committee's recommendations 3 which emphasize the need for financial incentives for 4 developing uses for rice straw. 5 The phase-out of the methyl tertiary butyl ether, 6 MTBE, from California's gasoline, creates a potential market 7 for California-produced ethanol. One ethanol plant can use 8 from 80,000 to 200,000 tons of rice straw annually. This 9 means that one ethanol plant could use up to 20 percent of 10 the rice straw grown annually. 11 Financial incentives may be needed, since 12 rice-straw-to-ethanol conversion technologies have not yet 13 been applied commercially. 14 The California Energy Commission has just released 15 its draft report on ethanol. The report recommends that the 16 state support demonstrations of several biomass-to-ethanol 17 facilities to establish the technical and economic 18 feasibility of biomass-to-ethanol facilities. 19 With the Rice Straw Grant Program the ARB has 20 awarded grants totaling over $3 million for five 21 demonstration and commercialization projects for developing 22 uses for rice straw. 23 The funded projects include using rice straw to 24 make particleboard, fiberboard, citric acid, animal feed and 25 erosion control mats. One of the companies funded is PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 14 1 FiberTech USA. FiberTech has just started making 2 particleboard out of rice straw. This is an important 3 milestone, the first large-scale commercial use of rice 4 straw. FiberTech expects to use from 40,000 to 60,000 tons 5 of rice straw annually. This is two to three times the 6 amount they expected to use when they applied for the 7 grants. 8 Mr. Chris Churchill, the president of FiberTech, 9 is here with us today and will say a few words after my 10 presentation. 11 Because two of the projects approved for grants 12 this year were cancelled, there is about $1.2 million 13 available for new grants next year. 14 The focus in this last round will be on 15 rice-straw-to-ethanol projects. Staff will seek out and 16 encourage ethanol projects to apply for all grants, although 17 all rice straw projects will be eligible to apply. Staff 18 expects to recommend projects for grant awards at the May 19 2000 board meeting. 20 The Advisory Committee on Alternatives to Rice 21 Straw Burning will soon be releasing its 1999 report. The 22 committee's draft recommendations include encouraging 23 financial incentives to develop new rice straw technologies 24 such as loans, grants and tax credits; providing financial 25 assistance for building barns to store rice straw to make it PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 15 1 available year-around. 2 The committee would encourage ethanol projects if 3 environmental, technical and economic studies are 4 supportive. The committee also recommends continued 5 research of farming practices to manage various rice straw 6 disposal methods. 7 The Rice Straw Tax Credit Program provides a $15 8 per ton state tax credit for buying rice straw with an 9 annual cap of $400,000 for all credits. The program is 10 administered by the Department of Food and Agriculture, 11 CDFA. The CDFA issued tax credit certificates for the 12 purchase of about 6,000 tons of rice straw, both in 1997 and 13 in 1998, the first two years of the program. 14 The straw was used primarily for bedding for dairy 15 cows, erosion control and cattle feed. 16 In its draft 1999 report on the program, the CDFA 17 recommended that the Legislature consider lifting the annual 18 cap of $400,000, allowing a tax credit purchase or trading 19 program, and allowing any unused tax credits to be used for 20 other rice straw activities. 21 Environmental and economic effects. 22 As a result of the phase down, emissions have 23 decreased on an annual basis and during the spring, because 24 of phase down of burning has primarily taken place in the 25 spring. Although the phase down has not affected the acres PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 16 1 burned during the fall, fall air quality has improved in the 2 past two years, and public complaints about agricultural 3 burning have decreased. This is most likely the result of 4 better smoke management under the Sacramento Valley Burn 5 Plan. 6 Economic effects. 7 The phase down has increased growers' production 8 costs. UC Extension estimates average production costs of 9 about $842 per acre in 1998. The costs of soil 10 incorporation averages $36 per acre, compared to $2 per acre 11 for burning. The added costs of rice straw disposal, due to 12 the phase down, is estimated at $20 per acre planted. This 13 reflects the combination of soil incorporation and burning 14 as the means of disposal. While the phase down has added to 15 the cost of production, yearly fluctuations in both market 16 prices and yields have a major effect on growers' 17 profitability. 18 Based on information received after the release of 19 the proposed report, staff suggests that the following 20 revisions be made to the report. These suggested revisions 21 are included in your packets and are available for the 22 public on the table outside the hearing room. 23 Improved information about growers' revenues in 24 1997 and 1998 estimates rice revenues to have been about 25 $908 per acre in '97, and $940 per acre in 1998. This would PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 17 1 change the net profit estimates to be about $85 per acre in 2 1997 and $98 per acre in 1998. 3 Recent studies on rice blast disease shows while 4 the weather patterns in Sacramento may not be optimal for 5 the blast disease, the patterns are considered conducive for 6 the disease. 7 Two additional clarifications should be made. 8 One to clarify is changing to the past tense the 9 reference to the University of California field studies on 10 soil incorporation, since they have now been completed. 11 The second to clarify is that the burn program is 12 most restrictive during the fall and the winter. 13 Conclusions. 14 The phase down requirements have been met. The 15 long-term outlook for the development of alternatives has 16 improved, but financial incentives are needed to speed the 17 development of new technologies. 18 In the meantime, the smoke management program will 19 continue to be critical to minimize smoke impacts. 20 Staff recommends that the board approve the report 21 with the suggested revisions. 22 That concludes my presentation. 23 And now Don McNerney, chief of the Modeling and 24 Meteorology Branch, will summarize the public comments we 25 received on the proposed report. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 18 1 MR. McNERNY: Thank you, Lesha. 2 We received four written comments on the report, 3 and you have copies of those comments. I'll briefly 4 summarize each one of those. 5 First, a letter from the American Lung 6 Association, and the Lung Association commends the staff on 7 a well-balanced, easy-to-read report. They feel it fairly 8 evaluates the research related to health, summarizes the 9 progress made to create alternatives to burning through the 10 grant program, and states concerns of rice growers, 11 including cost comparisons of different methods of dealing 12 with rice straw. 13 The association is very concerned that fall 14 burning has not declined significantly, and believes that 15 efforts to curtail the burning of rice straw must continue. 16 They support the matching grant program and 17 support the conclusions in the report, including providing 18 financial incentives for alternative uses of rice straw. 19 They note that asthma has increased 60 percent 20 between '84 and 1996. And that this poor air quality 21 affects groups most seriously, including children and the 22 elderly. 23 And they are pleased with the Air Resources Board 24 continued strong support for reducing small particulate 25 matter in the fall. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 19 1 They urge the board to approve the report. 2 The second is a series of comments on the report 3 from Larry Maben, a rice grower, and he makes eight comments 4 on the report, which I'll briefly summarize. 5 First, the inability to burn is causing problems 6 with rice diseases and that industry pathologists believe 7 that allowing -- being allowed to burn every fourth year is 8 inadequate for disease control. 9 Of course, we recognize that studies of disease 10 impacts are continuing and that 25 percent is what's 11 provided for in the law. So the law is being followed now. 12 Second comment is that spring burns are not 13 feasible in areas prone to winter flooding. 14 And I think we would agree with this comment. 15 Another comment, without grants and subsidies, 16 rice straw is not a good enough material to have much 17 economic value at present. 18 Yes. 19 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Mr. Kenny, maybe we can hold 20 these until after the witnesses, if that's possible. 21 MS. HRYNCHUK: Of course. 22 MR. KENNY: Be fine. 23 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you. 24 Any questions from the board members before we 25 proceed with the witnesses? PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 20 1 I had one question. When will the results of the 2 health effects study be available? 3 MS. TERRY: I talked to Dane Westerdall yesterday, 4 and actually they're just underway, so it probably will not 5 be for a year or so. 6 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Okay. Thank you. 7 If there are no questions, I think we'd like to 8 call the first witness who has signed up to testify. 9 And we've got at the moment 11 witnesses, and the 10 first one was Chris Churchill, I think, president of 11 FiberTech, and followed by Steve Schaffer and Bob Herkert. 12 MR. CHURCHILL: Good morning, ladies and 13 gentlemen. My name is Chris Churchill. I'm president of 14 FiberTech USA. 15 As Lesha indicated, we were one of the recipients 16 of the grant financing in the first round of grant funding. 17 Our project was to make particleboard out of rice 18 straw. There's some samples being passed around presently. 19 I'm pleased to inform you, as Lesha indicated, 20 that we did start up our facility in October of this year. 21 Start-up is going very well, and we should start full 22 production in the near future. 23 In 1995 -- in 1999 we harvested 45,000 tons of 24 rice straw. This was stacked and baled at various locations 25 around the Valley. This is in addition to the 10,000 tons PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 21 1 of rice straw that we harvested in 1998, and this year we'll 2 be using a total of roughly 55,000 tons. 3 Next year and in the following years we plan to 4 harvest at least 60,000 tons per year to feed this facility 5 with raw material. 6 I'd like to take this opportunity to thank the 7 staff and the board of the ARB for their support. The rice 8 fund grant was critical to our ability to get this project 9 off the ground. Without it, I'm not sure we would have been 10 successful. 11 As I indicated, we're passing around some samples 12 from our facility. Some of them are sanded, some are 13 unsanded to give you an idea of what it looks like before we 14 put it through the finishing process. They meet market 15 standards. We have customers lined up to take our product 16 when we are in full production, and things seem to be going 17 very well. 18 If you have any questions, I'd be happy to take 19 them at this time. 20 Thank you very much. 21 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you very much. 22 Any questions from the board? 23 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: It looks like good 24 material. 25 MR. CHURCHILL: Well, it's good rice straw. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 22 1 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Congratulations on all the 2 progress. It's great. 3 MR. CHURCHILL: Thank you. 4 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you. 5 Next is Steve Schaffer with the California 6 Department of Food and Agriculture. 7 MR. SCHAFFER: Chairman Lloyd, members of the 8 board, thank you for the opportunity to come before you 9 today. 10 First of all, I want to again as always thank 11 staff for the close working relationship and always their 12 availability in how they coordinate closely with the 13 Department of Food and Agriculture. We greatly appreciate 14 that. 15 Also want to commend the basic approach that the 16 report took this time in terms of its brevity and 17 readability. I think that was a very positive change. 18 One concern I do want to raise is that the brief 19 public comment period, and I know from the Food and Ag 20 perspective we haven't had a chance to review the public 21 comments. We were going to come before the board and ask 22 for a continuance on this, but we understand the busy 23 schedule of the board and the issues that will be coming 24 before the board next month. 25 What we would like to do is since this is a joint PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 23 1 report between the two agencies is to reserve the right to 2 take a look and consider those public comments and provide 3 some additional input, if necessary, through the Governor's 4 office. 5 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Acceptable to staff? Okay. 6 Thank you. 7 Thank you, Steve. 8 Any questions from the board? 9 Yes, Professor Friedman. 10 BOARD MEMBER C.H. FRIEDMAN: I noticed that a 11 couple of the letters, Butte and Glenn, also raised the 12 question of the short notice period. And I'm wondering if 13 we can -- are we in a position to hold the record open until 14 December for any additional comment, take action subject to 15 that now? 16 MR. KENNY: We are able to hold the record open. 17 The difficulty is that we would actually have to put it on 18 the agenda for December, and we would then be in a situation 19 which we'd have additional witnesses presenting themselves 20 for testimony in December. 21 MR. SCHAFFER: Thank you. 22 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you very much, Steve. 23 Next speaker is Bob Herkert, and then Joe 24 Carrancho and Robert Sutton. 25 MR. HERKERT: Good morning, Dr. Lloyd. Good to PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 24 1 see you again. 2 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Good morning. 3 MR. HERKERT: I'm with the California Rice 4 Commission, and I am the environmental affairs manager. 5 I'll just go through with our comments, sir, and 6 we've submitted this morning some 20 or some 18 pages of 7 comments on the report. 8 We do have some very substantial concerns with 9 some of the conclusions that were drawn in the report, many 10 of which were not stated today. 11 We also have looked around in the Valley to the ag 12 commissioners' offices and the various air pollution control 13 offices, and they have not had a chance to provide written 14 comments on this particular report. 15 Moreover, the Sacramento Valley Air Basin Control 16 Council, at least my best knowledge, is they have not had an 17 opportunity to review the report. 18 We really had to put ourselves in a knothole, sir, 19 in order to get our comments in, and we know that these 20 other folks are very busy and they do need an opportunity to 21 review this report and provide to you written comments. 22 Also in following up on Mr. Schaffer's comments, 23 since Food and Ag is your partner in this endeavor, the 24 record really should be held open at the very least. We 25 would like to see you actually delay your acceptance of this PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 25 1 report until everybody's had a chance to comment on it. 2 Thank you, sir. 3 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: I think you've expressed a good 4 concern there. And I know we've got some questions from the 5 board. 6 Mr. Kenny, do you have a suggestion as to how we 7 could resolve this? 8 MR. KENNY: The one other possibility would be to 9 essentially hold the record open, but not to basically put 10 it on the board's agenda, and unless there were significant 11 comments that changed the general direction of the report, 12 the report would then go forward. If there were significant 13 comments that changed the general direction of the report, 14 then it would be brought back before the board in December. 15 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Mr. Chairman, I don't know 16 whether this could be done, but I have been on boards where 17 we closed the public testimony at the conclusion of the 18 meeting, but deferred making a decision and invited written 19 comment until the next meeting. 20 Can that be done, Mr. Kenny? 21 MR. KENNY: Yes. 22 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: And that sort of solves the 23 problem of having new public testimony, but does allow for 24 the extension of the written comment period. 25 MR. KENNY: It does do that. The one difficulty PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 26 1 is that you -- I guess the question would be would you be 2 allowing public testimony at the December board meeting or 3 would you not be allowing public testimony at the December 4 board meeting? 5 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Well, the boards that I sat 6 on did not allow public testimony at the next hearing. They 7 simply allowed though for the written testimony to be taken 8 in and then the board would take action at that final 9 meeting. 10 I don't know if you can do it, but the local 11 boards can do it. 12 MR. KENNY: It could be done. 13 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Yes. Professor Friedman or 14 Ms. D'Adamo. 15 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Well, I just had a couple 16 of questions about the Rice Commission's comments. 17 Do those comments consider the suggested revisions 18 that staff has provided us with today? 19 MR. HERKERT: The comments that we have made go 20 far beyond the revisions that staff has given you today. We 21 do have some fundamental disagreements, particularly with 22 regard to the rate of fall burning. 23 We do believe, Mr. Kenny, that it does 24 fundamentally change -- could fundamentally change the 25 direction of the report, sir. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 27 1 BOARD MEMBER C.H. FRIEDMAN: They do take into 2 account, then you had the revisions and you're responding to 3 the original report and the revisions? 4 MR. HERKERT: I'm not responding to the revisions. 5 I have not seen them except for this morning. 6 BOARD MEMBER C.H. FRIEDMAN: Oh, so that you have 7 not taken those into consideration? 8 MR. HERKERT: No, sir, we have not. 9 BOARD MEMBER C.H. FRIEDMAN: So to the extent they 10 might take into account your concerns or some of your 11 concerns, you may not be aware of that? 12 MR. HERKERT: The ones I saw this morning do not. 13 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Yes, Professor Friedman. 14 BOARD MEMBER C.H. FRIEDMAN: As I understand it 15 we're going to have probably we're looking at a two-day 16 meeting in December, and I'm hoping that that would 17 accommodate whatever remaining discussion we may have as a 18 board, even though the public record may have been closed, 19 but any discussion of any written submissions that might 20 come in in the next three weeks or so, to give more time to 21 those interested parties as they've asked to respond to 22 this, especially with the revisions that are even more 23 recent. 24 So I, for one, would like to see us act in 25 December, but if it's permissible we can listen to the rest PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 28 1 of the testimony now, people have been notified, they're 2 here if they're interested, and any supplemental comments 3 could be in writing, which we could then consider and act in 4 December. 5 That would be my suggestion. 6 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Yeah. I would concur, since 7 we've heard from our colleagues in the Department of Food 8 and Ag and also from obviously the rice industry, that I 9 think that would be an appropriate thing to do. And, again, 10 given the fact that we're going to have a two-day board 11 meeting, maybe three days -- 12 BOARD MEMBER C.H. FRIEDMAN: I'll be home for 13 Christmas, right? 14 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you very much, indeed. 15 BOARD MEMBER PATRICK: Mr. Chairman. 16 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Yes. 17 BOARD MEMBER PATRICK: I have a question, sort of 18 a process question. 19 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Supervisor Patrick. 