BOARD MEETING STATE OF CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD JOE SERNA, JR. BUILDING CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY CENTRAL VALLEY AUDITORIUM, SECOND FLOOR 1001 I STREET SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA THURSDAY, JULY 20, 2006 9:00 A.M. TIFFANY C. KRAFT, CSR, RPR CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTER LICENSE NUMBER 12277 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 ii APPEARANCES BOARD MEMBERS Dr. Robert Sawyer, Chairperson Ms. Dorene D'Adamo Ms. Sandra Berg Supervisor Mark DeSaulnier Dr. Henry Gong, Jr. Ms. Barbara Patrick Mrs. Barbara Riordan Mr. Rob Roberts STAFF Mr. Tom Cackette, Chief Deputy Executive Officer Mr. Tom Jennings, Chief Counsel Mr. Michael Scheible, Deputy Executive Officer Ms. Lynn Terry, Deputy Executive Officer Ms. Kathleen Tschogl, Ombudsman Ms. Catherine Witherspoon, Executive Officer Ms. Lori Andreoni, Board Secretary Dr. Ken Bowers, Population Studies Section, RD Mr. Michael Carter, Chief, Emission Research & Regulatory Development Branch, MSCD Mr. Bart Croes, Chief, Research Division, RD Mr. Bob Fletcher, Chief, Stationary Source Division, SSD PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 iii APPEARANCES CONTINUED STAFF Mr. Harold Holmes, Manager, Engineering Evaluation Section, SSD Ms. Annmarie Mora, Air Pollution Specialist, RD Mr. Andrew Spencer, Staff, On-Road Controls Section, MSCD ALSO PRESENT Ms. Pamela Amette, Motorcycle Industry Council Dr. Ralph Appy, Director of Environmental Management, Port of Los Angeles Mr. Tom Austin, Motorcycle Industry Council Mr. Mike Barr, Association of American Railroads Professor Hal Cota, CARB Research Screening Committee Mr. Henry Hogo, SCAQMD Mr. Thomas Jellemic, Port of Long Beach Ms. Maureen Kane, Mayor Ronald Loveridge Dr. Robert Kanter, Director of Planning and Environmental Affairs, Port of Long Beach Mr. Kirk Marckwald, Association of American Railroads Ms. Susan Matthews, Points West ARGO, Inc. Dr. Michael Lipsett, CARB Research Screening Committee Mr. John Paliwoda, California Motorcycle Dealers Association Mr. Ed Pupka, SCAQMD PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 iv APPEARANCES CONTINUED ALSO PRESENT Mr. Mark Stehly, BNSF Railway Ms. Lupe Valdez, Union Pacific Mr. Barry Wallerstein, SCAQMD Mr. Kurt Wiese, SCAQMD Mr. Forman Williams, CARB Research Screening Committee Mr. Robert Wyman, Latham & Watkins PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 v INDEX PAGE Pledge of Allegiance 1 Item 06-7-1 Chairperson Sawyer 3 Executive Officer Witherspoon 4 Staff Presentation 4 Q&A 13 Item 06-7-2 Chairperson Sawyer 18 Executive Officer Witherspoon 20 Staff Presentation 21 Q&A 37 Dr. Wallerstein 50 Ms. Williams 52 Item 06-7-3 Chairperson Sawyer 58 Executive Officer Witherspoon 59 Professor Cota 61 Staff Presentation 63 Motion 75 Vote 76 Item 06-7-4 Chairperson Sawyer 76 Exeuctive Officer Witherspoon 77 Staff Presentation 78 Ombudsman Tschogl 90 Q&A 92 Mr. Paliwoda 93 Ms. Amette 97 Mr. Austin 98 Ms. Matthews 102 Mr. Wyman 103 Mr. Begin 104 Motion 108 Vote 108 Item 06-7-5 Chairperson Sawyer 109 Executive Officer Witherspoon 110 Staff Presentation 111 Q&A 122 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 vi INDEX CONTINUED PAGE Ms. Kane 125 Dr. Wallerstein 126 Mr. Pupka 127 Mr. Wiese 132 Mr. Hogo 134 Mr. Stehly 138 Ms. Valdez 142 Mr. Barr 152 Mr. Marckwald 153 Adjournment 157 Reporter's Certificate 158 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 1 1 PROCEEDINGS 2 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Good morning. The July 3 20th, 2006, public meeting of the Air Resources Board will 4 now come to order. 5 Would all please rise and join me in the Pledge 6 of Allegiance? 7 (Thereupon the Pledge of Allegiance was 8 recited in unison.) 9 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Will the Clerk of the Board 10 please call the roll? 11 SECRETARY ANDREONI: Ms. Berg? 12 BOARD MEMBER BERG: Present. 13 SECRETARY ANDREONI: Ms. D'Adamo? 14 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Here. 15 SECRETARY ANDREONI: Supervisor DeSaulnier? 16 Dr. Gong? 17 BOARD MEMBER GONG: Here. 18 SECRETARY ANDREONI: Ms. Kennard? 19 Mayor Loveridge? 20 Supervisor Patrick? 21 SUPERVISOR PATRICK: Here. 22 SECRETARY ANDREONI: Mrs. Riordan? 23 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Here. 24 SECRETARY ANDREONI: Supervisor Roberts? 25 SUPERVISOR ROBERTS: Here. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 2 1 SECRETARY ANDREONI: Dr. Sawyer? 2 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Here. 3 SECRETARY ANDREONI: Mr. Chairman, we have a 4 quorum. 5 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you. 6 I have a few opening remarks before we get 7 started. I would like to address the witnesses signing up 8 to speak today. Please be aware that the Board will be 9 imposing our usual three-minute time limit so that 10 everyone gets a chance to speak. I would also like to 11 suggest that each speaker put his or her testimony into 12 his or her own words. If we have your written testimony, 13 it's easier for the Board to follow if you go straight to 14 the main points you wish to make. 15 We have translation services in Spanish for those 16 who need it. Please see the Clerk if you require these 17 services. 18 (Thereupon Spanish translation was made.) 19 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: I would now like everyone in 20 the room to note the emergency exits to your right of the 21 hearing room and to the rear through the main entrance. 22 If exiting through the rear of the hearing room, please 23 follow the exit signs to the left just past the rest 24 rooms. 25 In the event of a fire alarm, we are required to PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 3 1 evacuate this room immediately. Evacuees will exit down 2 the stairways and probably to a relocation site across the 3 street. When the all-clear signal is given, we will 4 return to the hearing room and resume the hearing. 5 Agenda Item 06-7-1. Good morning. I would like 6 to remind anyone in the audience who wishes to testify on 7 today's agenda items to please sign up with the Clerk of 8 the Board. Also, if you have a written statement, please 9 provide 30 copies when you sign up to testify. 10 The first item on agenda this morning is our 11 health update. For the past few years, these monthly 12 updates have provided the Board with briefings on topics 13 related to our primary mission, to protect the public 14 health of Californians. 15 This month, staff will discuss emerging research 16 on the impacts of ultra fine particles. Ultra fine 17 particles are under increasing scrutiny as having 18 potentially significant health effects. A measure of the 19 interest in ultra fine particles is the large number of 20 attendees, over 500, at the ultra fine particle conference 21 into May hosted by the South Coast Air Quality Management 22 District and cosponsored by our Board. I was honored to 23 present the luncheon address at this conference on the 24 first day. Staff will discuss the Air Resources Board 25 Research Program into the health effects, sources, and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 4 1 property of ultra fine particles. 