20 BOARD MEMBER PATRICK: Yes. Was this time period 21 for public comment abbreviated from our normal public 22 comment period? Is that what the problem is? 23 MR. KENNY: It was abbreviated. The normal time 24 for public comment that we try to provide on any information 25 we put out is 30 days, and on this one we only provided ten PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 29 1 days. 2 BOARD MEMBER PATRICK: Okay. And so that was 3 because we have the December meeting looming on us, is that 4 correct? 5 MR. KENNY: No. The main reason for the shortened 6 time period was simply we were trying to put it together and 7 it took us more time to put it together than we anticipated. 8 BOARD MEMBER PATRICK: Okay. 9 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: When are we obligated to 10 submit it? 11 BOARD MEMBER PATRICK: That was going to be my 12 next question. When is the obligation for this? 13 MR. KENNY: The report should already have been 14 submitted. 15 BOARD MEMBER PATRICK: Whoops. 16 MR. KENNY: The additional three weeks, though, 17 will not make it all that much different. 18 BOARD MEMBER PATRICK: Not only that, but what's 19 the worse thing that can happen if you're late? 20 MR. KENNY: It is not -- there is really no 21 consequence to being late. And reports are, I don't want to 22 say routinely submitted late, but reports do go in both on 23 time and a little bit late. 24 BOARD MEMBER PATRICK: Certainly we prefer to do 25 them on time. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 30 1 BOARD MEMBER C.H. FRIEDMAN: I'd rather get an A 2 for being tardy, than get a C and be on time. 3 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Yeah, I would agree with you, 4 Professor Friedman. I think it's unfair to the industry at 5 this time. It's far better to have a report which we're all 6 comfortable with, or at least we understand the issues 7 there, before we go ahead. 8 So, but now I'm looking for how we proceed here 9 from -- Mr. Kenny, I guess we should continue to call the 10 witnesses here and then -- 11 MR. KENNY: I think you can continue to hear all 12 the witnesses who are present today and wish to offer 13 testimony, and then what we can do is we can simply leave 14 the record open until the December 9th board hearing, at 15 which point if it's the board's direction, written comments 16 would be considered and provided to the board up through 17 that date, and then the board needs to determine whether or 18 not it wishes to hear any public testimony on either 19 December 9th or December 10th. 20 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you, Mr. Kenny. 21 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: If I might. 22 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Yes, Ms. D'Adamo. 23 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Well, what I'm concerned 24 about is in the interest of moving the agenda through, 25 moving through it quickly in December, what I'd like to see PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 31 1 is if the record could be closed in order to give staff 2 enough time to be able to respond to the written comments, 3 and then be able to inform the board that these 10, 20 4 comments were given and they've been addressed in the 5 following manner, so that we wouldn't have to sort through 6 all the additional written testimony and make a 7 determination on our own as to whether or not the staff, the 8 report has accommodated those concerns or somehow addressed 9 them. 10 MR. KENNY: I think the board can do that, but as 11 we've been discussing this, there is a provision that I sort 12 of vaguely recall that public comment must be allowed on any 13 item that is placed on a board's agenda. And I don't recall 14 that provision real specifically at the moment, but I'm 15 pretty certain about it. Maybe I can get some help from 16 Kathleen. 17 MS. WALSH: Mike, I'm having somebody check that 18 right now, the extent of that provision, to determine 19 whether we can close off comment here and just continue -- 20 consider this a continued hearing. I believe that we're 21 able to do that. 22 MR. KENNY: The reason I raise it was that I think 23 this was essentially a provision that was enacted into law 24 just within the last five years, and it was enacted because 25 there were at least, not this board, but there were other PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 32 1 boards around the state, both at the local and state level 2 which were essentially not allowing public comment, and I 3 can't recall the specifics of how that provision works, but 4 I want to raise it just so the board is aware of the fact 5 that it is possible that if we go forward to December we may 6 have to allow public comment at that point in time. 7 BOARD MEMBER C.H. FRIEDMAN: Mr. Chairman, I think 8 we will get a clarification of that before we leave today. 9 I would suggest that we go ahead and hear the 10 remaining witnesses who are here today for that purpose, and 11 defer deciding until we're advised by counsel whether we can 12 close off the public testimony record today, but subject to 13 further written comment. 14 And in the light of Ms. D'Adamo's comment, I share 15 that concern. If we can instead of closing off the further 16 written submissions by the hearing in December, if we could 17 do that several days before, enough time, a week before, 18 five days before, something adequate to give the staff the 19 opportunity to screen those. Of course, they will send them 20 to us intact, but to at the same time be prepared to comment 21 on them so that we have the benefit of that when we consider 22 them at the hearing. 23 MR. KENNY: I think that's an excellent idea, and 24 staff would greatly appreciate that, because it obviously 25 makes our jobs a little bit easier. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 33 1 BOARD MEMBER C.H. FRIEDMAN: So if you want to 2 suggest three days, five days, what you think is 3 appropriate, to give more notice and opportunity to those 4 who wish to comment, but at the same time close off the 5 comment period. 6 MR. KENNY: My suggestion would be essentially 7 that we close it off one week in advance and what that does 8 is it provides essentially five working days. And I'm 9 making that comment in part because of the fact that the 10 report itself in total is only 38 pages in length, and so I 11 do think that between the time that's been provided to date, 12 and the additional time that would be available, for 13 example, between now and December 2nd, for example, which 14 would be one week in advance, that should be sufficient 15 time. 16 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Additional two weeks. 17 BOARD MEMBER C.H. FRIEDMAN: Close of business 18 December 2nd, Thursday. 19 MR. KENNY: That would be my suggestion. 20 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you very much. 21 Then we'll proceed with the next witness, Mr. Joe 22 Carrancho, with the Rice Producers of California, and then 23 Robert Sutton and Ed Romano. 24 MR. CARRANCHO: Good morning. 25 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Good morning. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 34 1 MR. CARRANCHO: And members of the panel. 2 I want to thank you for giving us this opportunity 3 to talk to you. 4 And I would like to say that I'm going to urge you 5 also to postpone this as much as you can. The gentleman 6 preceded me here I know worked practically day and night to 7 put out those comments, and I entirely agree with his 8 comments. 9 I'm going to speak to you today more on the line 10 of a farmer. Since I got back from Korea, I've been farming 11 my whole life. I farmed about 2400 acres. 12 And I'm going to take you back to the original 13 1378, which I was not involved in, but I remember very well, 14 Mr. Connelly coming out, putting his arm around a couple of 15 farmers and telling them this rice straw is going to be 16 worth more than your rice some day. And I don't think it 17 took the rice farmer very long to find out that certainly 18 was nowhere near true. 19 I became involved in it when we started up the 20 Senate Bill 318, and I was part of the negotiating team. It 21 was quite a long process. It was obvious that we needed to 22 be able to at least burn 50 percent of our rice straw. We 23 negotiated and we thought we had something that we can work 24 with. 25 And it was implied by some and perceived by others PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 35 1 that by the year 2000 we would have 50 percent rice straw 2 usage. We're at less than two percent. We don't really 3 have a problem if we had our 50 percent rice straw usage. 4 Now, the ARB funded some of these projects. 5 FiberTech, which incidentally I send them 300 acres worth of 6 rice straw. 7 And to let you know how that worked, we cut the 8 straw down as short as we could. We baled it, hauled it 9 off, chopped the little bit that was left. We got the burn 10 on a north wind day. It was a beautiful burn, barely any 11 smoke. And that ground is now worked. 12 However, when we got done burning it, the next day 13 there was at least 100,000 geese in that field. They 14 cleaned it off and we plowed it up and that ground is ready 15 for next year. This is the way to grow rice. We got our 16 disease control. We got rid of our straw. And we created 17 hardly any smoke. 18 FiberTech took that straw. FiberTech is in the 19 starting mode. Thank God, we got something. But it's a 20 starting mode. 21 Ethanol, I'll believe it when I see it. I'm 22 sorry, there's too many people that don't want ethanol. 23 However, I think it has the greatest potential and I'm all 24 for it. 25 Now, we wouldn't have a problem with a 25 percent PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 36 1 if we could just have 50 percent rice straw usage. 2 Now, if we go around the country and look, I can 3 show you, I took Chairman Dunlap, before you, out and showed 4 him a lot of things. I could show you stack after stack 5 after stack of rice straw out there looking for a buyer, 6 looking for someone to take it. All at the cost of the 7 farmer. 8 You know, it's not too many people who will go out 9 and bale rice straw on the continent, but the farmers are 10 willing to do it. 11 Now, the farmers will bale the rice straw under 12 certain conditions. They need to make a small profit. Now, 13 most of the straw that's going out, they're actually asking 14 the farmer to take the very small profit that he does make 15 and pay him to take it off. Insult to injury. 16 Now, if the farmer were allowed to make a small 17 amount, I'm not talking 50 bucks an acre, folks. I'm 18 talking 5 bucks an acre, 10, something. So that we can burn 19 this or get this rice straw baled and send it to someone who 20 can use it. 21 The only way they would burn their rice straw is 22 if weather did not allow the baling. Somebody left, wanted 23 to leave the straw for hunting purposes or environmental 24 reasons or the very most important thing that we want 25 burning for and that is disease control. You cannot expect PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 37 1 or ask a farmer to give up his most important tool for 2 disease control, unless he has an economically feasible 3 alternative to the control of that disease. 4 We have many things. I have a friend right now, 5 maybe some of you know him. He's a guy by the name of Mike 6 Shustus, used to be the Black Point Pheasant Club. He fell 7 in one of our rice fields. He's in the hospital today 8 because he drank some of the water, accidentally. 9 My own mother, this is my mother, this is not a 10 landlord, came up to me and said, son, you are not going to 11 flood that field next to my house. It stinks. The 12 mosquitoes about packed me off. 13 So it's not all win-win. This has to be looked 14 at. 15 I believe that this report is a weak attempt to 16 advise you of the farmers' plight. 17 Secondly, I'm extremely disappointed in our Burn 18 Alternatives Committee. With the evidence that they have in 19 front of them, and I know because I've been to some of those 20 meetings, the very limited amounts of uses that we have for 21 this rice straw, there's potential out there, but we don't 22 have them in use yet, that they will not come right up or 23 have the fortitude to come right up and say this isn't 24 working. 25 I don't know what pressures they have to not do PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 38 1 that, but, folks, this is not working. 2 I would say that if you -- if we could stay at the 3 40 percent that we are today, and until we reach that 50 4 percent rice straw usage that has been implied, in some 5 cases almost promised, I don't think the farmer would have 6 any problem. 7 But you keep ratcheting us down, and we exceed 8 your expectations every year. We don't meet them, we exceed 9 them. We need some flexibility also. 10 We cannot keep losing. What they show in this 11 report is what it costs you. They don't show you what you 12 lose in yield. 13 I'm not going to sit here and give you figures and 14 graphs and things like that. There's other people better 15 equipped for that than I am. 16 But I do know that my bottom line is dropping out 17 very fast. 18 Media. I don't know if there's any media here. 19 And I'm not -- I'm sure they're not going to like this, but 20 it really is an insult to me when you see tires burning and 21 you got somebody on television telling you it's not toxic, 22 don't worry, it's not going to hurt you. Yet, rice fields 23 burning out here that's organic, and my God it's toxic, 24 you're going to die next week. They don't come right out 25 and say that, that may be an exaggeration, but it's implied. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 39 1 We have November 1st, 1994, one of our 2 meteorologists made a mistake. Unfortunately he's human and 3 he made a mistake. We smoked out Sacramento. 4 Why is Sacramento so tolerant of all the smoke 5 we've had over all these last weeks, and when it comes to 6 rice, they won't listen? Why don't you compare the toxics 7 that came off of those fires, which incidentally were 8 another blunder, 60 years of Smoky the Bear, only you can 9 prevent forest fires. Now look at the mess we have. They 10 should have been controlled burns. Bad science. 11 We need good science in some of these things we 12 do. Not in motion. 13 On page four of this report they use the word 14 death, referring to rice. I really take exception to that. 15 The farmers had a test of 468 farmers, I believe it was, of 16 which I was one, chest x-rays, the whole bit. They quickly 17 thrashed that thing saying that basically we were too 18 healthy, because we're more -- we get more exercise. So 19 they thrash it. Let's face it, fellows, maybe that rice 20 straw might be doing us some good. I've been in it all my 21 life and I'm still here. 22 You know, everybody is quick to throw the blame to 23 someone else. I think farmers are getting tired of being 24 the fall person. 25 You want to look at something, just look at PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 40 1 Sacramento right here. I continuously hear about the 2 Sacramento Airport. You have more flights coming in and you 3 have more flights going out, look what we've got with this 4 airport. Yeah, you got a hundred acres of parking out there 5 and every car you see going out there is one person in it. 6 Freight. Planes taking off every 30 seconds. Where is the 7 mass transit going out to that Sacramento Airport so we 8 don't have all these cars. 9 They're not doing anything to help you clean up 10 your pollution, yet the rain forest effect from all this 11 rice out here is cleaning up that air. 12 We only burn on days when we're allowed to burn 13 that we know it's going to be a cleaner day the next day. 14 These cars and everything else is burning all the 15 time. 16 Rice farmers are not the entire culprits. If you 17 want to look at the culprit, let's be honest, look at urban 18 sprawl. 19 With that, I really encourage you to give us a 20 little more time to respond to this. There's a lot of 21 things in this report that we don't agree with. 22 Thank you very much. 23 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you very much. 24 And I think you heard we're giving you that 25 additional time. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 41 1 I did miss, by the way, where do the geese come 2 in? 3 MR. CARRANCHO: On my ranch, and some of the 4 ground I farm I happen to be blessed to live between the 5 Sacramento and the Delvan Refuge, and I have a duck blind 6 that is a hundred yards from the Sacramento Refuge. And I 7 get to see wildlife, and I enjoy my way of life and I want 8 to keep it. 9 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Ms. D'Adamo. 10 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Yes, I had a couple of 11 questions for you. 12 You indicated that the report does raise the issue 13 of the financial cost to farmers that impact average cost 14 per acre, but you indicated that it doesn't show or it 15 doesn't raise some of the other impacts, such as reduction 16 of production. Was that a point that you were trying to 17 make? 18 MR. CARRANCHO: That's right. With the disease 19 that we have, I can give you an example of one field that I 20 have myself. I've incorporated for six years. My yields 21 went from 90 some in the '90s, clear down to 54. I burned 22 it last year, it went right back up to where it was. 23 There is -- you've got to realize, I know some of 24 you here are new, the land is not all the same. We're not 25 all blessed in the same way. I would love to have some of PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 42 1 that land that they can just put the straw down and put a 2 little water on it and it disappears. I have unfortunately 3 don't have that. I do have one piece that is that way, and 4 I love it. But we do not have that much. 5 I also wanted to say the money that we -- this $5 6 million that we have, that started up FiberTech and so on, 7 and I guess ten percent of it went for administration for 8 the ARB, we need more. I mean it's $5 million is a lot of 9 money, but when you throw $5 million at a problem of this 10 magnitude, that's like going to a third world country, 11 getting a starving child and giving it a pacifier. 12 It's not nowhere near enough for the magnitude of 13 the problem we have. 14 And I would encourage here, and I think the 15 farmers deserve to keep this freeze that we have now at the 16 40 percent until we've demonstrated that we can use 50 17 percent of the rice straw, which was the goal to begin with. 18 And until we get to that goal, you're going to 19 crucify your rice farmers if you don't let them do a little 20 more burning, and we only burn on burn days. We're the only 21 people who are regulated. 22 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Yes, Mr. Calhoun. 23 BOARD MEMBER CALHOUN: I had one question that 24 maybe I should know the answer, I planned to ask the staff 25 this issue, but you're a rice producer, I figure I'll ask PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 43 1 you. There's no burning in the spring, most of the burning 2 is in the fall. What's the rationale for that, when, 3 according to the staff that from an air quality point of 4 view it would be best if the burning were done in the 5 spring? 6 MR. CARRANCHO: Well, first of all, I disagree 7 with the fact that we're keeping the burn the same amount in 8 the fall. We're regulated by the fall burn program. And 9 that's really ratcheted down. 10 There's as much burning done in the spring. I 11 think we've burnt more in the spring. I've burned as much 12 as I possibly can in the spring. 13 But to answer your question why, there is lands 14 out there that flood. If you don't burn them in the fall, 15 you're not going to burn them in the spring because the mud 16 gets over the straw and won't burn it. 17 There's other lands out there, as I told 18 Mr. Lloyd, the geese, once the geese get on that ground and 19 there's water on it and they sit out there and stomp on it, 20 you got a few thousand geese walking over that straw, what 21 you're going to do out there in the spring is you're going 22 to go out there and make a lot of smoke, and you're not 23 going to burn nothing. 24 I have, last year I spent in one field that was 25 300 acres, that was in that area, I spent $2200 paying men PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 44 1 with burn cans burning. One of them ended up in the 2 hospital with his leg all burnt. 3 Like I say, it's a two-sided sword. It's not all 4 good. 5 You do not get a good burn in the spring like you 6 do in the fall. You want disease control, burn in the fall. 7 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Supervisor Roberts. 8 BOARD MEMBER ROBERTS: I don't have any questions 9 of the witness, but I do have for staff after you excuse the 10 witness. 11 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Mr. McKinnon, sorry. 12 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: I'm one of the new guys, 13 but I actually burned fields and burned the stubble in the 14 mid '70s. I worked in some land in the Sutter Basin. 15 Something you said kind of spurned this question. 16 Is there a lot of variation in the length of the 17 stubble that's been burnt? Are there ways of reducing the 18 amount of stubble before burning? 19 MR. CARRANCHO: Yes, there definitely is if we can 20 just find a use for the straw. It all comes back to the 21 same thing. As I said, on that 300-acre piece I cut it down 22 to what we call the waterline. 23 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: Right. 24 MR. CARRANCHO: Then we chopped what was left, the 25 four to six inches, so that we'd get a good hot burn and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 45 1 burned it. 2 There is various ways of harvesting. We have now 3 what's called a stripper header, which you probably weren't 4 aware of it if you were in the '70s. The stripper header 5 simply takes the grain off the top, it does not cut the 6 straw at all, and they go back in with what's called a 7 swather which gathers the hay, puts it into a winrow of 8 straw and then it's baled. 9 That is the most successful spring burn that you 10 have is the stripper straw, because it leaves the straw 11 standing and the geese don't like to get into it as much and 12 the ducks. They do get into it some, but they don't get 13 into it as much, and then they burn it in the fall. 14 However, that's only used in certain areas for various 15 reasons. 16 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: I guess I want to, when we 17 go to staff, I also want to ask if there's ways of dealing 18 with the amount of stubble to control the amount of 19 emissions, and that's something, whether or not it has an 20 effect. 21 But the other thing I heard you talk about the 22 quality of water, and can you tell us what the effect of 23 burning or not burning is on the quality of water? 24 MR. CARRANCHO: As you know, anything that rots is 25 going to stink. Mosquitoes are a problem. And I'm rather PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 46 1 concerned with not only the quality of water, but we're not 2 in a drought right now. What happens if we get into a 3 drought? The only thing the farmer has now is to actually 4 put water on that and decompose that straw. If we don't 5 have that water, then what do we do? The phase down is 6 coming down anyway. We need something to get rid of that 7 rice straw. We need alternatives. And the water is just 8 simply decaying matter. 9 He told me the name of the disease that this 10 gentleman got, but it's -- Jack, what's the -- what you call 11 it, that that guy could have ingested that got it? 12 It starts with a P, whatever it is. It's a word 13 about yea long. 14 But, anyway, he took it in and he's in the 15 hospital right now from drinking some of that water. I can 16 assure you, he didn't drink it on purpose. 17 But it is pretty putrid, it's kind of an oil film 18 on it, and a lot of this is of course because of the year. 19 We've had warm days and it rots a little. Actually it's 20 good for rotting, and that's what we need is to rot that 21 straw. 22 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: Thank you very much. 23 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you. 24 Thank you very much indeed. 25 Mr. Kenny, I'd like to see what you've decided. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 47 1 Ms. Walsh. 2 MS. WALSH: The board can cut off public testimony 3 on this item, since you are hearing it on a report today. 4 If, however, there are any changes to the report 5 that would come back in December, you would be required to 6 take public comment on the report. 7 Given that the decision is potentially to keep the 8 public comment period open, the expectation is that there 9 will be comments coming in that will be raising issues, 10 either that will be reflected in changes in the report or 11 certainly in decisions by the staff not to make changes to 12 the report. 13 It would be the call of the board then to decide 14 whether you wanted to make time available for public comment 15 in December. You could, of course, put some limits on that 16 in order to minimize the amount of additional time. 17 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Well, again, I welcome comments 18 from my colleagues here, but I would say that probably we 19 will be taking comments in December and, given that, it 20 might be today I would encourage people who wanted to 21 testify to basically keep their comments short, adding new 22 items and to avail themselves of the opportunity to also 23 testify in December. 24 But welcome any additional comments from my 25 colleagues. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 48 1 BOARD MEMBER C.H. FRIEDMAN: I would just echo 2 that I would hope that those who cannot come or don't want 3 to come next time would add anything new to what we've 4 already heard and try not to just simply repeat what we have 5 already heard, in the interests of time. 6 And I think we need to carry this over, and I 7 would suggest that we get a reasonable time limit for 8 testimony in December and stick strictly with that time 9 limit that's fair and reasonable for additional, any 10 additional comments in light of the written submissions we 11 receive and any revisions that staff may make or comments 12 the staff may have in response to those between now and 13 December. 14 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Yes. Thank you very much, 15 Professor. 16 Ms. D'Adamo. 17 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: If the written comment 18 is -- well, I take that back. The staff's revisions would 19 be expected to be produced by what date if we go this route? 20 MR. KENNY: Well, what will happen -- we would 21 have all the comments essentially by December 2nd, and so 22 what we would do is we would put the revisions out probably 23 at the time of the board meeting, presuming that there were 24 revisions that the staff were proposing. 25 I think the board's direction here is actually PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 49 1 very good, because the difficulty is that there is the 2 possibility that what would happen is the comments come in 3 and staff does not incorporate some of those comments into 4 the proposed report, at which point it does seem fair to 5 allow the people who have offered those comments to come up 6 and at least make their points to the board at the time of 7 the hearing. 8 But I think directly in response to your question, 9 it is hard to say what the exact date would be. If we have 10 all the comments by December 2nd, we will make every effort 11 to getting a revised draft out as quickly as possible, but 12 that will only be seven days before the December 9th board 13 hearing. It is possible that we would not have them out 14 until early in that week of December 9th which could be only 15 a couple of days in advance. 16 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: What I'm hoping to have 17 occur is that those who have testified today and who may 18 continue to express their concerns, for them to actually 19 have in their hands the report, have an opportunity to 20 review it, so that when they come to the next meeting, if 21 they have any remaining concerns they can just limit their 22 comment to those remaining issues. 23 MR. KENNY: We'll make every effort to do that. 24 The difficulty is going to be, though, that they will 25 probably at best only have that revised report in their PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 50 1 hands a couple of days in advance of the board hearing. And 2 it's possible they may not even have that much time 3 depending on how comprehensive the revisions may be. If it 4 turns out the revisions are very minor, obviously we can get 5 the report out quicker. If it turns out the revisions are 6 fairly substantial, it will take more time. 7 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Supervisor Roberts. 8 BOARD MEMBER ROBERTS: I don't have a question of 9 the procedural, but when you're done with that, I want to 10 get back. 11 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: No. 12 BOARD MEMBER ROBERTS: The last testimony raised a 13 question in my mind. I think that perhaps Mr. McKinnon was 14 going in the same direction. 15 If we heard a description of the reuse and after 16 basically the field was, I don't know, 90 percent cleared, 17 then it was burned, how do you evaluate something like that 18 in terms of the overall acres being burned, since it's clear 19 that that would have far less impact and yet we're writing 20 all our limits in terms of acres. It seems to me that that 21 raises a fundamental question, and I'm not sure procedurally 22 how you're dealing with that. 23 MR. KENNY: We would count them as acres burned. 24 BOARD MEMBER ROBERTS: I think we've got something 25 wrong. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 51 1 MS. HRYNCHUK: Actually, we don't. 2 BOARD MEMBER ROBERTS: I'm glad I asked the 3 question. We're all going to learn. 4 MR. McNERNY: They are counted as acres burned, of 5 course, but there would be a discount factor, depending on 6 the loading of the fuel, whether it's a spot burning, a 7 clump of stuff at the edge of the field that didn't get 8 harvested that needs to be burned or whether there's a 9 stubble over the field in the burn plan submitted, developed 10 and submitted by the basin coordinating council, there is an 11 allowance for the adjustment of the amount of material in 12 terms of -- 13 BOARD MEMBER ROBERTS: It doesn't count as a full 14 acre, it could be some percentage of a full acre? 15 MR. McNERNY: Yes, it is. That's right. And it's 16 burned in terms of rice acre equivalents, that is a full 17 field containing straw and -- 18 BOARD MEMBER ROBERTS: That's going to the heart 19 of my question and I feel much more comfortable now. 20 MR. KENNY: Me too. 21 BOARD MEMBER ROBERTS: So does Mr. Kenny. 22 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you very much. 23 I would, in response to the previous speaker, just 24 point out that we are not picking on the rice industry, and 25 those of you who attend this board regularly every month you PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 52 1 will recognize that in fact we're trying to cut down 2 emissions from all sources that affect public health, so 3 we're not certainly singling one aspect out there. 4 What I'd like to do, as I indicated here, we have 5 another, I think, about seven people signed up to testify. 6 We are running into potential problems. I'm going to 7 change -- take the items out of order here. I'm going to 8 take the third item here, area designations, after this one, 9 because that's a regulatory item, and we may be losing some 10 board members. We may be losing a quorum. So I would like 11 to ask those people who feel compelled if they want to 12 comment on this item today to come forward and do it as 13 briefly as possible, recognizing that there will be 14 additional time in December to do that. 15 So if you decide that you don't want to testify at 16 this time, just let me know or just put your hand up. 17 We have Robert Sutton, Ed Romano and William 18 Waite. 19 MR. SUTTON: I'm Robert Sutton and I'm going to 20 pass today. 21 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you. 22 Ed Romano? 23 MR. ROMANO: Pass. 24 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: William Waite? 25 You decided not to wait. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 53 1 MR. WAITE: You might wish I did. 2 Thank you, Mr. Chairman and board members. I'm 3 Supervisor Bill Waite from Colusa County and chairman of the 4 Air Basin Control Council, and also as a member of the 5 Alternative to Rice Straw Burning Committee. 6 So I've been involved in this. I was chairman of 7 the Air Basin Control council actually before the phase 8 down. We were involved in a lawsuit concerning the burn 9 plan. This is basically what led to the phase down, 10 although we didn't have any involvement in it. 11 So with the plan, it's the only plan in the state 12 for agricultural burning. I think it's a model. I think 13 it's been very successful. Les Fife has been our burn plan 14 coordinator for the whole time. 15 It's based strictly on meteorologic conditions, 16 and it's helped bring in to a cleaner environment. I think 17 it's a model I think it needs to be done all over. 18 The one thing is, phase down is only for rice 19 north of Sacramento. It doesn't concern anything in the San 20 Joaquin Valley. So you've got about ten percent of your 21 rice is unregulated. 22 And speaking of the plan here, since I've been 23 working on the alternatives plan, this thing, I was more 24 concerned with that it's got away from what work we have 25 done, and I feel and it's been biased toward a health PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 54 1 ramifications and gotten away from the alternative, and 2 that's what I think is important. We need to look at the 3 alternatives and the ramifications of what the alternatives 4 are doing to the rice industry. 5 I think Mr. Carrancho was correct in that there's 6 only about two percent of the rice is being utilized now and 7 we're supposed to be doing -- and the plan says 50 percent, 8 they say. 9 There needs to be a look at -- there are going to 10 be, I say, within five years, we probably will have 50 11 percent, but that's five years down the road. 12 This SB 1378 was a very poorly conceived plan, and 13 the ramifications are starting to show up now is the more 14 you ratchet down the more impacts it has. 15 I think you need to look at this plan. 16 Les Fife, who is our coordinator, has the 17 technical knowledge and I've discussed with him yesterday 18 this plan, the report, and I think he needs to sit down with 19 your staff and go over. And he feels and I feel there's 20 many errors and misconceptions. 21 One of the things that says right here, the 22 distribution of rice acreage is on districts is based on 23 needs of ready-to-burn acres, amount of rice planted, air 24 quality and prevailing meteorologic conditions. Actually 25 it's in the reverse order, meteorologic conditions and air PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 55 1 quality are the main emphasis on that. 2 And I think you need to -- much more time. Our 3 control council is meeting December 10th. Now I see it's 4 going to be after your meeting. But I think it needs to be 5 discussed for all the counties involved. It's a very 6 serious thing economically for all our counties and in the 7 North Sacramento Valley. 8 And I would like to see you even postpone even 9 farther to get more input, because I basically seen this 10 report yesterday. And if you could, I'd like to see you 11 postpone this even two months, because it's a report to the 12 Legislature. It's better to get the report right and all 13 the information right than have a poorly incomplete report 14 to the Legislature, because it's going to have a lot of 15 impact, and maybe some of the future laws, maybe more, maybe 16 more stringent laws, and I think it's important that you 17 wait, get as much information and corrections as possible. 18 Thank you. 19 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you very much. 20 Questions or comments? 21 MR. WAITE: Thank you. 22 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you. Any of your 23 colleagues from Colusa County or they going to wait until 24 December? 25 We've got Mr. Krug and Mr. Fife. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 56 1 FROM THE AUDIENCE: Pass. 2 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Pass. Good. 3 MR. FIFE: Mr. Chairman, members of the board, my 4 name is Les Fife, and as Control Council Chairman Waite 5 indicated, I'm the Sacramento Valley agricultural burning 6 coordinator. 7 I have worked in this program since 1981. I 8 drafted a lot of the procedures and policies that are 9 followed in this program and have written most of the 10 software, computer software that we use. 11 The focus of my comments are going to be the air 12 quality side, the environment assessment. 13 And what I want to do is start with their numerous 14 indications in the report, numerous statements that say fall 15 burning is the worst conditions and, you know, there's not 16 enough spring burning and so on. 17 I want to quickly indicate here from data that I 18 took off the ARB, published data from one of the CDs that I 19 was sent for 1994, because this is one of the graphs you saw 20 here today. And it was a graph of the smoke impacts on 21 November 1st of 1994. I have data for 1994, the worst, the 22 highest PM 10 values for the Sacramento Valley for 19 23 different sites, November 1st was the worst and only one of 24 those 19 sites. The other sites that were four days out of 25 those 19 sites that were during the fall, the balance of 15 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 57 1 sites had the highest air quality or the worst air quality 2 problems in January, January 21st, January 14th, January 8th 3 and so on. They've all wintertime problems that you see in 4 1994. Only four days out of those 19 days during the fall. 5 Another thing that we have to take into account, 6 and I just would like to go on to some other years. 7 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Mr. Fife, I don't want to 8 minimize what you're stating, but I think it will be most 9 helpful at this time if you can give that level of detail to 10 staff and try to work it out before the next meeting. 11 MR. FIFE: And I would be happy to do that, but 12 there are lot of references in this report that apply to the 13 worst air quality conditions in the fall, and I just wanted 14 to be sure that you understood that's not the case. 15 There was also a reference that in the plan that 16 the plan's most stringent during the fall. It is most 17 stringent during the winter simply because of these types of 18 values. We have a weighting factor that weights the air 19 quality conditions more in the winter months than we do in 20 the fall. So there's a lot of corrections like that that 21 need to be done. 22 There's also a statement on the distribution 23 software where the acreage is distributed to these ten 24 counties in the Sacramento Valley. 25 I wrote all the algorithms for that distribution PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 58 1 software, and planted rice acreage is not one of them. So 2 there's another correction to the report. 3 So there are numerous things that I would be happy 4 to talk to the staff about and make those corrections to the 5 report. 6 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you very much. I wish you 7 would, because, clearly, you've got some germane comments 8 there which should be incorporated or responded to anyway. 9 Thank you. 10 Any questions? 11 Thank you very much indeed. If you pass those on, 12 I appreciate that very much. 13 We've got two more, Mr. Chris McKenzie, who is a 14 rice farmer, and then the last one is Paul Knepprath from 15 the American Lung Association. 16 MR. McKENZIE: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and good 17 morning, committee. 18 I'm a rice farmer from just north of Sacramento. 19 I sit right in on the ozone border of Sacramento. 20 And I think that the staff should be commented on, 21 and I think the rice growers need to be complimented on the 22 success of the air quality management system. Clearly, the 23 results in the report have indicated that we are making 24 progress. 25 I thought I heard today that we have not reduced PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 59 1 the fall burn. And the statistics we have in the report 2 looks like this year we will have a fall burn as of today of 3 about 55,000 acres. In 1994 I believe it was about 150,000 4 in the fall burn. That's about two-thirds reduction. 5 That's a pretty good reduction. I don't think you can say 6 that about any other class of pollution reduction in the 7 State of California. 8 I wanted to talk primarily about the impact, as 9 Mr. Carrancho did. Economic impact I think is something 10 that tends to be glossed over when it's not your money. 