2 Ms. Witherspoon, would you please introduce this 3 item? 4 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Thank you, Dr. 5 Sawyer and members of the Board. 6 Although we've known a lot about particulate 7 matter in general, very little is known yet about the 8 health impacts of ultra fine particles. The emerging 9 evidence being published in the scientific literature is 10 pointing to them as being factors in respiratory and 11 cardiovascular health. To address this increasing 12 concern, ARB is actively engaged in studying this field. 13 As we will hear in this presentation, ARB's research 14 studies include emission and exposure research into the 15 nature of ultra fine particles from various sources and 16 their ambient concentrations and spatial distributions. 17 Health studies are also being conducted which will help us 18 evaluate the respiratory and cardiovascular risks 19 associated with ultra fine particulate matter. 20 Dr. Ken Bowers will make today's presentation. 21 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 22 presented as follows.) 23 DR. BOWERS: Thank you, Ms. Witherspoon. Good 24 morning, Dr. Sawyer and members of the Board. 25 Today's health update will discuss ultra fine PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 5 1 particles, what is currently known about their effects, 2 and how ARB's Research Program is working to better 3 understand the impacts on California. 4 --o0o-- 5 DR. BOWERS: What exactly is ultra fine 6 particulate matter? These very small particles are a 7 subfraction of the currently regulated PM10 and PM2.5 size 8 particulate matter. Ultra fine particles on their own are 9 not regulated. Most commonly, ultra fine particles are 10 defined as having an aerodynamic diameter of .1 11 mircometers and smaller, although this definition is not 12 universally used. Ultra fine particles are about the same 13 size as viruses and considerably smaller than bacteria or 14 red blood cells. 15 This slide provides a graphic comparison of the 16 size of ultra fine particles with PM10 and PM2.5 17 particles. A human hair is approximately 60 mircometers 18 in diameter, which on the scale of the particles shown 19 would be considerably wider than the entire slide. 20 Since these particles are extremely small, they 21 contribute very little to the conventional particle mass 22 measurements. More commonly, they are measured as the 23 number of particles per cubic centimeter. 24 --o0o-- 25 DR. BOWERS: So why are we concerned about ultra PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 6 1 fine particles? Although ultra fine particles contribute 2 only a small amount to total PM mass, they have a large 3 surface area and often very high number concentrations. 4 They behave much like a gas and may enter all parts of the 5 lung where they tend to deposit in the deep lungs. Once 6 deposited in the lung, they may penetrate through lung 7 tissue into the bloodstream. 8 They have been shown to deposit in critical 9 organs such as the heart and brain. They have also been 10 shown to contain many toxic components such as metals, 11 carbon, and organic compounds which may initiate or play a 12 role in many types of harmful tissue level oxidant 13 processes that can damage the heart, lung, and other 14 organs. To better understand the impacts of ultra fine 15 particles on California health and welfare, the ARB has 16 made this area a focus of our research in the past several 17 years. 18 --o0o-- 19 DR. BOWERS: Our ultimate concerns are the health 20 impacts of ultra fine particles. Previous research 21 findings both in ARB funded studies and in other studies 22 indicate that they are important in respiratory health. 23 They also appear to play a role in systemic inflammation 24 and cardiovascular health, including heart rate 25 variability, atherosclerosis, and changes in the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 7 1 concentrations of numerous blood markers of cardiovascular 2 health. They also appear to be able to cross the blood 3 brain barrier to lodge into brain tissues and may cause 4 additional as yet unidentified effects. 5 Studies into Detroit, Erfurt, Germany, and other 6 cities are suggestive of an increase in premature 7 mortality due to ultra fine particles. U.S. EPA and ARB 8 funded animal chamber studies and cell culture studies 9 have shown that ultra fine particles should be rapidly 10 carried throughout the body and will penetrate cells to 11 induce oxidated stress and mitochondrial damage. 12 --o0o-- 13 DR. BOWERS: Some of the effects seen in 2.5 and 14 PM2.5 studies may be from ultra fine fraction of the total 15 fine PM since PM2.5 includes the ultra fine particulate. 16 However, studies that examine both the PM2.5 and ultra 17 fine indicate that there are often different affects from 18 the two fractions. This may be due to the particle 19 sources or different properties that are typically 20 associated with the fine versus ultra fine fractions. 21 To evaluate this issue further, the ARB currently 22 has three studies investigating ultra fine particle health 23 effects. Professor Delfino at U.C. Irvine will determine 24 the health effects of air pollution on elderly persons 25 living in the southern California air basin. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 8 1 An in-vehicle study conducted by Professor Hinds 2 at UCLA will investigate cardiovascular health effects in 3 healthy adults over 60 years old during exposures on the 4 405 and 710 freeways. 5 Professor Kleinman at U.C. Irvine will examine 6 the effects of fine and ultra fine PM exposures on markers 7 of vascular cell inflammation and the role of PM on the 8 development of arthrosclerosis into older normal and 9 atherosclerotic prone mice. 10 U.S. EPA has established five particle research 11 centers around the nation, three of which have ultra fine 12 particles as a focus of their research program. U.C. 13 Davis has also recently been named one of the particle 14 centers and will concentrate on studies in the San Joaquin 15 valley. 16 --o0o-- 17 DR. BOWERS: The ARB has been investigating ultra 18 fine exposure for several years. Completed ARB ultra fine 19 particle exposure research has produced a number of new 20 findings indicating a strong variation of particle 21 concentrations and exposures between locations and over 22 time on both daily and seasonal scales. From 2001 through 23 2004, the ARB operated one of the first ultra fine 24 particle monitoring networks in the twelve communities 25 participating in the children's health study into southern PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 9 1 California. An important finding was the degree of 2 variation of ultra fine particle concentrations at the 3 different locations. ARB supported research on the 4 distance from freeways showed that the concentrations of 5 ultra fine particle fell off quite rapidly within the 6 first several hundred meters of the freeway due to 7 diffusion and combining particles. 8 This finding helped support the passage of a 9 school siting bill authored by Senator Escutia. Roadside 10 and especially in-vehicle studies have shown that the 11 concentrations of ultra fine particles related to freeway 12 driving may be quite high. We've estimated that over 13 50 percent of a person's daily exposure to ultra fine 14 particles can occur during a commute on a freeway. 15 --o0o-- 16 DR. BOWERS: Current ARB studies are expanding on 17 these findings. UCLA is monitoring ultra fine particles, 18 black carbon, and PM2.5 in communities around LAX. The 19 ARB is coordinating multiple research efforts in the 20 Harbor Communities Monitoring Project and the Wilmington, 21 West Long Beach, San Pedro to investigate the variations 22 into number concentrations at a fine, spatial, and 23 temporal scale to determine if freeway sound walls -- and 24 determine if freeway sound walls and tree lines have an 25 important impact. Professor Sioutas will lead the ultra PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 10 1 fine portion of this project. 2 In a study by Dr. Arthur Winer at UCLA, an 3 electric vehicle has been developed into a mobile 4 monitoring platform to conduct highly timed and spatially 5 resolved pollutant data to near sources such as freeways, 6 arterial roads, rail yards, refineries, and ports. This 7 study will start in the fall and continues for one year. 8 --o0o-- 9 DR. BOWERS: Since most persons spend a 10 substantial fraction of their time indoors, indoor air 11 quality is also important in determining a person's 12 pollutant exposure. Indoor combustion sources such as 13 cooking, wood burning, and candles can contribute to ultra 14 fine exposure. A recently completed study at U.C. 15 Berkeley reported on the production of ultra fine 16 particles and formaldehyde from indoor ozone and terrapin 17 reactions during the use of common cleaning products. 18 Terpinenes such as limonine and pinene are added to 19 cleaning products as the solvent for their cleaning 20 properties and as fragrance components. 21 --o0o-- 22 DR. BOWERS: Currently, we are researching how 23 ultra fine particles get into the indoor environment. 24 Indoor exposures can be divided into two sources: 25 Processes that occur in the indoor environment, and those PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 11 1 that occur outdoors and infiltrate into the indoor 2 environment. 3 Professor Nazaroff at U.C. Berkeley will measure 4 ultra fine particles and related pollutants inside 5 California classrooms and residences. The study will 6 provide information on the infiltration of outdoor ultra 7 fine particles to indoor environments. The investigators 8 will also assess the indoor source contributions. 9 In a study by Professor McKone, the emissions 10 from office machines such as computers, laser printers, 11 ink jet printers are being measured in controlled 12 chambers. 13 --o0o-- 14 DR. BOWERS: Sources of ultra fine particles are 15 primarily combustion processes, which in most places in 16 California means that mobile sources internal combustion 17 processes predominate. Stationary combustion processes 18 can also be significant sources. In addition, ultra fine 19 particles can be formed through condensation of 20 semi-volatile gases, secondary particle formation in 21 photochemical processes, and in certain indoor sources and 22 reactions. 23 --o0o-- 24 DR. BOWERS: With the evolution of engine 25 designed fuels and after-treatment control technology, the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 12 1 emissions of ultra fine particles will change. The 2 characterization and quantification of mobile source 3 emissions remains an area of interest. In the near term, 4 ARB researchers in collaboration with USC, UCLA, the South 5 Coast AQMD, EMRL, and others are getting ready to 6 investigate the psychochemical and toxicological 7 characteristics of mobile source emissions at the ARB 8 heavy-duty emissions laboratory in Los Angeles. 9 Investigators will focus on both heavy-duty and light-duty 10 vehicles for the various fuel and technology types 11 expected on the road. 12 The ARB is also collaborating with key 13 international players in the area of ultra fine particle 14 emission measurements and new certification standards. 15 The European particle measurement protocol project has 16 opened up a valuable opportunity for coordinated and 17 focused scientific exchange on sampling methodology for 18 emissions of ultra fine particles. 19 An additional study is being performed by 20 investigators at U.C. Davis and University of Colorado to 21 apportion sources of fine and ultra fine particles 22 collected during two field studies. To support the source 23 apportionment, ultra fine particles from gasoline and 24 heavy-duty diesel vehicles were collected and analyzed and 25 measurements were made of particle size and composition in PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 13 1 the roadside environment. 2 --o0o-- 3 DR. BOWERS: In conclusion, the health impacts of 4 ultra fine particles are still largely unknown, but 5 evidence is being published in the scientific literature 6 increasingly indicates they can be a significant source of 7 risk to respiratory and cardiovascular health. The ARB 8 Research Program is investigating the health impacts and 9 sources and properties of these particles. Our studies 10 will help the Board to evaluate the risks associated with 11 ultra fine particles and develop policies consistent with 12 these risks. 13 Thank you for your attention. I will be happy to 14 answer any questions that you may have. 15 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you. 16 Do any of the Board members have questions? 17 Dr. Gong. 18 BOARD MEMBER GONG: Just a comment. I think that 19 the potential health effects of ultra fine particle 20 exposure has been well enlightened to the public, 21 scientific and lay public, both with South Coast Air 22 Quality Management District and even by your short 23 presentation, which I found to be very elucidating. 24 As I was thinking about what you were saying, it 25 occurs to me that we've made great strides over the past PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 14 1 decade in looking at the health effects of all the 2 particles, whether they be coarse -- and I think Dr. 3 Lipsett there can testify to that -- and also obviously 4 the fine particles and now ultra fine. But I keep also 5 thinking there's nanoparticles as well. So we'll going 6 keep on looking at these things I'm sure. 7 My ultimate question I guess right now is, and 8 maybe no one can answer this is, that's a great emphasis 9 on ultra fines right now. My question really is, is there 10 a relative toxicity scale for these particles? Are fine 11 particles less toxic than ultra fines for the same type of 12 exposure? That's sort of my maybe unanswerable question. 