11 The rice producers in California, this year if we 12 incorporate the maximum, which is not likely, because we've 13 had a dry fall and we haven't done it in the last couple 14 years, but if we incorporate the maximum and because that's 15 a fixed level and we had more acreage than the 125,000, we 16 will probably spend close to -- close to $15 million comes 17 out of the growers' pocket to incorporate and plow straw 18 into the ground this year. 19 Each year it's been increasing and your studies 20 could show that. 21 Oh, to answer your question earlier, depending on 22 how long ago you were in the rice fields, the rice industry 23 has funded research to grow shorter rice and, yes, we have 24 reduced the height of rice straw by I believe it was about 25 20 percent in what we call short stature rices and probably PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 60 1 85 or 90 percent of all the rice grown in the Valley is now 2 short stature rices which grows 25, 30 centimeters shorter, 3 and is for the purposes of getting more yield and less 4 straw. So that has been a factor, but it's been a factor 5 for quite a while. 6 The economic impact discussed the $36 an acre 7 incorporation cost which I said this year is going to be 8 about $15 million coming out of each individual's pocket. 9 The chart up on the board is something that it's 10 completely ignored in the report, which are yields in 11 California. That's the state yields. And, admittedly, 12 we've suffered through El Nino and La Nina and there have 13 been a number of other factors, but if you can see at the 14 bottom of the page, the last dot there is the November 1991 15 CDFA estimate of average yield, which is 7,000 pounds per 16 acre. 17 On the bottom here, I believe this is about 1981, 18 and here's where our straw incorporation started. You can 19 see our trend and this is over 20 years of rice production. 20 And you see where we are going now. 21 The statistical significance of that, I can't 22 estimate, but I do think it's something that needs to be 23 recognized. 24 The important thing is that the yield loss is 25 approximately three times the incorporation cost if we have PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 61 1 disease. How much, who knows. It's been dumped on us. We 2 don't really have definitive studies to determine what the 3 agronomic impact of 423,000 acres of straw incorporation. 4 That's a whole bunch. Two percent is going perhaps 5 off-site. That has made some huge environmental impacts. 6 It requires a tremendous amount of water supplies already 7 alluded to. The biologic, environmental, ecological impact 8 of that is not known. We don't have anything to base it on. 9 We're just trying to go in business and be in 10 business next year and this is the only thing that the 11 farmers have come up with that sort of works. 12 But the long-run impact that may occur may be 13 occurring, what the disease impact in that is, we don't 14 know. And no one has done a study. We don't have any 15 results as to what continued incorporation can lead to. 16 Disease is -- and it's a problem to research 17 because disease happens and it doesn't happen. The disease, 18 all the factors can be there except for the right number of 19 days or a little more temperature or a little less. There's 20 a lot of factors like blast. Blast is airborne. It's a 21 completely different animal. But these are problems and we 22 don't really know. The only thing we do know is this is 23 state average yields. This is pretty significant stuff 24 here. And nobody is addressing it. There is nothing in 25 there about yield losses and disease. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 62 1 We have a manufacturer in California who has 2 presented a new product that was just cleared for the -- and 3 kind of rushed through CDFA for the purposes of discussing 4 blast, of dealing with blast, a new disease that has 5 materialized. 6 The manufacturer has made a promise to those of us 7 not in the blast area that the 30, 25, 30 dollars, 35 8 dollars an acre, whatever it costs, to apply the chemical 9 will be made up by disease control, because we have disease. 10 In here it doesn't say we have more disease. It doesn't 11 even address the question. 12 Now put the overlay. This is straw incorporation 13 and down in the bottom of the page is 20 years of history. 14 There it is. That's what we used to incorporate. Here's 15 what we're incorporating now. 16 Now you can scroll down a little bit. Well, up, I 17 guess. 18 There we are up there and that's a break because 19 my grid on my chart isn't right. That little mark up there 20 is supposed to say about 400,000 acres. 21 And now what I want to do is overlay the two. 22 Okay. Now you have to -- the scale on the X axis there is 23 year straw incorporated, so that dot corresponds with that 24 year, if you know what I'm saying. Straw incorporation 25 impacts the following year. So actually there should be a PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 63 1 slight shift in the straw incorporation. 2 But here one would just have to assume that 3 there's some kind of an impact and the timing of increasing 4 yields, increasing straw incorporation, decreasing yields, 5 has to raise some serious questions. 6 What we're saying is, yes, our yields are going 7 down. We know that we can -- we used to be the most 8 efficient rice producers in the world. I don't know that 9 that's the case anymore. 10 These are -- all's I'm saying is those are big 11 dollars and shouldn't be ignored in the report. 12 Waiting for off-site uses of straw may in fact put 13 us out of business. 14 The other aspect of the economic analysis that I 15 think needs to be recognized is that we got two government 16 welfare checks. One was an emergency disaster check, which 17 makes up this $60 an acre, whatever it is, profit margin. 18 These are all presuming that the federal government is going 19 to continue a grain subsidy program. That does not mean 20 that we're making money based upon the rice and its value 21 and our ability to produce it at these costs, and that is 22 not really clearly stated there. The amount of the subsidy 23 can go away tomorrow. 24 So my next point is that the straw incorporation 25 table on Table 8 on page 26 evaluates incorporation versus PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 64 1 burning as far as pollutants and air particulate matter, and 2 it completely does not address at all the components of 3 decomposition. 4 What we're saying, nothing happens out there? No. 5 It rots. Yes, we produce huge amounts of methane. Yes, we 6 don't know what the other byproducts of decomposition are. 7 But you can't ignore it, and this chart does. 8 In your prior -- in the prior reports that were 9 done years -- over the last several years that we've -- they 10 also addressed the problem of methane gas production and 11 perhaps water quality. And those are two big items, if you 12 want to look at that. 13 I do my own practical experience, because we're 14 out there, we're in it, we are very concerned that I use a 15 lot of water. My water is not district water. I have to 16 pump it out of the ground. PG&E bills are expensive, 17 groundwater use is expensive. We use at least a third more 18 water to grow rice now than we used to. In the drought that 19 was a major concern was that rice used too much water and 20 that LA wanted more. So we would lose. 21 That is a problem that should be at least 22 acknowledged that we're using a tremendous amount more of 23 more water to farm the same crop. 24 There is perhaps a water quality issue too. We 25 talk about previously unknown diseases. If nothing else, PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 65 1 the decomposition of a shallow amount of water in warm 2 temperatures takes the oxygen out of the water and if that 3 water then goes into a waterway by accident or on purpose, 4 it may result in environmental damage, fish may die, things 5 can happen. And although -- and I don't think that's ever 6 been addressed. 7 The other thing that being out on the border of 8 Sacramento, I think is we all need to recognize is that I'm 9 providing a buffer zone and a commute corridor for those 10 people driving to Roseville every day and three months out 11 of the year they can look at ducks sitting out on the side 12 of the road where they're resting, and in the summer while 13 they're racing up and down Riego Road to Roseville the back 14 way, 99 to Roseville, we also provide a tremendous ozone 15 buffer. 16 One of your air resource monitoring stations is on 17 the north border of our farm. And if you look at the www. 18 sparetheair.com ozone maps, you will see that we seldom get 19 ozone problems. I mean, we go into the yellow, but not into 20 the red high quality ozone problems, and I think with a 21 little research you'll find that rice field is probably the 22 best thing you can have in the hot summer months to destroy 23 ozone, because we have a green biomass, we are providing 24 oxygen, we do not provide a heat sink in that the rice 25 immediately cools down as soon as the sun is gone, and we PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 66 1 know that because we're there. You may not, but it does 2 make a difference. 3 Thank you very much for your time. 4 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you very much. 5 Supervisor Patrick, did you have a question? 6 BOARD MEMBER PATRICK: Yes. I just had a very 7 brief question. I have this handout and it doesn't have a 8 source for all of your -- 9 MR. McKENZIE: Yes. I'm just a farmer, I don't 10 have a -- the CDFA provided the yield data. Most of the 11 acreage and burn unit data came from the Air Resources. I 12 had this at a prior meeting. And the 1999 data is the only 13 stuff that is still tentative, because we haven't finished 14 the burn season in total. The yield factor is also 15 tentative, because not all the rice is harvested, but about 16 95 percent of it is. 17 BOARD MEMBER PATRICK: Thank you. 18 MR. McKENZIE: Okay. Any other questions? 19 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you very much indeed. 20 Thank you, Paul. 21 Thank you for your remarks. 22 MR. KNEPPRATH: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and 23 members of the board. Nice to see you this morning. 24 My name is Paul Knepprath. I'm here on behalf of 25 the American Lung Association and our medical arm, the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 67 1 California Thoracic Society. 2 And I'm going to be fairly brief in the hopes that 3 I can make a couple of quick points. 4 You do have our letter for the record and it 5 states our issues with the report. 6 I think, first of all, we would say that the staff 7 has done a great job on this report. We think you've 8 captured the health data and the impacts on public health 9 very well. 10 I think of all the three reports that we've seen, 11 I think this one goes into the health effects probably the 12 most comprehensively, and so we really want to congratulate 13 you on that, and for really staying on point to what the 14 problem is that we're trying to address here, and that is 15 the public health impacts of open field rice straw burning 16 on the public. 17 This is not just an issue that affects the 18 Sacramento metropolitan area, and I think sometimes it is 19 felt as though that is where the real impact is. We're 20 talking not only about Sacramento, but we're talking about 21 the entire upper Sacramento Valley, including cities like 22 Corning and Colusa, Red Bluff, Gridley, Chico, Live Oak, 23 Yuba City, Marysville, and even Grimes, if you know where 24 that is. 25 This is a problem that impacts people in their PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 68 1 communities and it's not just in the big bad Sacramento 2 metropolitan area. 3 The Lung Association is committed on many of these 4 issues that you're working on to getting us to zero, and 5 that's whether it's ZEVs or whether it's the new gas 6 standards, the transit bus rule that you're going to be 7 looking at in January. We want to get to zero or near zero 8 on this issue as well and we think that providing the 9 funding for the alternatives is a really important part of 10 that, and also includes continuing look at the health impact 11 on fall burning, as well as spring burning. 12 But I think that we're in agreement with the 13 staff's characterization of the health impacts on the fall 14 burning being greater. And so we want to encourage your 15 public health leadership role in getting us to zero or near 16 zero on the rice straw burning issue. 17 This is something that in these communities in the 18 North Sacramento Valley that impacts people who have lung 19 disease, people who have asthma, COPD, emphysema, for them 20 when there are impacts, smoke impacts, it is a matter of 21 life and breath and so we want you to consider that as you 22 continue moving forward on this. 23 We'll save any additional comments until the 24 December meeting. It appears that the report may change at 25 that time, and so we'll certainly take a look at it again. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 69 1 But we did want to provide you some preliminary comments. 2 Obviously, this issue is going to be one of 3 legislative interest this year, as Senate Bill 318 does 4 sunset, and we'll be, of course, looking at that issue 5 trying to walk hand in hand with the rice industry as we 6 have in the past to try to find solutions to the problem 7 together. 8 I think we've come together very well in the past 9 on finding the funding for the alternatives. 10 And I think we need to challenge ourselves, you as 11 an arm of this administration and us as interest groups, and 12 the legislative process to find that money so we can 13 continue working toward the alternatives. 14 Without that out there, and without the continued 15 reduction of the public health impacts, I don't think we'll 16 have the incentives for us to find the uses and the 17 commercialization for these products. So we want to 18 continue working with you and your staff on this issue. 19 Thank you. 20 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you very much, Paul. 21 Any questions or comments? 22 With that, if any -- as you know, we're going to 23 continue this item. I guess it will be until December the 24 10th. It looks as though the 9th will be a full day. 25 MR. KENNY: I think we should continue to December PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 70 1 the 9th, but I think that more than certain likelihood is 2 that it would be heard on the 10th. 3 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Okay. Yes. 4 BOARD MEMBER C.H. FRIEDMAN: I just like to key 5 off of the last comment. 6 I think as we make our -- develop our report and 7 it includes mandates to phase out rice straw burning, I 8 think we have to intensify our efforts to find commercially 9 viable and healthy disposal alternatives to the burning. 10 And I'm awful happy to see that we have a small 11 amount of available funding, 1.2 million, to explore the 12 rice straw and ethanol projects. At least that's what I 13 understand is the recommendation, and that's consistent with 14 the Governor's Executive Order directing the California 15 Energy Commission to evaluate the potential for creating a 16 bioethanol industry here in California. 17 It certainly ties into our phase-out under the 18 Governor's directive of MTBE. 19 And my only concern is that we seem to be just 20 barely scratching the surface of what is truly needed in the 21 way of government subsidy or assistance in financing and 22 supporting the development of the commercially feasible 23 method of converting rice straw to ethanol. 24 And I understand that one of these plants may cost 25 upwards of 50 to 100 million dollars just in capital PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 71 1 improvements alone, and there seems to me maybe a need for 2 at least a partial government assistance or funding. 3 And so I would, if the chairman and my colleagues 4 concur, I would suggest that we think about making, 5 developing a quick analysis, but a sound analysis of what 6 the costs would be and what the -- what we might be able to 7 project in the way of conversion product, so that we could 8 try and propose some budgetary consideration to the 9 administration, at least by the time of the May budget 10 revise. 11 In other words, what I'm thinking of is some kind 12 of a partial fuel subsidy because of the MTBE phase-out, a 13 fuel price subsidy, until the bugs get worked out, to test 14 whether there is one or more commercially viable methods of 15 converting rice straw to what appears will continue to be 16 required, unless we're relieved of the federal mandate for 17 some oxygenate or ethanol in our fuel. 18 So I guess what I'm saying is I'm wondering if we 19 couldn't ask the staff, if you all agree, if it isn't too 20 much of a burden imposed on them, to assess what longer term 21 financial needs would be present for a biomass-to-ethanol 22 industry here in California. 23 The benefits are obvious. I mean, there's 24 employment. There is another source of ethanol here in the 25 state for our fuel reformulations, and we're taking what is PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 72 1 now being required to be burned, which is -- or has been 2 burned and is posing health hazards and we're converting it 3 into something productive. 4 And so I guess that's -- and I think that in 5 costing that out, we ought to take into account what it is 6 now costing the growers to burn, and they would be relieved 7 of those costs, of course. 8 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: I would strongly support 9 Professor Friedman's recommendation for staff to look at 10 this. I think we've heard today from the industry that 11 they're very willing to work to look at these alternatives, 12 but there's cost to do that. So I think this would be an 13 excellent way to look at that and what it would really take 14 would be consistent, as you indicated, Professor, with the 15 Governor's Executive Order. 16 I think it also will build on the excellent report 17 that the Energy Commission has looked at for the 18 biomass-to-ethanol options in California. In fact, I'm 19 going to their hearing tomorrow. But I think they've 20 stopped short of looking at the type of financial incentives 21 and what not which would require it. 22 So I personally would be thoroughly supportive of 23 that. 24 BOARD MEMBER C.H. FRIEDMAN: There may also be 25 some federal subsidies or funds that could key in. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 73 1 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: And I think that Mr. Herkert 2 basically wrote a letter supporting one of the bills in 3 Congress which shows that there's hopefully a significant 4 amount of dollars at the federal level to help the biomass 5 industry, and I think we should really use the California 6 delegation to tap into that for these obviously 7 well-deserved sources. 8 We've two comments from Mr. McKinnon. 9 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: Yeah. Just kind of a 10 question to Board Member Friedman. 11 When you talk about biomass, are you also 12 including forest biomass, is it the general -- I'm 13 supportive, I just down the road I think the next thing we 14 run into is burning in the forests for fire control. 15 BOARD MEMBER C.H. FRIEDMAN: I think I would 16 start -- a journey of a million miles starts with the first 17 step, and I think for me the first step is what seems to be 18 exigent, which is if we're going to mandate all rice straw 19 burning be curtailed and eliminated in the near future, I 20 think it's reasonable for the growers to say, well, you 21 know, what are we supposed to do with it. 22 And I think we have an opportunity, tying in as I 23 say to the MTBE phase-out, and as long as there's a 24 continued need for ethanol, which apparently is the only 25 other game in town. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 74 1 And so I wouldn't rule it out, no. I certainly 2 wouldn't rule it out. And I think the key is to cost out 3 what might be a test facility for this kind of conversion 4 that could get into production, and to show that it can be 5 done and then private industry will jump in, hopefully. 6 But I think sometimes government has a role to be 7 bold and audacious, assuming that there is the wherewithal. 