13 But I'd be interested in comments, see if I can put the 14 Research staff on the line. 15 HEALTH AND EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT BRANCH CHIEF BODE: 16 Dr. Gong, this is Richard Bode. 17 That's actually part of our research goals and 18 priorities, something we've been looking at for a while, 19 is how to put all these particles on any kind of a 20 toxicity scale. UCLA is working -- their particle center 21 has done quite a bit looking to see how the fine particles 22 seem to be some of the most toxic, and the work on ultra 23 fine is just beginning. So they do have some very 24 interesting results that we need to follow up on and show 25 that in some cases ultra fines may be extremely toxic as PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 15 1 well. But as far as a final toxicity scale, it's 2 definitely something we need more work on and we're 3 focusing on. 4 BOARD MEMBER GONG: Thank you. 5 BOARD MEMBER BERG: I just have a clarification 6 question. When we measure premature deaths, how do we 7 quantify or eliminate other things such as poor diet? 8 Even if the person appears healthy, how do we determine 9 that the cells are getting the correct nutrients and all 10 the other things then if we just eliminated the ultra fine 11 particles or whatever it is that we're looking at, if we 12 eliminate that totally, we would be eliminating this 13 quantity of deaths. 14 POPULATIONS STUDIES SECTION MANAGER WELLER: Many 15 of the studies that look at premature death look at a 16 number of different confounders. They will look at diet, 17 for example, and other potential -- smoking, other things 18 that may be affecting the subjects in addition to the 19 ultra fine particles. So those types of effects are 20 tried -- also looked at and an attempt is made to quantify 21 those outside of the effect of the ultra fine particles. 22 BOARD MEMBER BERG: Is there an age bracket in 23 which we feel that a certain person regardless of who they 24 are to live to a certain age and then at 15 years below 25 that age if they pass away that that then is a premature PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 16 1 death? Is that how this is measured? 2 POPULATIONS STUDIES SECTION MANAGER WELLER: 3 Well, actually, the way they usually do this as far as 4 premature death is concerned is they look at the mortality 5 in association with the exposure. So it's sort of looking 6 at the exposure and the mortality and association rather 7 than looking at a length of time that people should live. 8 There is a calculation that I believe U.S. EPA has done to 9 try to figure out actual loss of life from PM. I don't 10 believe they've done that calculation for ultra fine. 11 BOARD MEMBER BERG: Thank you. 12 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Ms. Riordan. 13 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Yes. Thank you. 14 To the staff, I'm wondering on the exposure 15 research projects for community levels of the ultra fine 16 particles, are those projects underway as we speak or are 17 those completed? I'm sorry. I didn't understand when you 18 made the presentation. So those would appear under -- 19 well, LAX, the Harbor Communities Monitoring Project. 20 DR. BOWERS: The LAX project is underway. The 21 others will start this fall and go for about a year. 22 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: And are we in some way 23 participating in that? Are we funding and are we lending 24 our expertise? 25 DR. BOWERS: We're participating in both of the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 17 1 Harbor Community studies that I mentioned. 2 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Are we funding those or is 3 some other -- 4 DR. BOWERS: A part of it. 5 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Thank you very much. 6 DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER SCHEIBLE: And in the 7 case of the Harbor Communities, the monitoring hasn't 8 started. But there's been a great deal of interaction 9 with the community in order to design, to inform them of 10 the program, to design the program to go to the right 11 places and address the issues that are community concerns. 12 So that work is being done as the program is being 13 designed. 14 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Thank you. 15 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: As a result of this 16 research, if we should conclude that the PM2.5 standard is 17 not adequately protective of human health, will we know 18 enough to determine what kind of an air quality standard 19 or emissions standard would be appropriate? 20 DR. BOWERS: I think that is probably down the 21 road a little bit yet. I don't know that we have -- we 22 certainly at the present time don't have enough 23 information. And these studies are just beginning to show 24 the information that we'll need, but we'll need some other 25 studies that are more designed toward regulations setting PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 18 1 when we get to that point. 2 DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER SCHEIBLE: So the first 3 use of the results will be tell us how careful we need to 4 be in terms of implementing existing PM controls to make 5 sure when we do that, we control not only mass but also 6 number and we control both the PM2.5 and ultra fine. 7 We're already pursuing that, but we haven't done so in a 8 regulatory sense yet. 9 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Are there any other 10 questions from the Board members? 11 Since we have no witnesses, that concludes the 12 public part of this item. 13 Does staff have any further comments? I assume 14 not. 15 Since this is not a regulatory item, it is not 16 necessary to officially close the record. 17 The next agenda item is 6-7-2, a briefing by the 18 Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach under joint Clean Air 19 Action Plans which was recently released for public 20 comment. This briefing was requested by Mayor Loveridge 21 at our April 20th, 2006, meeting in Long Beach because of 22 the obvious connection of the Port Plan to the 23 Comprehensive Emission Reduction Plan for goods movement 24 that this Board approved at the same meeting in April. 25 The ports are the most important partners in this effort PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 19 1 since they are the landlords overseeing all of the 2 activities that results in the emissions of concern. 3 For that reason, I am pleased to welcome Dr. 4 Ralph Appy, Director of Environmental Management at the 5 Port of Los Angeles and Dr. Robert Kanter, Director of 6 Planning and Environmental Affairs at the Port of Long 7 Beach to our meeting today. We look forward to your 8 presentation. 9 Since our April 20th meeting, there have been 10 several important developments concerning port-related 11 emissions. First, Governor Schwarzenegger and the 12 Legislature agreed on a series of bond proposals for the 13 November ballot, including $1 million for mitigating the 14 air pollution from goods movement activities throughout 15 the state. We hope that bond will be approved by the 16 voters so they can expedite cleanup at the ports and other 17 intermodal facilities. 18 The second major development was a corporate 19 action. On May 26th, the Maersk shipping line announced 20 it would begin using lower sulfur fuel in both the main 21 and auxiliary engines of its ships calling on California 22 ports starting immediately. Maersk recognizes protecting 23 public health is good for business and acted to make that 24 commitment real. 25 Then on June 28th, the ports of Los Angeles and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 20 1 Long Beach released their draft Clean Air Action Plan 2 after several months of intense effort to forge the 3 uniform and unified strategy. That was an important 4 accomplishment. 5 Ms. Witherspoon, would you please introduce this 6 item? 7 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Thank you, Dr. 8 Sawyer. 9 The comprehensive emission reduction plan for 10 goods movement that you approved into April envisioned a 11 major role for ports in meeting our public health goals. 12 The ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach have been active 13 for years in emissions management and recently stepped up 14 with wide ranging proposals to accelerate the move to 15 cleaner engines and fuels for all port-related emission 16 sources. 17 The San Pedro Bay Port Clean Air Action Plan 18 compliments ARB's efforts by focusing on what can be 19 accomplished via leases and tariffs which are the two main 20 tools at the port's disposal. The measures in the port's 21 Clean Air Action Plan generally parallel ARB's strategies 22 so some of the details differ. We will continue to work 23 together to ensure that our efforts are cohesive and 24 complimentary, especially where public dollars will play a 25 pivotal role. For example, we agree that cleaning up the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 21 1 fleet of port drayage trucks is a high priority for public 2 health and will require a significant incentive funding. 3 How to best accomplish this objective is an open question 4 we are currently discussing with all the stakeholders. 5 While a great deal more work will be needed to complete 6 and implement both the ARB's and the port's plan, we are 7 very excited about the progress to date. 8 With that introduction, I'll now call on Dr. Appy 9 and Dr. Kanter to present their joint San Pedro Bay Ports 10 Clean Air Action Plan. 11 DR. APPY: Dr. Sawyer, members of the Board, I'm 12 Ralph Appy, Director of Environmental Management for the 13 Port of Los Angeles. It's really a pleasure to be here to 14 brief you today on the San Pedro Bay -- and I want to 15 emphasize that -- San Pedro Bay Clean Air Action Plan. 16 You know, after four months of pretty intense work, we did 17 release this document on June 28th. And your staff and 18 others were present at that pretty auspicious occasion 19 down at the port of Los Angeles with the giant ships 20 moving behind the press conference that was going on. It 21 was very impressive. 22 And you know, you bring up Maersk. Just the 23 other day they were in their office and we were talking 24 with them and we're getting comments from them. And also 25 American President Line called the other day and said we PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 22 1 can do this. So we're hearing some good feedback at least 2 from some of our customers at least in regards to a good 3 portion of the components of this plan. 4 I want to also talk about the collaboration a 5 little bit. This plan was produced with a lot of help 6 with a lot of agencies' folks. ARB staff were there. A 7 lot of meetings. A lot of late nights. Quick reviews on 8 documentation. And also the South Coast Air Quality 9 Management District, U.S. EPA, and so they're all 10 participants in supporting the preparation of this plan. 11 I have to tell you there's something very fortifying as 12 well about working together with a multi-agency group 13 toward a common goal, which I think we all can see here 14 today your discussion of ultra fine particulates this 15 morning is particularly applicable here. 16 We've now held three of our four public 17 workshops. We have one remaining, which would be July 18 25th in San Pedro. The one the other evening Bob can 19 maybe talk to, but they had a very large participation at 20 that particulate meeting, and I think our one in San Pedro 21 will also be very well attended by the community. 22 I think I want to emphasize that the approach -- 23 that this is not just a port of L.A. plan, not just a port 24 of Los Angeles. It's a San Pedro Bay Plan. That is very 25 significant. Some view this as very unusual. But to be PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 23 1 honest with you, port of L.A. and Long Beach, although we 2 compete pretty fiercely for customers, we do a lot of work 3 together. Our staff meet together on at least a quarterly 4 basis to talk environmental issues. We have long range 5 time studies we've done together, our 20/20 plan. We also 6 worked on rail user facilities. We also recently signed 7 an agreement with Pacific Harbor Line to implement about a 8 $20 million program to bring in new diesel locomotives 9 into our switching yards throughout the ports. And that's 10 a major accomplishment. And also we're collaborators on 11 our vessel fee reduction program, which slows down vessels 12 to twelve-and-a-half knots from 24 miles outside the port. 13 So we have a history of this. So it's probably 14 not too surprising. But at the same time, it's very 15 significant, because the playing field is important. The 16 problems overlap. I think I'm getting -- we are hearing 17 that some of our customers want to see an even application 18 of these things and the port should not be playing off one 19 customer against another. So there is a lot of benefit to 20 that. 21 So this introduction, it's really a pleasure to 22 be here. I'd like to introduce Dr. Robert Kanter. He's 23 the Director of Planning and Environmental Affairs with 24 the Port of Long Beach. And he's our co-equal partner in 25 the advancement of the Clean Air Action Plan. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 24 1 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 2 presented as follows.) 3 MR. KANTER: Thank you, Dr. Sawyer, members of 4 the Board. It's indeed a pleasure to be here, and this is 5 a monumental occasion. I don't want to lose sight of the 6 fact this is a very significant effort. I'm going to go 7 fairly quickly through my presentation and allow some time 8 for question and answer. 9 --o0o-- 10 MR. KANTER: This all began with a Clean Port 11 Summit where our Board members met with Board members of 12 the port of Los Angeles and AQMD to really jump-start 13 this. Everybody came together and said let's do this. 14 Let's move together jointly. Let's advance this. It's 15 absolutely necessary. Air quality knows no boundary. And 16 it effects not only our communities, but the whole region. 