8 And I don't know that there is or not, that's for the 9 Legislature and the Governor, but it seems to me that this 10 is a legitimate thing for us to initiate as a possibility. 11 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Ms. D'Adamo, I know you've been 12 heavily involved with the biomass issue well. 13 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Well, yes. I fully agree 14 with Professor Friedman's suggestion, and think that one of 15 the things that I notice as going through as I went through 16 the report is that I would really appreciate it if there 17 could be at one point anyway a stronger comment made of the 18 tremendous gap between the uses that exist right now and 19 what the rice industry's needs are, and I think that would 20 be a real good segue into the discussion of some other 21 government program subsidies, assistances, that would 22 provide for greater financial incentives to other 23 industries, so that that two percent could then become 50 24 percent at some point. 25 I had a couple of other comments that I just PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 75 1 wanted to make as well. 2 First of all, you raise the MTBE issue, and it 3 reminded me of the difficulties that we were all faced with 4 when we were trying to, government on the one hand was 5 trying to provide for cleaner air, and then the unintended 6 consequences that resulted from that of providing for some 7 serious water quality concerns. 8 And I believe it was Mr. McKenzie who raised some 9 environmental impacts. 10 And I looked through or thumbed quickly through 11 the environmental section of the report, and it seems to me 12 that the general tone is the environmental benefits of 13 reduction in rice straw burning, which are extremely valid 14 points and absolutely need to be made, but I was just hoping 15 that staff could also address some of the possible 16 environmental downsides of the phase down of rice straw 17 burning, the increase in water use and the impact that that 18 may have on our already strained water supplies for 19 fisheries and environmental purposes, potential groundwater 20 overdraft issues. I don't know if that is an issue or not, 21 but just something that came to my mind. 22 Water quality issues and the decomposition issue 23 that was raised and methane gas, I'm not suggesting that 24 this turn into a huge section of the report, but at least if 25 they could be raised I think that perhaps these issues PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 76 1 perhaps would, depending on the outcome, may deserve further 2 study at some point, but at least right now to raise the 3 issue. 4 As far as economic impact, I was going through the 5 report on the financial impact and the conclusion 6 referencing on page 37 of the report in 1998 a study that 7 indicated that there were declining yields, but that it was 8 primarily the result of weather conditions. 9 I don't think we have the time to get into a 10 debate about that right now, but it does appear with some of 11 the testimony that there are some other economic impacts, 12 perhaps not just due to weather conditions, but perhaps due 13 to the resulting inability to address disease control. 14 So I think that that should perhaps be looked into 15 further. 16 Additionally, Mr. McKenzie brought up a point that 17 is close to home. Working for a member of Congress that 18 serves on the Agriculture Committee in 1996, the Freedom to 19 Farm Act was adopted by the Congress that provides for a 20 phase down of the subsidies to which he refers, and that 21 might be again just a point that should be raised, as well 22 as the resulting market conditions that could result from 23 that full implementation of the Freedom to Farm Act. 24 One other point, shifting gears here, on the 25 science. I really did appreciate the discussion of the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 77 1 public health impacts, and I think that Mr. Knepprath made a 2 very good point. 3 One of the comments, though, raised by the 4 California Rice Commission, I believe, was that they were 5 concerned that perhaps some of the statements in the public 6 health section were not properly referenced. 7 I think that it would be helpful, I see here that 8 I believe the rice growers provided a study, that one was 9 footnoted. I know a lot of studies have been done on PM 10, 10 and I thought that it would be appropriate if those studies 11 could be footnoted as well or references. 12 And in addition I know someone raised the concern 13 about the emissions producing symptoms ranging from 14 breathing difficulties to increased respiratory infections 15 and even death. If that study could be referenced, I think 16 that it may go a long way to calm some of the concerns that 17 the rice growers may have. 18 And if the studies do point to rice straw burning, 19 of course, that should be properly cited, but I believe the 20 beginning of that paragraph references rice straw burning 21 and then my own sense is then the remainder of the paragraph 22 goes on to refer to some of these other studies that may be 23 more general in nature. 24 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you very much. 25 Supervisor Patrick. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 78 1 BOARD MEMBER PATRICK: Thank you. 2 I just wanted to make a brief comment and 3 follow-up. 4 Professor Friedman, I'm completely in agreement 5 with your idea of looking at subsidies to biomass plants and 6 the ability of biomass to help solve some of our 7 environmental problems with our gasoline. 8 And following up with what Board Member McKinnon 9 brought up talking about forest waste, what about all the 10 agricultural waste in the San Joaquin Valley that is burned 11 routinely. Now there are not, I'm sure the rice folks would 12 stand up and say, but there are no rules and regulations, 13 and I'll grant you that. But in terms of the health of 14 people in the San Joaquin Valley, it's a huge issue and we 15 have biomass plants that with energy deregulation are going 16 to be going out of business. 17 And so I agree that your journey begins with a 18 step, and I think that this is an appropriate step, but this 19 is merely scratching the surface, and I would not be 20 representing the San Joaquin Valley today if I was were not 21 to bring up that this is a major issue in the San Joaquin 22 Valley. 23 We do have a plant that has been searching for 24 that federal bit of legislation and everything else, but is 25 very much in danger of closing, because of a new competitive PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 79 1 market in electricity generation. 2 So I would be remiss if I did not bring that up. 3 It's a huge problem in the San Joaquin Valley. 4 I agree that we need to start today, because the 5 subject today is rice burning, but I would remind this board 6 and the staff that it's a big problem. It's a big problem 7 in Kern County, certainly throughout the entire San Joaquin 8 Valley. 9 And the phone calls when we're having bad energy 10 or bad pollution days, bad air days, believe me, I'm in one 11 of these areas where on the fringes of Bakersfield we've got 12 agricultural burning going on, much of it is in my district, 13 and I'm the one who gets the phone calls. 14 So I think we're just barely scratching the 15 surface on what needs to be done with our agricultural 16 waste, our forest waste and potentially others as well. 17 But I would -- I wouldn't be representing the San 18 Joaquin Valley if I were not to draw that to your attention 19 today. 20 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: So registered. 21 Any other comments at this time? 22 Again, I would reiterate that, and I encourage you 23 all, we'll get you copies of the CEC report looking at the 24 biomass to ethanol, which I think covers all these issues 25 and I think will play a very important role in following up PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 80 1 on the Governor's Executive Order with MTBE phase-out. 2 I think at this time we will continue the hearing 3 until December the 9th. 4 My understanding is that all comments should be in 5 by December the 2nd. Is that right, Mr. Kenny? 6 So we will hopefully at that time be able to 7 incorporate those comments before the December the 9th board 8 meeting. 9 I reiterate again that December 9th and 10th look 10 like long days, so that it's likely that this item will 11 occur on December the 10th, for those people who might want 12 to come back to hear it, because on the first day we have a 13 pretty full day, which is likely to go into the early 14 evening. 15 So if you want to come and listen to how we are in 16 fact cutting down on emissions from gasoline, you're welcome 17 to come back, but I think this particular item, if you're 18 just interested in the rice straw issue, is likely to be 19 held on December the 10th. 20 So with that, we will go. 21 Like I say, we will jump an item here, so we have 22 a regulatory item, which is one on area designations, and so 23 we will have some change with staff and give the court 24 recorder two minutes to rest. 25 (Thereupon a short recess was taken.) PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 81 1 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: The next agenda item is 99-9-4, 2 public hearing to consider area designations for state 3 ambient air quality standards. 4 Our eyes and lungs generally tell us when we're in 5 a clean air versus polluted area. However, there are also 6 legal definitions of attainment, nonattainment and 7 transitional that trigger various requirements for emission 8 controls. These designations are based on ambient 9 monitoring data, which is the truest picture of what we have 10 of what's happening in the real world. 11 However, California is nonattainment for one 12 pollutant or another, and has been for some time. 13 Occasionally, a new nonattainment area gets added, which is 14 what's happening today. 15 But what we're ultimately working towards is an 16 attainment designation for every part of California, which 17 will mean that we have truly clean air for all of us. 18 Mr. Kenny, would you like to introduce this item. 19 MR. KENNY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of 20 the board. 21 The California Clean Air Act requires the board to 22 establish designation criteria and to use these criteria to 23 designate areas for the state standards. 24 In addition, the board must review the area 25 designations each year and update them when new information PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 82 1 indicates it's appropriate. 2 Today the staff is proposing that the board update 3 the designations based on a review of the air quality data 4 for 1996 through 1998. Recent data show violations of the 5 state ozone standard in the northern portion of Sonoma 6 County. The staff's preliminary analysis shows that these 7 violations are caused by overwhelming transport from the 8 northern San Francisco Bay Area. 9 Based on these violations, the staff is 10 recommending that the area designation for northern Sonoma 11 County be changed from attainment to nonattainment for the 12 state ozone standard. 13 Ms. Marci Nystrom will give you some background on 14 the area designation process and present the staff's 15 proposal for changes. 16 Marci. 17 MS. NYSTROM: Thank you, Mr. Kenny. 18 Good morning, Chairman Lloyd and members of the 19 Air Resources Board. 20 Today I'll be talking about our proposed 21 amendments to the ozone designations for the state standard. 22 I've divided the presentation into four major 23 parts. 24 I'll start by giving you a quick introduction to 25 the area designations and how they fit into our air quality PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 83 1 programs. 2 Next I'll describe the designation criteria. 3 These are the rules we use to make the area designations. 4 In the third section, I'll tell you about our 5 proposed amendments to the air designations. As you've 6 already heard, we're proposing only one change this year. 7 Finally, I'll give you just a short summary of the 8 staff recommendations. 9 I'd like to start by taking a quick look at just 10 how much our air quality has improved over the years. 11 This graph illustrates just how successful we've 12 been. Since 1980 carbon monoxide concentrations are down 35 13 percent. Currently there are only two areas, Los Angeles 14 County and the City of Calexico in Imperial County, that do 15 not attain the state and national CO standards. 16 PM 10 and ozones show even greater reductions. 17 However, most areas of the state still violate the 18 standards for these pollutants. 19 It's impressive to note the stark contrast between 20 the improvements in air quality and the significant 21 increases in both population and the number of vehicle miles 22 traveled each day on our roadways. 23 Although, we have made significant progress, we 24 still have a lot of work to do. 25 This map shows the current area designations for PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 84 1 ozone. Concentrations in the nonattainment areas shown in 2 red violate the state standard. 3 In contrast, concentrations in the attainment 4 areas, shown in yellow, do not violate the standard. 5 As you can see, most of the state is 6 nonattainment. 7 The same is true for PM 10, our other problem 8 pollutant. 9 Although concentrations are declining, the 10 improvements have not been sufficient to redesignate many 11 areas as attainment. 12 All of the major urban areas still violate both 13 the state ozone and PM 10 standards, and it will be a number 14 of years before they reach attainment. 15 The basic purpose of the area designations I just 16 showed you is to identify which areas are clean and which 17 areas are dirty. The clean areas are designated as 18 attainment. The dirty areas are designated as 19 nonattainment. 20 Once an area is designated as nonattainment, it 21 enters the planning process, which is aimed at cleaning the 22 air. 23 These nonattainment areas are then assigned a 24 classification. The classification is based on the level of 25 air quality as compared to the state standard. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 85 1 For example, ozone nonattainment areas are 2 classified as moderate, serious, severe or extreme, based on 3 the level of their measured concentrations. Most of our 4 major urban areas are classified as severe. An area's 5 classification dictates the degree of emission control 6 that's required to assure progress toward attainment. The 7 more polluted an area is, the more stringent the control 8 requirements. 9 With this background in mind, let's move on to the 10 designation criteria. These are the rules we use to 11 determine how an area should be designated with respect to 12 the state standards. 13 Under the rules of the designation criteria, 14 there's a specific process we follow in making the area 15 designations. 16 First, we identify which pollutants are subject to 17 the designations. 18 Then we select the appropriate data, define the 19 extent of the designated area and exclude certain high 20 values. 21 Finally, based on the relevant information, we 22 assign the area designations. 23 Now I'd like to go through each of these steps in 24 a little more detail. 25 We make area designations for the nine pollutants PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 86 1 with state standards. The first three that are listed here, 2 ozone, PM 10 and carbon monoxide, pose the biggest problems. 3 As I said earlier, the ozone and PM 10 standards 4 are violated throughout California. In contrast, carbon 5 monoxide is a problem in only two small areas. 6 For the remaining six pollutants, most of the 7 state is designated as either attainment or unclassified. 8 In selecting data for the designation process, we 9 rely on what we call data for record. These are mainly data 10 collected by the ARB or the districts. These data are 11 quality assured, meaning they satisfy certain siting and 12 quality assurances procedures. Data from other sources may 13 also be acceptable as long as they meet the same 14 requirements. 15 As a rule we base the area designations on three 16 years of data. For example, this year's designations are 17 based on data collected during 1996, 1997 and 1998. 18 Using three years of data provides some stability 19 to the area designations. It tends to prevent changes in 20 designation because of meteorology, rather than emissions. 21 As I said, most of the air quality data we use are 22 collected by the ARB and the districts. This map gives you 23 some idea of the scope of the monitoring network. We 24 currently collect data at more than 250 sites located 25 throughout California. This results in more than 10 million PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 87 1 individual measurements each year. Even with this massive 2 effort, there are resource limitations and some areas of the 3 state are not as well represented as others. 4 In defining the size of the designation area, we 5 look at the characteristics of the pollutant itself. An air 6 basin is the basic designation area for the regional 7 pollutants, which include ozone and PM 10. Using this large 8 region allows us to include not only the source area, but 9 also the receptor area. Including both areas facilitates a 10 more comprehensive planning effort. 11 In contrast, a county or county portion of an air 12 basin is the basic area designated for the local pollutants, 13 which include carbon monoxide. 14 Since the impact area for the local pollutants is 15 more restricted, it makes sense to limit the size of the 16 designated area. 17 To address unusual situations, the criteria allow 18 us to designate smaller areas for any of the pollutants so 19 long as the smaller area is justified. 20 Before I go on to the types of data we exclude 21 from the designation process, I'd like to define two key 22 terms that I'll be using. These terms are exceedance and 23 violation. These two terms are often used interchangeably. 24 However, in the context of the designation criteria, they 25 have very specific meanings. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 88 1 An exceedance is any value or concentration that 2 is higher than the level of its state standard. In 3 contrast, a violation is an exceedance that we cannot 4 exclude from the designation process. 5 Based on these definitions, it's clear that not 6 all exceedances are violations. 7 However, it's the violations that are the most 8 important, because the violations provide the basis for 9 designating an area as nonattainment. 10 The exceedances that we exclude are called highly 11 irregular or infrequent events. In essence these are the 12 exceedances that unreasonable to control through the 13 regulatory process. In other words, they occur very 14 infrequently or they're caused by factors that just don't 15 make sense to plan for. 16 There are three types of qualifying events: 17 extreme concentrations, exceptional events and unusual 18 concentrations. 19 We identify extreme concentrations using a 20 statistical procedure. In very simple terms, the procedure 21 excludes all values that occur less frequently than once per 22 year. 23 Exceptional events are defined as events that do 24 not occur routinely, but do have a specific cause that we 25 can document. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 89 1 Some examples of exceptional events are 2 stratospheric ozone intrusion, construction and demolition 3 activities, chemical spills and wildfires. 4 Finally, unusual concentrations are intended to 5 cover anomalous exceedances in situations where we really 6 don't know what's typical for an area. In most cases they 7 apply to new sites with incomplete data. They allow us to 8 take a wait-and-see approach, rather than applying a 9 mandatory nonattainment designation. 10 Now let's move on to the last part of the 11 designation process, which is determining the designation 12 category. 13 The criteria specified four major designation 14 categories: nonattainment, nonattainment transitional, 15 attainment and unclassified. 16 A nonattainment designation is given to areas with 17 dirty air. An area is nonattainment if there was at least 18 one violation at any site during the last three years. 19 You'll recall that violations are those exceedances that we 20 cannot exclude as highly irregular or infrequent events. 21 The second designation category is nonattainment 22 transitional. In reality, this is a subcategory of the 23 nonattainment designation. It signals that an area is 24 making progress, has only a few high values and is getting 25 close to attainment. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 90 1 However, we must be careful in applying this 2 designation. Because of meteorology, areas can qualify as 3 nonattainment transitional during very clean years. 1997 is 4 a good example. This was a very clean year for ozone, 5 because of meteorology. As a result, a number of areas 6 qualified for nonattainment transitional. However, we 7 didn't change their designation, because the 1998 data 8 showed an increased number of exceedances. 9 The remaining two designation categories, 10 attainment and unclassified, are both pretty simple. 11 In contrast to nonattainment, an attainment 12 designation signals clean air. 13 An area is attainment if complete data show there 14 were no violations in the last three years. Because we're 15 looking only at violations, an area can have exceedances and 16 still be attainment, so long as we can exclude the 17 exceedances as highly irregular or infrequent events. 18 The last designation category is unclassified. 19 This is the default category. That is, if we don't have 20 sufficient data to designate the area as one of the other 21 categories, we designate it as unclassified. The 22 unclassified areas are mostly limited to nonurban areas. 23 Because of resource constraints, these areas are not high on 24 the priority list for monitoring. However, given our 25 knowledge of emissions and air quality, we would not expect PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 91 1 to find violations in many of these areas. 2 Now let's move on the third section of the 3 presentation, which is the summary of our proposed 4 amendments to the area designations. 5 With this year's review, the staff looked at the 6 air quality data for all nine pollutants with state 7 standards. The data were collected during 1996 through 8 1998. Based on these data, we're proposing only one change 9 for ozone. As you know, the state ozone standard is 0.09 10 parts per million for a one-hour average. 11 The proposed change for ozone affects the northern 12 portion of Sonoma County in the North Coast Air Basin. 13 Currently this entire air basin is attainment. We're 14 proposing that the Sonoma County portion be redesignated as 15 nonattainment. You'll remember that I told you that an air 16 basin is the basic area designated for ozone, unless the 17 board finds a smaller area is justified. 18 In this case, the board has historically found 19 that counties within the North Coast Air Basin do have 20 distinctly different air quality. As a result, we've 21 already justified making ozone designations by county in 22 this particular area. 23 During the last three years, monitoring data for 24 the Healdsburg Municipal Airport site in northern Sonoma 25 County showed a total of nine ozone exceedances. We can PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 92 1 exclude four of the nine exceedances as extreme 2 concentrations. We cannot exclude the remaining five 3 values. 4 As a result, these five values are considered 5 violations of the state standard and provide the basis for 6 the proposed nonattainment designation. This change would 7 affect only the Sonoma County portion of the air basin. The 8 rest of the North Coast Air Basin would remain designated as 9 attainment. 10 Because this would be a new ozone nonattainment 11 area, the California Clean Air Act requires us to evaluate 12 the potential impact of transport. 13 This map gives you a better idea of the area we're 14 talking about. It shows the location and topography of 15 Healdsburg in relation to Santa Rosa in the San Francisco 16 Bay Area Air Basin. Healdsburg is located just 15 miles 17 north of Santa Rosa. Both cities lie in the Santa Rosa 18 plain, and the predominate wind flow is from south to north. 19 Because the area is flat, there are no barriers to block the 20 transport of pollutants and emissions. 21 Our preliminary assessment shows the Healdsburg 22 area is overwhelmed by transport from the Santa Rosa area. 23 Santa Rosa has experienced significant growth over the last 24 several years and its population is now estimated to be 25 140,000. Compare this with a population of 10,000 in PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 93 1 Healdsburg. 2 One result of the growth in the Santa Rosa area is 3 higher ozone concentrations in the downwind area of 4 Healdsburg. 5 Final results of the transport assessment are 6 scheduled to come before the board next year. 7 If the board approves our assessment that 8 Healdsburg is overwhelmed by transport, there will be no 9 local planning requirements. 10 However, the upwind area must address the 11 transport impacts in its clean air plan. 12 We did have a workshop in northern Sonoma County 13 in August. The district APCO, Ms. Barbara Lee, is here 14 today, and she supports our assessment. 15 In closing, I'd like to just briefly summarize the 16 staff's recommendations. 17 First, we recommend you adopt the proposed change 18 to the area designations. 19 This change would redesignate the northern portion 20 of Sonoma County in the North Coast Air Basin from 21 attainment to nonattainment for the state ozone standard. 22 The rest of the air basin would remain designated as 23 attainment. 24 We also recommend you adopt a minor change to 25 section 60201 of the area designation regulations. This PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 94 1 change would delete the footnote and replace it with a new 2 reference. This change is for cleanup purposes only and 3 will not affect the way the designations are made or the 4 area designations themselves. 5 This concludes my presentation. If you have any 6 questions, we'll be happy to answer them. 7 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you very much. 8 Ms. Ombudsman, do you have any comments on this 9 item? 10 OMBUDSMAN TSCHOGL: Yes, I do. Thank you. 11 Mr. Chairman and members of the board, the item 12 before you was developed by ARB staff between April of 1999 13 and the present. 14 On April 6, the ARB staff sent notices to all air 15 districts in California requesting information on area 16 redesignations. 17 On August 12th, ARB staff conducted a public 18 workshop to develop the area redesignation proposal. About 19 12 people participated in the workshop, including 20 representatives from several air districts, concerned 21 citizens and Calpine, a geothermal geyser plant in northern 22 Sonoma County. 23 ARB staff conducted numerous phone calls, 24 conference calls and one-on-one phone calls with several air 25 district staff in August and September to provide additional PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 95 1 opportunity for input into the proposed regulation. 2 On October 1st, ARB staff posted the availability 3 of the staff report and the notice of today's hearing on the 4 ARB Web site. 5 ARB staff did a good job of reaching out to all 6 appropriate stakeholders and interested parties, and 7 involving them in the development process of the regulation 8 before you. 9 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you very much. 10 I had a question before any other board members. 11 How many of the violations occurred on weekends? 12 Sorry. 13 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: Looking at the impact of 14 tourism in Sonoma and Napa? 15 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: No. There's an ongoing study 16 looking at the weekend and weekday effect and I wonder 17 whether that's a phenomenon in that area. 18 It's an unfair question. 19 MR. KENNY: I think we'll have to get you that 20 answer. 21 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Sorry. I should have asked that 22 the other day. 23 Any questions from the board? 24 Mark, do you want to make any comment about 25 transport in the Bay Area? PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 96 1 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: The only comment I make 2 is in terms of growth in Santa Rosa and issues we have in 3 the East Bay, and Barbara and I have had some discussions in 4 the last year about transport, it's just any region that is 5 growing in California or in that case in the world, but in 6 this case I think CARB really has an opportunity to play 7 more and more of a role in trying to guide cooperation 8 between bordering districts. 9 And we shouldn't be fearful of trying to help 10 that, I think. Be courageous, Mr. Kenny, you can mediate 11 these things, with the danger that it gets into things like 12 land use controls and things like that. 13 BOARD MEMBER PATRICK: Mr. Chairman, the solution 14 that we've identified in the San Joaquin Valley is if you 15 move some of your businesses here, we won't have a problem. 16 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: Barbara, you know, not 17 to digress way away, for people in the Bay Area if the jobs 18 and the traffic goes that way, that's something we want to 19 cooperate with. There is the proverbial win-win in here. 20 BOARD MEMBER PATRICK: Good. We have got that on 21 tape and the court reporter is taking is down. 22 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: Supervisor Cabral has 23 this too. 24 MS. POPEJOY: Chairman Lloyd. Over here. 25 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Yes. Sorry. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 97 1 MS. POPEJOY: I'm Debora Popejoy. 2 Barbara Lee informed us there are two of the five 3 days were on weekends. 4 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Two of the five? Interesting. 5 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: Mr. Chairman, I would 6 like to thank you for calling on us, but you know that the 7 danger is we'll start to talk and you won't be able to shut 8 us up. 9 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Always a pleasure to hear from my 10 colleagues. 11 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: Wait until December. 12 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Any other questions here? 13 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: I will be happy to move 14 the resolution. 15 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: I'll second that. 16 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Are there any ex parte 17 communications on this item? 18 No. 19 Hold on. I guess -- no further comments? 20 So I guess we can -- I can officially close the 21 record here since all testimony and written submission and 22 staff comments for this item have been entered into the 23 record and the board has not granted an extension of the 24 comment period, I'm officially closing the record on this 25 portion of the agenda item No. 99-9-4. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 98 1 Written or oral comments received after the 2 comment period has been closed will not be accepted as part 3 of the official record in this agenda item. 4 I guess now we have the resolution in front of us 5 and so we had a motion and second. 6 All in favor say aye. 7 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: Unless you'd like to 8 continue it until December. 9 (Ayes.) 10 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Those in -- anybody in favor -- 11 all in favor. So unanimously passed there. 12 Thank you very much. 13 We now go back to agenda item No. 2, which is the 14 minor violations report to the Legislature. 15 (Pause in proceedings.) 16 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: The next item, agenda item 17 99-9-3, public meeting to consider a report to the 18 Legislature on the implementation of California's minor 19 violation program. 20 In fact, ARB is required by state law to provide 21 this report by January 1, 2000. 22 Staff are also following up on directions from the 23 board. In April 1998, the board asked staff to report back 24 on the implementation of ARB's minor violations regulations, 25 which were adopted at that same month. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 99 1 The report to the Legislature accomplishes that 2 objective. 3 I understand that staff has worked diligently with 4 the 35 local air districts on this report and that their 5 comments have been incorporated. 6 At this point I would like to turn it over to 7 Mr. Kenny and ask the staff presentation to begin. 8 MR. KENNY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of 9 the board. 10 Staff has prepared the status report and report to 11 the Legislature entitled, "Implementation of California's 12 Minor Violation Program." 13 As required by AB 2937, ARB established a minor 14 violations program in the areas for which it has direct 15 enforcement authority. These areas include motor vehicle 16 fuels, consumer products, and cargo tanks. 17 AB 2937 directed the local air districts to do the 18 same for their respective areas of responsibility. 19 The board approved ARB's minor violation 20 regulation at the April 1998 hearing and it became effective 21 in May 1999. 22 At the April meeting, the board requested a status 23 report on implementation of ARB's regulations. 24 The legislation also requires ARB to prepare a 25 report to the Legislature by January 1st, 2000, and I would PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 100 1 note that we are ahead of that date. 2 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: So noted. 3 MR. KENNY: Thank you. 4 Staff is presenting to you today the legislative 5 report, which also serves as a status report to the board. 6 The legislative report is required to contain 7 three elements. One, actions taken by ARB and the local air 8 districts to implement the minor violations program; two, 9 the results of that implementation; and, three, the degree 10 to which the purposes described in Health and Safety Code 11 section 39150 have been achieved. 12 The ARB has complied with the directive of AB 2937 13 by adopting a regulation and establishing the program. 14 In order to obtain information regarding the 15 actions taken by the 35 local and regional air districts, 16 ARB staff distributed a survey requesting rule adoption 17 information and other information regarding the issuance of 18 notices to comply. 19 A notice to comply, or NTC, is issued to a person 20 or facility when a minor violation is detected during the 21 course of an inspection. 22 The survey was sent out in May of 1999. A 23 follow-up telephone survey was done in July and November of 24 1999, and the draft report was sent to all air pollution 25 control officers, air district enforcement officers and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 101 1 members of the California Air Pollution Control Officers' 2 Association Enforcement Managers' Committee for the review 3 and comment this past August. 4 The ARB received only five comments from the 5 districts on the draft report. Three expressed approval of 6 the report and the other two requested minor modifications, 7 which have been incorporated into the report before you 8 today. 9 Staff also sent the draft report to approximately 10 500 industry and environmental representatives in October of 11 1999. No comments have been received on them. 12 To date, 26 of the 35 local air districts have 13 adopted a minor violations regulation. 14 The remaining nine districts are in various stages 15 of development. 16 Through the survey process, it was determined that 17 the intent of the legislation, which was to develop faster 18 compliance times, a better working relationship between the 19 regulators and the regulated, and to establish a more 20 resource efficient compliance mechanism, has largely been 21 achieved. 22 Ms. Judy Lewis will now make the presentation. 23 Judy. 24 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: I just wanted to ask, is it just 25 coincidence that the fact that this report is early and the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 102 1 fact that the chief of the Compliance Division is heading 2 this up was any more than coincidence or just coincidence? 3 MR. KENNY: No comments. 4 MS. LEWIS: Thank you, Mr. Kenny, Chairman Lloyd 5 and members of the board. 6 Today I will present ARB's report to the 7 Legislature on implementation of California's minor 8 violation program. 9 The presentation will consistent of brief 10 background information, a summary of the contents of the 11 report to the Legislature and conclusions and 12 recommendations. 13 Assembly Bill 2937 was enacted in 1996 and 14 required ARB and the local air districts to adopt rules 15 establishing a minor violation program. 16 Under such a program, most minor violations would 17 result in a notice to comply, rather than a notice of 18 violation. 19 The notice to comply, or NTC, provides a violator 20 with an opportunity to correct a violation without the 21 assessment of a fine or penalty, whereas with the notice of 22 violation a penalty usually results. 23 AB 2937 is codified at sections 39150 through 24 39153 of the Health and Safety Code. 25 Taking into account all the criteria and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 103 1 requirements imposed by AB 2937, ARB workshopped and 2 developed a minor violation regulation. ARB worked 3 diligently with affected industry. 4 The regulation came before the board in April 1998 5 and was approved. 6 The board at that hearing requested a future 7 status report on implementation of ARB's regulation. 8 ARB's minor violation regulation contains 9 guidelines for issuance of a notice to comply in the areas 10 for which ARB has direct enforcement authority. Those areas 11 include cargo tank inspections, motor vehicle fuels and 12 consumer products. 13 The Office of Administrative Law approved ARB's 14 regulation and it became effective in May of 1999. It is 15 codified at sections 60090 through 60093 of Title 17 of the 16 California Code of Regulations, and is also included as 17 Appendix 1 of your report. 18 The legislation requires that ARB prepare a report 19 to the Legislature by January 1, 2000, on implementation of 20 California's minor violation program. Health and Safety 21 Code section 39153 requires that three elements be included 22 in the report: actions taken by ARB and the districts to 23 implement the program, the results of that implementation, 24 and the degree to which the purpose described in Health and 25 Safety Code 39150 A has been achieved. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 104 1 First, actions taken by the Air Resources Board. 2 ARB has adopted a regulation entitled, "Regulation 3 Classifying Minor Violations and Guidelines for Issuance of 4 a Notice to Comply." 5 The Compliance Division also wrote a policy and 6 procedures manual which includes certain instances when a 7 notice to comply can be issued, and includes the forms to be 8 used when doing so. 9 The Compliance Division has issued five NTCs since 10 the rule was adopted, all for motor vehicle fuels and minor 11 violations. The NTCs were issued for procedural minor 12 violations. 13 ARB's regulation does have provisions for 14 emissions violations, which are de minimis. De minimis is 15 defined as a emission-related violation that is considered 16 to be so trivial that it is inconsequential, which is in 17 keeping with the purpose of section 39150 A, which is to 18 take into account the danger that the minor violation has on 19 human health, welfare, safety and the environment. 20 Next we'll talk about district implementation 21 actions. 22 As of today's date, 26 of the 35 local air 23 districts have adopted a minor violation regulation. This 24 number is different than the number previously reported in 25 the board book and sent out for public comment on October PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 105 1 18, 1999. This is because the previous number, which was 28 2 districts, was based on information provided by districts. 3 During the last week, staff has received more updates from 4 districts as the status of adoption is constantly changing. 5 It was discovered through this process that two 6 districts whose rules were scheduled for adoption have been 7 postponed to December of 1999. 8 An updated report was provided to you today by the 9 clerk of the board and it's also outside on the table for 10 members of the audience. 11 We've updated the data contained in the original 12 report and a footnote has been added to the final version of 13 the report dated November 18, 1999, stating that two 14 additional districts have hearings scheduled before their 15 governing boards in December 1999. 16 The remaining nine districts without an adopted 17 NTC rule are in various stages of rule development. Of the 18 nine remaining districts, four have a minor violation policy 19 in place based on our most recent data. Some have updated 20 their existing policies to include major components of the 21 legislation. 22 Now we will describe the results of implementation 23 by ARB and the districts. 24 Implementation resulted in changes to ARB's 25 enforcement policy. Prior to the adoption of the rule, PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 106 1 emission-related violations were not considered minor by 2 ARB. A notice of violation was required for all 3 emissions-related violations and prosecutorial discretion 4 was exercised and determined settlement terms and 5 conditions, including the amount of any penalties. A notice 6 to comply was issued for procedural violations only. 7 Adoption of ARB's minor violation program now 8 requires ARB to issue a notice to comply in situations where 9 an emissions violation is determined by the executive 10 officer to be of such an inconsequential amount that it is 11 de minimis. 12 Further results for ARB include a policy and 13 procedure manual for the issuance of NTCs for minor 14 violations. 15 Since May 1999, five NTCs have been issued for 16 reporting violations associated with fuels regulations. 17 Prior to the implementation of ARB's new minor 18 violation program, these would have been handled using ARB's 19 enforcement discretion, based on circumstances surrounding 20 the violations. 21 Resulting benefits of this legislation for ARB 22 include formalization of ARB's existing policy and more 23 specific guidelines, which are now provided in the 24 inspector's manual. 25 The manual cites certain instances when an NTC may PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 107 1 be issued, providing greater consistency and enforcement. 2 This has resulted in a more specific and consistent method 3 of issuing an NTC. 4 Next we will discuss results and resulting 5 benefits of air district implementation of the minor 6 violation program, which can be discussed in five 7 categories. 8 Number one, adoption of rules. 26 of the 35 local 9 air districts have adopted a rule. 10 Two, establishment of a minor violation program 11 where one did not exist. The legislation has resulted in 12 the establishment of a minor violation policy in 12 13 districts where there had been none. This number is also 14 different than the previously reported number, which was 13, 15 and is based on most recent data obtained from the 16 districts. 17 Three, changes to existing minor violation 18 programs. Of the 26 districts that adopted a rule, 14 had 19 an existing NTC policy. Three of these 14 reported that 20 they had made significant changes to existing policy. 21 Four, issuance of NTCs under the new minor 22 violation program. Of the 26 districts adopting a minor 23 violation regulation, approximately 5300 NTCs have been 24 issued since adoption by these districts. This number has 25 also been updated from previous reports and includes data PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 108 1 through October 31, 1999, for all 26 districts, and 2 resulting benefits. 3 As previously mentioned by Mr. Kenny, Compliance 4 Division staff sent each of the 35 local air districts a 5 survey. From these surveys and throughout the 6 data-gathering process, ARB received comments on the 7 resulting benefits of the legislation. These comments 8 included statements that the industry preferred the notice 9 to comply as it provided no penalties, but got industry's 10 attention enough to come into compliance. 11 Other resulting benefits that were reported by 12 districts are the formalization of existing minor violation 13 policies and the improved structure in the guidelines for 14 NTC issuance. These benefits are consistent with the 15 benefits that ARB was realized. 16 One of the larger districts reported that the 17 legislation resulted in documented guidelines for inspectors 18 for all rules and subsections of rules. This eliminated an 19 deficiency in their existing enforcement program policy and 20 resulted in consistency and uniformity of enforcement in the 21 field. All these reported improvements and benefits have 22 resulted in the more specific and consistent method of 23 issuing an NTC. 24 The last element of the three elements required to 25 be in the report is the degree to which the purpose of PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 109 1 section 39150 A has been achieved, that purpose being to 2 establish an enforcement policy for violations that the 3 enforcement agency finds are minor when the danger they pose 4 to or the potential danger that they have for endangering 5 human health, welfare or the environment are taken into 6 account. 7 ARB staff obtained and analyzed each minor 8 violation rule adopted by local air districts. It was 9 determined through this review that all adopted minor 10 violation rules contained provisions addressing Health and 11 Safety Code 39150 A. Thus, all 26 districts with an adopted 12 rule has achieved the purpose of 39150 A. 13 Health and Safety Cody 39150 states that the 14 intent of the Legislature in enacting chapter 3, minor 15 violations, is to provide a more resource efficient 16 enforcement mechanism, faster compliance times and the 17 creation of a productive and cooperative working 18 relationship between the state board, the districts and the 19 regulated community, while maintaining protection of human 20 health and safety and the environment. 21 Of the 28 districts that returned our survey, five 22 stated that it was too early to determine whether the intent 23 of the legislation had been met. 24 23 did answer regarding legislative intent and 25 this was the result. When asked if district staff believed PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 110 1 that the overall intent of legislation had been met, 19 of 2 the 23 districts responding, or 83 percent of those 3 districts, indicated that, yes, they did think the intent 4 had been met. 5 Conclusions. 6 As of today's date, ARB and 26 of the local air 7 districts have complied with the legislation by adopting a 8 regulation and establishing a minor violation program. 9 Additionally, two districts have hearings 10 scheduled before their board for rule adoption in December 11 1999. 12 Most of the remaining districts are making 13 progress, based on our most recent data gathering in 14 November of 1999. 15 The remaining districts either have an existing 16 program in place and/or are making progress towards the 17 adoption of the minor violation regulation. 18 The purpose of Health and Safety Code 39150 A has 19 been realized by ARB and all local air districts with an 20 adopted rule. The intent of the legislation has largely 21 been realized. 22 Recommended actions. 23 It is recommended that you approve ARB's revised 24 report to the Legislature dated November 18, 1999, through 25 Resolution 99-37. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 111 1 Upon your approval, the report shall be submitted 2 to the Legislature no later than January 1, 2000, in order 3 to fulfill the statutory requirements of AB 2937 and Health 4 and Safety Code section 39153. 5 That concludes my presentation. 6 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you very much. 7 Do we have any questions from the board members or 8 Mr. Kenny? 9 No. 10 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Mr. Chairman, you and I 11 were speaking and we were trying to remember the author of 12 the legislation. 13 Was it Brulte? 14 MS. LEWIS: Yes, it was Brulte. 15 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Thank you. 16 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Good. 17 I don't think there are any written comments to go 18 into the record. No. 19 I guess since this is not a regulatory item, it's 20 not necessary to officially close the record. However, we 21 do have a resolution before the board, so I'll take any 22 motion on this. 23 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: Mr. Chair, I'll move the 24 motion. 25 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: I'd like to second it. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 112 1 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: All in favor say aye. 2 (Ayes.) 3 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Unanimous on that. 4 I guess the last item today will be a review of 5 air quality -- thank you very much. 6 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Maybe you should put a red 7 tag on this for the Senator's office. It's fun to see 8 legislation where you have intended something to happen 9 actually happened. 10 (Pause in proceedings.) 11 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: As I mentioned, we thought we'd 12 take this opportunity today in the final agenda item for 13 review of the 1999 air quality legislation. 14 The State Legislature has recessed for the 15 remainder of this year and Governor Davis recently completed 16 his review and action on hundreds of bills that reached his 17 desk. 18 Since many of the new laws will affect future ARB 19 programs and regulations, I've asked ARB's legislative 20 director, Rob Oglesby, to give us an overview of the year 21 past. 22 Before he does that, Mr. Kenny, is there any 23 particular comment that you would like to make highlighting 24 any particular aspects of the 1999 legislation? 25 MR. KENNY: Nothing I really want to highlight, PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 113 1 more than simply stating that I think Mr. Oglesby and the 2 rest of the legislative staff have an extraordinary job and 3 it's extraordinarily difficult, and I do want to 4 congratulate them on following all the bills as well as they 5 do, and keeping both the chair's office and all staff very 6 well informed, and at the same time in terms of the 7 substantive efforts they put forward the results really 8 speak for themselves. They have really done a great job. 9 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: I would thoroughly concur. 10 Rob. 11 MR. OBLESBY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of 12 the board, Mr. Kenny. 13 I'd like to begin with an overview of the 14 responsibilities and services provided by the legislative 15 office, followed by a review of the 1999 legislation. 16 There were more than 3,000 bills introduced in 17 1999. Of these, approximately 80 had potential impact on 18 air quality. 32 bills became law, and most of these laws 19 will take effect on January 1. 20 Overall, I'd say it was a good year. The signed 21 bills generally enhance existing programs. Conversely, 22 bills that could have weakened air quality were either held 23 in committee, withdrawn by the authors or vetoed by Governor 24 Davis. 25 California has two-year legislative sessions, so PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 114 1 the bills that did not make it this year remain alive for 2 further action next year. 3 There will also be another two to three thousand 4 brand new bills introduced early next year. 5 The legislative office reviews and comments on air 6 quality bills as part of the Davis administration. 7 As you can see by this slide, the process is 8 highly structured and formal. Confidential analyses are 9 prepared, reviewed by the chairman and Cal EPA, and 10 forwarded to the Governor's office. These analyses inform 11 the Governor of the issues surrounding each bill, the costs, 12 options and policy recommendations. 13 In addition, other state agencies that are 14 affected by a particular bill submit their own analyses and 15 recommendations, so there may be several points of view to 16 reconcile. 17 The Governor's staff considers this input and then 18 decides what position to recommend for the Davis 19 administration as a whole. 20 The Governor's final policy call is referred to as 21 an approved position. This step is required before ARB can 22 officially go on record in support of or opposition to any 23 bill. 24 As you may surmise, much discussion takes place 25 within the administration before any state agency advocates PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 115 1 a position in the Legislature. And when we finally speak, 2 it is on behalf of the Governor. 3 However, I don't want to leave you with the 4 impression that official positions are ARB's only input to 5 the legislative process. 6 ARB staff also served as a technical resource for 7 the Legislature on air quality issues. As you know, air 8 quality is a highly technical area. Few people understand 9 the science or are able to wade through the studies, reports 10 and complex models which guide air quality policies. 11 To help members understand the impact of their 12 proposals, we provide technical information at committee 13 hearings and also directly to individual members of the 14 Legislature and to legislative staff. These are fact-based 15 communications, rather than policy statements. 16 ARB staff also participates in special interim 17 hearings that focus on a particular subject. For example, 18 there have already been four hearings of interest since the 19 Legislature recessed in September. One on the growing 20 concerns over tire fires, one on global climate change, and 21 two hearings on indoor air quality in portable classrooms. 22 Finally, the legislative office also serves as a 23 resource to newly appointed board members during the 24 confirmation process in the state Senate. 25 Our office is a point of contact for scheduling PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 116 1 and other details. 2 We also prepare background materials for you, the 3 board members, on the history of particular issues in the 4 Legislature and specific confirmation protocol. 5 With that review of our role in the legislative 6 process and mine, next I'd like to highlight the most 7 significant air quality bills that emerged from the 1999 8 session. I'm going to describe these in terms of major 9 policies or themes. 10 MTBE phase-out. 11 After the Governor issued his Executive Order 12 phasing out MTBE by 2002, the Legislature responded by 13 codifying most of that order into law and by specifying 14 additional criteria they want the executive branch to meet. 15 SB 989 by Senator Byron Sher, closely parallels 16 the Governor's order. 17 In addition, the bill improves groundwater 18 protection by increasing monitoring, containment and cleanup 19 requirements. The bill also provides financial assistance 20 to small businesses for upgrading and replacing or removing 21 underground storage tanks. 22 To prevent MTBE-like problems from occurring in 23 the future, SB 529 by Senator Debra Bowen, requires 24 multimedia evaluation of all proposed future fuel 25 regulations. An exception was provided for the upcoming PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 117 1 Phase 3 gasoline regulation. However, a multimedia 2 evaluation will also be done for that to the fullest extent 3 feasible in the compressed time frame. 4 Though not sent to the Governor, SB 192 by Senator 5 Perata influenced the administration's decision to require 6 MTBE labeling on gas pumps as part of the phase-out process. 7 Senator Perata dropped SB 192 after the board adopted pump 8 labeling regulations last July. 9 Children's health. 10 There's been growing concern that existing 11 environmental standards may not be protective enough for 12 children. During his campaign, Governor Davis pledged to 13 close that gap and signed legislation to accomplish that. 14 SB 25, by Senator Escutia requires ARB to revisit all of its 15 criteria pollutant and toxic air contaminant standards to 16 make sure that they take children's unique exposures and 17 sensitivity into account. That will be happening over a 18 period of several years with ARB working closely with the 19 Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. 20 If this review reveals that we missed something, 21 ARB is required to amend the standard as needed or adopt 22 additional mitigation strategies to protect children's 23 health. 24 The bill also requires additional monitoring at 25 schools, parks and other places that children congregate to PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 118 1 make sure that we're doing our exposure assessments 2 correctly. 3 Environmental justice. 4 1999 marks the first year that the concept of 5 environmental justice made it into state law. SB 115 by 6 Senator Solis defines environmental justice and makes the 7 Governor's Office of Planning and Research the coordinating 8 state agency for environmental justice programs at the local 9 level. 10 A separate provision of the bill tasks Cal EPA 11 with developing a model environmental justice mission 12 statement for its boards, departments and offices by January 13 1, 2001. 14 Diesel cleanup incentives. 15 Fortunately for us, the Legislature and Governor 16 Davis recognize that cleaning up diesel emissions is a 17 crucial part of our air quality efforts. Over the past two 18 budget years ARB has received a total of $44 million for 19 this purpose. 20 This year, the Legislature codified the program 21 known as the Carl Moyer Grant Program in AB 1571 by Assembly 22 Speaker Villaraigosa. This bill also created a 13-member 23 advisory committee to assess the need for continued diesel 24 cleanup funds by March 30, 2000. That's critical to us 25 since any new funding won't be forthcoming until this report PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 119 1 is completed. 2 Staff is preparing an update on the Carl Moyer 3 Program for your consideration at the January board meeting, 4 which will set the groundwork for the advisory committee's 5 review. 6 Clean vehicle incentives. 7 The Legislature also recognized the importance of 8 providing incentives to very low emission and zero emission 9 vehicles. This year several bills passed that add both new 10 money and new inducements to use the cleanest technology 11 available. The single most important boost was provided by 12 Assemblymen Cunneen AB 71. This bill allows alternatively 13 fueled ULEVs, SULEVs, and ZEVs to use carpool lanes, an 14 incentive that many ZEV supporters feel is key to expanding 15 the ZEV commuter market. 16 Four additional bills have clean vehicle 17 incentives built in. 18 AB 971 by Speaker Villaraigosa provides new funds 19 to develop clean fuel technologies and extends funding 20 eligibility to electric-powered forklifts. 21 SB 98 by Senator Alarcon restored the South Coast 22 Air District's $11 million annual program that funds major 23 research and demonstration projects involving clean fuels 24 and clean vehicles. 25 SB 826 by Senator Sher lets the San Francisco Bay PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 120 1 Area District fund low emission vehicle projects with its 2 existing motor vehicle registration fees, a use that was 3 previously not allowed. 4 And AB 18 by Speaker Villaraigosa is a two billion 5 park bond measure that allows some funds to be used for zero 6 emission buses inside parks. Incidentally, this bond 7 measure, which will be on the March 7, 2000, ballot, would 8 also fund a variety of environmental and infrastructure 9 improvement projects related to parks and recreation 10 management activities, including clean air projects. While 11 no allocation for air quality is specified, it is 12 conceivable that several million dollars might be made 13 available. 14 Smog check. 15 Smog check is a perennial issue in the Legislature 16 and 1999 was no exception. This is a complex and 17 controversial program, particularly the enhancements that 18 were scheduled to take effect right about now. Though the 19 state implementation plan relies heavily on the smog check 20 program to deliver emission reductions, the Legislature 21 generally wants to pare it back. Several bills were 22 introduced this year to restructure the smog check program 23 or repeal it entirely. 24 A few bills passed that tinkered with the program. 25 However, serious retooling efforts were held in anticipation PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 121 1 of an evaluation report due to US EPA early next year. 2 Once that report is done in February, we 3 anticipate a flood of new smog check legislation and expect 4 the Legislature to strenuously debate what should happen to 5 the smog check program. 6 Miscellaneous bills. 7 There are just a few more bills that I want to 8 highlight. 