17 With that being said, we were able to put 18 together a working group and very, very thankful for all 19 the support of the agencies. The port's staff were 20 involved, South Coast Air Quality Management District, 21 your staff, Environmental Protection Agency. And this was 22 truly a team effort. 23 --o0o-- 24 MR. KANTER: Obviously, the drivers for this 25 whole plan were to minimize health risk from port PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 25 1 operation. This has been our goal. We have a lot of 2 goods movement sources of air emissions, the vessels, 3 cargo handling equipment, trucks, and locomotives, as well 4 as harbor craft. And we definitely wanted to control 5 those emissions and the impact on the public. 6 We also want to accelerate a lot of the effort, 7 some of the efforts that you have initiated here and other 8 ones that we have initiated between the ports. As Ralph 9 said, we wanted to set realistic consistent project and 10 source specific standards and goals so that everybody 11 knows right up front where we're going and we're not 12 trying to play one port against the other or get around 13 with a claim that we didn't know we had to be there. 14 And for us a very important point is to enable 15 port development. We have been basically in suspended 16 animation with regard to port development and 17 redevelopment, which this is obviously part of our mission 18 as well to accommodate the international trade. It's so 19 important to the global economy both import and export. 20 And we must do that more cleanly. And in order to do 21 that, we've got to get our arms around air quality. 22 --o0o-- 23 MR. KANTER: The foundation for this is certainly 24 obvious. If we work cooperatively, we can pool our 25 resources and minimize these impacts. We have a lot of PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 26 1 efforts going on not only within the ports, your efforts, 2 as well as those of our individual tenants and customers. 3 This was important. We wanted to start with that as the 4 beginning and build upon that. What we didn't want to do 5 was reinvent the wheel. Obviously, the ports are very 6 sensitive to the fact we have not done our fair share. 7 That is, the maritime goods movement sector has not done 8 its share, as we're aware of the power plants, the 9 refineries and the like have been racheted down and 10 racheted down. It's certainly some of the sources. 11 Particularly vessels and the like have not been held to 12 the same standards to say the least. 13 We also want to make sure when we go forward with 14 redevelopment or new projects that we have certain risk 15 criteria that we will not exceed. So we will not 16 exacerbate a problem that exists. And in fact, we want to 17 get at that problem and go back to where we were, get the 18 air cleaned up pre-base line conditions. 19 I want to emphasize this is a living document. 20 We don't have all the answers. It's not perfect the first 21 time out. We will be refining and changing course and 22 adding to this as we grow. We've got many unanswered 23 questions in terms of the actual nuts and bolts. We 24 received quite a bit of good input so far from the public 25 and stakeholders, but we need more then that in order to PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 27 1 make this plan work. 2 --o0o-- 3 MR. KANTER: These are the sources as I mentioned 4 before. You're well aware of those. 5 --o0o-- 6 MR. KANTER: Also the pollutants. Since you're 7 very sophisticated, you already know this. I have used 8 this slide with some of our less sophisticated audiences 9 to make sure they understand what we're going after, the 10 diesel particulates, the NOx, and the SOX which is 11 primarily associated with vessels and the fuel they burn. 12 And want to get the basin back into federal attainment. 13 --o0o-- 14 MR. KANTER: This is a list of the control 15 measures we've attached to each of the various sources. 16 I'm not going to go through each one of these. But just 17 suffice to say each one of these is oriented towards a 18 special emission category. Heavy-duty vehicles, that is 19 our on-road trucks, OGV, ocean going vessels, cargo 20 handling equipment, CHE, harbor craft, and our rail. 21 Also I would like to draw your attention to the 22 bottom of that list where we have some very important 23 pieces. That is technology advancement, infrastructural 24 and operational improvements, and construction standards. 25 Besides all the ongoing operations, we have PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 28 1 construction of these very facilities going on. And we 2 want to make sure we get our arms around the emissions 3 from those sources. 4 --o0o-- 5 MR. KANTER: We've set three levels of standards, 6 ones that basically encompass the San Pedro Bay. And we 7 have actually project specific standards. These are going 8 to apply to projects that come up for redevelopment or new 9 projects. And then source specific standards. That is 10 for the cargo handling equipment, trucks, and the like 11 that we want to achieve and basically know the ones, the 12 regulations that are coming from your shop. 13 --o0o-- 14 MR. KANTER: So with regard to the San Pedro Bay 15 standards, obviously again with a goal of reducing risk to 16 the public from port-related toxins and preventing the 17 violations from the ambient air quality standards and 18 obviously their fair share. 19 For our project specific standards, we set our 20 health risk standard at ten in a million excess cancer 21 risk as a threshold. That means we want to keep any 22 project related emission below that. So measures 23 including most of the ones that are outlined in this Clean 24 Air Action Plan will be implemented to bring those risks 25 down below that standard. And in addition, for criteria PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 29 1 pollutants and others that we will apply all additional 2 feasible controls to get those down. And then as I 3 mentioned before, source specific standards. 4 --o0o-- 5 MR. KANTER: So for our first five years, we're 6 really focusing on heavy-duty trucks. We have a 7 combination of strategies that involve either retrofit 8 technologies or replacement of vehicles. We also have a 9 commitment to looking at alternative fuels. And in our 10 first year we intend to build and run an LNG maintenance 11 and fueling facility in the region of the ports. Again, 12 this is something that has not happened in the past, but 13 we need to have some options out there for those that 14 would operate cleaner fleets. 