9 SB 1186 by Senator Ortiz allows ARB to carry over 10 $1.23 million in rice straw burning alternative grant funds 11 that would have otherwise been lost. ARB staff hopes to use 12 these monies to encourage alternatives to open field rice 13 straw burning, such as the development of a 14 rice-straw-to-ethanol project. You will hear more about 15 this program and the staff's plans at the December board 16 meeting. 17 Senator Burton's SCR 19 asked ARB to do a report 18 on the health and environmental impacts of leaf blowers for 19 the Legislature's information. That work product is also 20 scheduled for your December board hearing. 21 District bills. 22 Many of the air quality bills in any given year 23 affect local air districts. Some of these relate to 24 statewide policy for stationary source controls, others are 25 district specific. The lion's share is aimed at the South PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 122 1 Coast District, which makes sense, since that is the 2 district with the largest air quality challenge and with the 3 largest concentration of regulated sources. 4 ARB tracks all of this legislation and makes 5 policy recommendations on the most significant bills. A 6 full description of district-related legislation is in our 7 written report. 8 The two documents provided to you today tell the 9 legislative story for 1999. The annual summary lists all 10 the air quality related bills we identified and tracked 11 throughout the area. 12 The second document, creatively titled, "The 1999 13 Chaptered Bills Requiring ARB Efforts," list a dozen bills 14 that specifically mandate the ARB to undertake certain 15 activities, including reports, program development, ambient 16 monitoring, standards review and consultation with other 17 agencies. 18 For audience members, let me note that several 19 copies of this summary and the other document are available 20 at the sign-in table where you entered the hearing room. 21 I appreciate the board's interest in the 22 legislative program. 23 If you have any questions about my presentation, 24 I'd be happy to answer them. 25 Also, please do not hesitate to contact me at any PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 123 1 time with any legislative questions or concerns you may 2 have. 3 That concludes my remarks. 4 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you very much, Rob. 5 I notice on the penultimate slide there you had a 6 report on the leaf blowers is also coming up in December. 7 Is that still on there? Okay. 8 MR. KENNY: It's a four-day board hearing. 9 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: I think we'll need to go to Lin's 10 afterwards. 11 Appreciate the report. It's very good indeed. 12 Any comments from the board members, questions? 13 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Yes, I had a few questions. 14 I should probably already know this, because we 15 just discussed rice straw burning, but the amount, is it 5 16 million? 17 MR. OBLESBY: The overall amount that was made 18 available for the grant program was 5 million. Of that, a 19 couple of projects that were originally awarded grants fell 20 out of the process, the applicants withdrew their 21 applications. That made 1.23 million funds available back 22 into the pool. We had to gain legislative approval to 23 reencumber that money at the last minute of the session and 24 we were very fortunate enough to be able to do that, so we 25 have the second bite at the apple for that 1.23 million. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 124 1 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Plus an additional 5 2 million? 3 MR. OBLESBY: No. The original pot was 5 million. 4 It was all encumbered and then the two projects fell out, so 5 there is a reauthorization of a portion of that 5 million. 6 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: The total amount of the 7 Carl Moyer program? 8 MR. OBLESBY: We have 19 million. The Energy 9 Commission has 4 million, in this round. 10 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: 4 million. Okay. 11 The Sher's bill, jumping around here. 12 MR. OBLESBY: MTBE, 989? 13 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: No. The Sher bill on Bay 14 Area vehicle registration. Was there any effort by other 15 districts to become a part of that bill? 16 MR. OBLESBY: No. Actually, the way the different 17 districts historically gained the authority to spend these 18 motor vehicle fee surcharges, they were -- there was not one 19 bill that did it. There were a number of bills that granted 20 authority in different ways at different times. So the 21 other districts already have this authority, and it was 22 essentially the Bay Area district catching up. 23 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Okay. The report to US EPA 24 on I and M, that will be provided by ARB to US EPA? 25 MR. OBLESBY: That's correct. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 125 1 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: In February? 2 MR. OBLESBY: February. 3 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Does that come before us? 4 MR. KENNY: What we will do is we will make a 5 presentation to the board with regard to the smog check 6 program. The report itself was probably not scheduled to 7 come before the board because it's a technical assessment of 8 what the smog check program is achieving. But we will 9 basically provide the information to the board. 10 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Okay. I think that's it. 11 Thank you. 12 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Mike, I know you answered 13 yesterday, but for the board and the public, when will we be 14 likely to see labels appearing on the gas tanks as a result 15 of the Governor's action? 16 MR. SCHEIBLE: The regulation that the board 17 approved in July was just adopted or approved by the Office 18 of Administrative Law earlier this week, so approximately a 19 month from now the labeling will be required at the pump 20 level. 21 We've sent out notices to the parties. We've seen 22 various arrangements for getting labels out, so you may 23 start seeing them any time over the next couple weeks as you 24 pump your gas, or not seeing them. In a month if you don't 25 see them, it means that there shouldn't be any MTBE in the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 126 1 gas from that particular pump. 2 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you. 3 Yes, Supervisor DeSaulnier. 4 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: Alan, just a comment. 5 As the children's health issue goes forward and 6 the environmental justice issue goes forward, and I made 7 these comments before about our children's health study in 8 Southern California, and its relationship to toxic hot spots 9 and sort of the changing of where at-risk populations 10 children and asthmatics may be and where they reside, as we 11 sort of evolve through that, there's a concern that without 12 diminishing the genuine concerns around environmental 13 justice and the locations around stationary sources, but 14 also that as an inventory changes, young people who may be 15 not in near toxic hot spots, may also have health risks. So 16 sort of as that evolves it's a concern, it's a concern that 17 I've heard at the Bay Area air district. We just adopted an 18 environmental justice policy. 19 But trying to grapple with the changing sort of 20 environment and not getting stuck in, I hate to use this 21 word, the old paradigm of the stationary sources and 22 environmental justice are the sources that are the highest 23 potential for risk for those targeted populations. So if 24 you have minority children in particular who are close to 25 stationary sources, not to diminish that, but at least to be PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 127 1 able to, if we're going to start looking at this, looking at 2 it in the atmosphere that the inventory is changing. 3 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Very good point. 4 BOARD MEMBER DeSAULNIER: Did anybody understand 5 that? 6 MR. KENNY: Actually, yes. 7 To a great extent, that's what we have been trying 8 to do. One of our key changes, I think you probably would 9 see from a staff perspective at the board is that 10 historically what we've always done is we look at like mass 11 emission reductions. As we look basically at where we have 12 to go for the future it really is more of an exposure 13 assessment on an individual basis. 14 And as we look at those exposure assessments, what 15 we're going to try to do is essentially look at the 16 different types of populations around the state and focus on 17 those exposures and then try to figure out what we can to 18 both identify the sources of exposure and then to mitigate 19 those sources. 20 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Okay. Thank you. 21 I guess that's all for this item. It's not a 22 regulatory item, so we can thank you, Rob, very much indeed. 23 I guess that we are now coming to the open comment 24 period. We do have one comment here, it's written here, 25 from Mr. Kurt Rasmussen from Yah-Whooo Technologies. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 128 1 You should have come earlier, because you've got 2 the answer to solving all rice problems. 3 MR. RASMUSSEN: By the way, I invented the name 4 Yah-Whooo about 12 years ago, which is ironic. I should 5 have patented it. 6 Well, ladies and gentlemen, I'm here representing 7 EM Technology. We are a nonprofit organization. We have 8 503 sitting down in Tucson, Arizona. 9 We have no money. We have very little staff. And 10 we take care of all North and South America, so I'm a 11 volunteer and I'm been there for about three and a half 12 years. 13 And what EM is, it means enhanced microbes. It's 14 nothing but mother nature taking out of the earth and 15 cultured up and then put back into the soil and it will take 16 all the microbes, so the good microbes takes over and crowds 17 out like E. coli or all these other bad buggers and eat 18 that. 19 So this is a general view about what it is. It 20 was discovered by coincident in Japan about 15, 20 years ago 21 by Dr. Higa, and he didn't want anybody to get risks of it, 22 so he took it over to the poor world first. So all the 23 third world countries it's used by 100 countries today. I 24 got scientific reports from all over the world. 25 And since you -- we are constantly discovering new PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 129 1 uses for EM, because how can you keep track of it. You've 2 got about a product that has about 80-plus different 3 critters in it. Let's put it that way. 4 And how can you keep track of the symbiotic 5 relationship of that many? It's just you don't hav ebig 6 enough computers or they're just still finding more use for 7 it. 8 But what we can do in rice, and that's what you 9 were discovering, and we're going to do a program with some 10 rice growers up north and we are going to take some material 11 up here maybe next few days and hopefully what we have 12 agreed to is if you're going to take a field and you're 13 going to spray it on with the big sprayers. EM can be 14 applied, if you can apply water you can apply that also. So 15 it's very simple to do and it's very inexpensive stuff. 16 So he's going to plow this stuff in on that field 17 and then have another one that doesn't get EM, so we have a 18 control. And then the next application would then be when 19 he waters the next time in the spring then we would put in. 20 First time you put in ratio of 1 to 500, because we need to 21 inoculate in order to make them the dominant, to establish 22 it, so begin with it's more expensive, but as you go down 23 the road it becomes very inexpensive. So the next time we 24 use about a ratio of one to 2000. And the last one we'll 25 fly on. Because what it will do is it will enhance the rice PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 130 1 kernel also. If you ran oxidant and if you get it on the 2 leaves it enhances, grows it, because it enhances it, 3 photosynthesis on the leaves by ten percent somewhat. 4 So therefore you have many benefits on that and 5 you should get a better rice kernel. At least for instance 6 in Burma 30 percent of all the rice over there is grown this 7 way. Much rice in Japan is grown this way. Some places 8 they have achieved up to 30 percent more yield. 9 Now I'm not going to say we will do this year, but 10 it also take care of the root stem, because it's a disease 11 and it crowd out all the bad ones, because these are 12 anaerobic and it's actually anaerobic 95 percent and five 13 percent aerobic. How they can exist together we really 14 don't know, but they do. 15 So we can clean up also the polluted water with 16 it. 17 I did out in Vacaville out here Frank's Septic out 18 here, we took a year and a half ago we took 15,000 gallons 19 of septic sledge out of septic tanks and put it in a 20 gasoline tank on the ground, put 35 gallons of this stuff in 21 it. Three weeks later I drank the water. It was that 22 clean. 23 We now have Title 22 for it. And we waiting for 24 the counties to approve it so we can use it for gray water 25 for running it. He has built a fish pond and we're going to PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 131 1 put it in there and then raise fish in it. 2 And so now what is left over is a black -- so 3 about two-thirds became clean water, one-third becomes dirt 4 black, real black sludge, and that sludge you can then use 5 as a starter for the next batch. Or I took some out and 6 drained it and dried it up and you ended up with very good 7 organic material, up to about 14 or 15 percent. That means 8 that you can use that as a fertilizer. You cannot use it 9 the way it is. It's too strong. 10 So it has had benefits. 11 The rice straw is we got about six different 12 things I can use it for right now, I can tell you. I wrote 13 them all down. You can use it, for instance, if you chop it 14 up, the rice straw, you ferment it up for a month and you 15 can put it back out as a fertilizer. That's another way to 16 do it. 17 You can ferment it up and put a little rice bran 18 or rice hull into it, you can make an animal feed out of it 19 for cattle feed, use it about five or ten percent of the 20 chicken feed and all that. You can use it for chicken 21 bedding. You can use it as a floor sweep, because it will 22 take care of oil. It likes to eat oil. 23 And you can use it as for if you take your kids, 24 we have a program going in Tucson where about a dozen 25 schools are collecting all the garbage from the school and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 132 1 recycling it and they put this EM assay we call it, which is 2 this fermented stuff, and put that on in there with it and 3 it makes a super good fertilizer, and you can then grow a 4 very good garden or you can use it anywhere you want to. 5 It has those uses. And many more uses. 6 But I mean we can take care of the mosquito 7 problems because it do something to flies and mosquito 8 larvaes that prevent -- they get a sour stomach, I guess. I 9 don't know for sure, but they don't develop into it, so you 10 can immediate. 11 I got some scientific reports I got last week from 12 a pig farm and a cattle farm, a dairy farm down in Montega. 13 And the pig farmer down there he was -- Mr. Gund, he used to 14 spray with a water gun the fields, and it stunk, and they 15 were shutting him down. Now he sprays the field and it 16 don't stink. 17 And but one big benefit they discovered also is 18 that he can only reach half of that alfalfa field, so when 19 we reached with the new EM water they grew quite a bit more 20 alfalfa. So it's a win-win all the way around. 21 Now, if you put it into the drinking water to the 22 pigs, we then have a different EM, then we skew it over to 23 the what we call Probiotic, which is the yeast side, and we 24 want to erase, we skew it over to photosynthesis. So we 25 have flexibility there we have discovered we can do. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 133 1 And so he's now putting it into the pigs, because 2 they will utilize the feed better. If you put it into 3 chickens you can save ten percent of the feed on chickens 4 and they will be heavier chickens, better chickens. I got 5 report from China and Pakistan you can have them all. I got 6 whole bunch of that stuff. 7 It's just that we are nonprofit and we only about 8 eight or nine people from Tucson down there. We have no way 9 of spreading the word, it's just by word of mouth. And so 10 nobody wants to believe you because it sounds too good to be 11 true. That's been my biggest problem. I worked with it 12 three years. I grown tomatoes that won't rot from months, 13 for two months. Actually they will change after four weeks 14 and they get more mushy inside, but if you take a vine ripe 15 tomato and lay it on a counter, it will stay fresh for four 16 weeks, because you get more antioxidant in it, so each of 17 the microbes in the soil that makes this, you know, that 18 normally makes this in a soil anyway, so when you crowd all 19 the bad ones, they took over and they become dominant and 20 you get better plant, you can -- so therefore you can also 21 have better -- any plant will grow better that way. 22 So this is -- any questions? 23 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: If we had a restaurant owner they 24 may be interested in these delicious crops you have there. 25 One of the things I was going to say, I would be PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 134 1 interested in staff monitoring what you are doing if in fact 2 you are going to work with the rice growers. I think it 3 would be fascinating to see what the results will be. So 4 maybe staff or Ms. Tschogl could take a look at that. At 5 least it will be -- may be more rewarding than tracking some 6 other additives. 7 Yes, Mr. McKinnon. 8 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: Actually, there's a 9 gentleman, and I'll get the name for you, that works on 10 inoculates, they're called inoculates, in Woodland, pretty 11 close by. And I've used some of it before in a vegetable 12 garden. And I think his comes from the cow digestive system 13 or something like that. 14 MR. RASMUSSEN: See, these microbes are found in 15 the stomach normally. I drink it every day because it's 16 good, healthy for you. So it's nothing but a natural 17 product, but we got about 80 different critters. All the 18 ones that is on the market today are the researched. About 19 20 some similar products, but they all engineered up one at 20 a time, so that because you have a hard time to keep track 21 of this symbiotic relationship where it's going to go. And 22 but so this is why we can't tell you all the uses it 23 actually be for. We haven't discovered them all yet, 24 because you got 80 plus. 25 BOARD MEMBER McKINNON: Sir, can I finish? PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 135 1 Anyway, I will get Ms. Tschogl the doctor's name 2 that's working on that. 3 And one of the things that it does do is decompose 4 vegetable matter very quickly. There's a lot of heat 5 produced and stuff. 6 So I was interested when he was talking earlier, 7 that earlier testimony about the smell and warm days and 8 whatever. I mean, to me that's good stuff. It means that 9 the rice hulls are being decomposed. 10 So, there may be a lot of ways to do it. 11 MR. RASMUSSEN: You got the City of Redding is 12 using it for winrowing for composting and they have done it 13 for several months now. 14 CHAIRMAN LLOYD: Thank you very much for coming 15 up. We'll be following this very interestedly. 16 Okay. Is there any other thing on the open 17 comment period? 18 With that, we'll officially bring this board 19 meeting to a close, and can't wait for the next one. 20 (Thereupon the meeting was adjourned 21 at 1:10 p.m.) 22 23 24 25 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 136 1 CERTIFICATE OF SHORTHAND REPORTER 2 3 I, JANET H. NICOL, a Certified Shorthand Reporter 4 of the State of California, do hereby certify that I am a 5 disinterested person herein; that I reported the foregoing 6 meeting in shorthand writing; that I thereafter caused my 7 shorthand writing to be transcribed into typewriting. 8 I further certify that I am not of counsel or 9 attorney for any of the parties to said meeting, or in any 10 way interested in the outcome of said meeting. 11 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand 12 this 27th day of November 1999. 13 14 15 16 Janet H. Nicol 17 Certified Shorthand Reporter License Number 9764 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345