15 The ports together are committing $20 million per 16 year per port for five years. That's basically $200 17 million dedicated. A majority of that will be earmarked 18 for the truck -- the heavy-duty trucks because we believe 19 we have to get at those quickly. And we think we can do 20 that. 21 Our ocean going vessel measures, as Ralph 22 mentioned, we have for a number of years had an MOU in 23 place with you as a signatory to slow the vessels down 24 within 20 nautical miles of the port. This plan will 25 expand that going out to 40 nautical miles. As the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 30 1 current plan is, we have about a 68 to 70 percent 2 compliance. We want 100 percent compliance with this 3 vessel speed reduction. This is a painless way to get 4 emission reductions to the tune of about a ton and a half 5 per day. 6 The port of Los Angeles and the port of Long 7 Beach are committing to providing shore side electrical 8 power to plug in the vessels and eliminate what we call 9 hoteling emissions in the ports. The program is referred 10 to as AMP, alternative maritime power, in the port of Los 11 Angeles and shore side or cold ironing in the port of Long 12 Beach. Port of Los Angeles within the first years 13 committed to retrofit or equip 15 berths for shore side 14 electricity; the port of Long Beach, seven to 13 berths. 15 And you might ask why is Long Beach slightly less. And we 16 just don't have the electricity down there. We need to 17 bring a major source of electricity down in order to meet 18 the demands of this program. 19 So it's going to take a little bit longer. As 20 you all realize, Maersk's major announcement for the 21 ability to run their auxiliaries and main engines on 22 reduced sulfur content fuel was super. And we were in the 23 middle of preparing this plan and everybody turned to each 24 other at the table and said it's going to be our new 25 standard. So it's been adopted into this program and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 31 1 that's significant. Obviously, other NOX and PM controls 2 including retrofit technology will be applied to some of 3 the in-use vessels, just like we have the challenge of 4 looking at in-use truck fleets. We have the challenge of 5 looking at in-use fleets of vessels or ones that are very 6 frequent callers at the ports. And as a result, we need 7 to get them to other technologies. So we're looking at 8 alternative technologies. 9 With regard to the shore side electrical 10 infrastructure, the two ports in addition to the $100 11 million each that we have already contributed towards this 12 program, we will be investing another 144 million for the 13 installation of this shore side electrical infrastructure. 14 This is a significant commitment. This will move forward 15 and is moving forward as we speak. 16 --o0o-- 17 MR. KANTER: Railroads, as Ralph mentioned, we 18 recently consummated an agreement with the Pacific Harbor 19 Line which operates in the two ports for building trains 20 and their locomotives. Some of them 30, 40 years old are 21 all going to be replaced. One-hundred percent replacement 22 with Tier II locomotives. 23 In addition, they will be testing a diesel hybrid 24 for a year, and an LNG powered locomotive for a year in 25 port service. It's a pretty unique service and duty PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 32 1 cycle. So we must verify just how those are going to 2 work, but we are optimistic that is going to work well. 3 The two ports are contributing $5 million each, and the 4 AQMD distributed over $3 million. And Pacific Harbor Line 5 will contribute when it's all said and done in excess of 6 $12 million. We're looking at a figure close to $25 7 million to replace the entire fleet of locomotives. This 8 is significant, and we will continue to improve benefits 9 as they operate these into the future. 10 Cargo handling equipment. With your help over 11 the last couple of years, we retrofit 100 percent of the 12 existing fleet of cargo handling equipment in the port of 13 Long Beach, and L.A. has installed a similar program to 14 retrofit with diesel oxidation catalysts to transition 15 many of these cargo handling equipment to emulsified 16 diesel. We're not going to stop there. This is -- we 17 look at this as an internal phase. And through this Clean 18 Air Action Plan, we will turn over these fleets to cleaner 19 operating vehicles. 20 We also have harbor craft standards with Carl 21 Moyer funds and the like with many of the tugs and other 22 work boats in the harbor have been retrofit with new 23 engines, and that will continue as they identify 24 additional sources. 25 Finally, the ports are -- well, actually, I have PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 33 1 two more things. The infrastructure improvements in 2 on-dock rail yards which are much more efficient and allow 3 us to move cargo more efficiently, grade separations like 4 that we'll continue in both ports. 5 And one of the key areas that we are constantly 6 facing the challenge is evaluation of new technology. We 7 know the CARB has a process for doing that, and we are 8 working very closely with vendors and other people with 9 ideas to improve emission reduction strategies for all the 10 different source categories. And so the two ports are 11 committing $15 million to this effort and working with 12 vendors and manufacturers to test these types of 13 strategies. 14 --o0o-- 15 MR. KANTER: Again, just on the technology, we 16 want to combine our expertise with that of the regulatory 17 agencies, with CARB and the two ports. We're going to 18 look at some of the out-of-the-box suggestions, LEV II, 19 and other ways to move cargo more cleanly. And so we'll 20 be looking at ways to get at that and get away from the 21 traditional means of moving cargo. 22 We have to report on our success and progress. 23 And it's going to return expanded inventory, and that is a 24 significant labor of love as your staff is well aware. 25 We're going to work on ways to make that inventory more PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 34 1 efficient so that we can on a more regular basis get the 2 reporting and recording. And we have, like I said, the 3 commitment of $50 million over five years for that. 4 --o0o-- 5 MR. KANTER: How are we going to implement this? 6 This is always the question. Our primary leverage points 7 are through lease requirements and tariffs. There are 8 some other areas that I'll touch on briefly. But these 9 requirements are our strongest area. This is where 10 someone either seeks an adjustment to their existing land 11 holdings or leases with the port. Their lease is up for 12 renewal expansion of land. This opens up their lease. 13 This gives them an opportunity to impose this. 14 We have recently demonstrated that we are doing 15 this. And just about two months ago and just last month, 16 our international transportation services, many of the 17 measures identified in the Clean Air Action Plan have been 18 imposed through those lease openings and that will 19 continue and be expanded upon by our Board. 20 Tariff changes. Tariffs are a particulate way 21 that we have the ability to impose requirements. Tariff 22 set the rates that is paid on cargo and the like. But 23 also gives us a way to modify behavior. For instance, we 24 recently adopted an incentive tariff. That is, for those 25 who comply with the vessel speed reduction, we will give PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 35 1 them a reduced dockage fee, which is the fee they pay to 2 tie up in our port. This is a monitoring incentive, also 3 a way to give recognition. So there is ways to use 4 tariffs to encourage good behavior so to speak. 5 CEQA, as I mentioned earlier, we will be coming 6 forward, both ports, with new projects in order to meet 7 those project goals. The operations are going to have to 8 be below the standards sets or reach the standards set by 9 our health risk analysis. In order to achieve that, we 10 will adopt certain of these measures, cold ironing, cargo 11 handling equipment, this is at a certain standard and so 12 on. Those will be incorporated into our CEQA document and 13 they will be rolled into our lease requirements. So 14 before a project and a new lease is issued, those 15 standards will be set. 16 Other incentives can be used in terms of monetary 17 incentives. There are voluntary efforts going on within 18 our terminals. We have several of our terminal operators, 19 as L.A. does, that have come forward with their own plans, 20 buying on-road certified engines right now for their cargo 21 handling equipment, for instance. We're glad many are 22 getting the message that we mean business and that they're 23 taking this action voluntarily. There's other 24 suggestions, capital lease back, credit trading program, 25 which has been brought forward which we still think has PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 36 1 some promise as an application and government backed loan 2 guarantees. 3 --o0o-- 4 MR. KANTER: The estimated emission reductions, I 5 won't go through this laundry list. I'll go right down to 6 the bottom line. We expect that these emission reductions 7 within our first five years will be achieved. And we are 8 determined to make that happen. Diesel particulate at 9 1,186 tons per year; tons of NOX at 12,148; and SOx at 10 2,433. These are ambitious goals. We recognize that. 11 But we're serious about that. We are ready to implement 12 this plan. 13 --o0o-- 14 MR. KANTER: These are the funding commitments. 15 Again to reiterate, the ports of L.A. and Long Beach have 16 committed $100 million of new money and in addition to 17 already committed money previously for our cold ironing 18 and infrastructure. So you're looking at close to $400 19 million of commitment. The AQMD has committed $36 20 million. 21 Obviously, everybody is talking about their fair 22 share of the bond funding. We believe a large portion of 23 that should go to this effort. We believe it benefits the 24 state and the nation. And we also believe it can serve as 25 a leverage point. That is, once we get bond funding, we PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 37 1 can leverage that money by getting additional industry 2 participation and provide expanded benefits. 3 --o0o-- 4 MR. KANTER: The monitoring and reporting, as I 5 indicated earlier, will be important. We have both real 6 time monitoring stations that have expanded into both 7 ports, and that has been integrated in and will continue 8 to be integrated into the AQMD monitoring station in the 9 region. The monitoring updating to our Board, to you, and 10 our City Council and the L.A. City Council will happen at 11 the end of each year if not more frequently. And the idea 12 is to hold us accountable for the emission reductions that 13 we expect to get out of this plan. 14 --o0o-- 15 MR. KANTER: As Ralph indicated, we have had a 16 series of public meetings. We have one more remaining. 17 We have received some written comments, and we expect a 18 host of them by the end of our period. In September, we 19 hope to bring this to our Boards for adoption and move 20 forward into the more difficult phase. This is the easy 21 part, and now we need to get into the implementation. So 22 I thank you very much. We are here to answer any 23 questions that we can. 24 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you very much. 25 DR. APPY: I have one kind of comment to make at PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 38 1 the end of this. We can't forget the international 2 ramifications of this. Some people look out and see an 3 ocean and others see a highway. Our world is shrinking. 4 And it's not by luck that this has been published in five 5 different languages. And recently our director returned 6 from a European trip, and I've been on a similar trip and 7 also a trip to Asia where we met with heavy industry 8 manufacturers, engine builders, ports, and operators in 9 regards to how can we work together to get the word out. 10 And so we shouldn't really forget that. 11 I gave a talk the other day for the 12 Transportation Research Board in San Diego, and the 13 moderator of that particular panel was the port of New 14 York/New Jersey. And the first comment out of his 15 mouth -- I gave a briefing on this -- was that, well, I 16 guess a new bar has been set. And so I think this is a 17 plan, word gets out fast. We're hearing lots of comments 18 from other counties, and we shouldn't forget our trading 19 partners. 20 This year and hopefully in December we are going 21 to launch the first annual meeting of the Pacific Rim Port 22 Collaborative, which we'll be cosponsoring with us and 23 Shanghai and that should be in L.A. So we're excited 24 about that. It's going to include all the Pacific Rim 25 ports. So that's the other component that's really not PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 39 1 here that shouldn't be forgotten. 2 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you very much. 3 Do the Board members have questions? 4 Ms. Berg. 5 BOARD MEMBER BERG: Thank you very much for 6 taking the time, and the presentation was very good. Also 7 it is a yoman's job. When we all started looking at this 8 and you look at the awesomeness of the undertaking, this 9 is pretty exciting that you actually have a document as it 10 should be a living document, but that we have something to 11 go forward on. 12 I just have a couple of quick questions for you. 13 I was excited to see the public participation, because as 14 we have learned on a couple issues over the years, it is 15 so critical to keep getting their input. And so I was 16 really pleased about that. 17 I had a question on the estimated emission 18 reduction. Do you have a percentage off of the base line 19 which these numbers represent? And is the base line 2000? 20 MR. KANTER: If I could have one of my staff here 21 to address part of that. I don't think we have -- 22 MR. APPY: I would say the one difference is we 23 get into the base line because of the problem with the no 24 net increase established the 2001 base line. And that one 25 was in fact -- you know, we looked at that base line and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 40 1 the percentages. We did this one a little differently, 2 and Thomas can relate too. We did do some comparisons, 3 but we really went after how much can we use and how 4 quickly can we do at. So Thomas. 5 MR. JELLEMIC: From the base line, it achieves a 6 50 percent reduction in diesel particulate matter and a 45 7 percent reduction in NOX and 40 percent reduction in 8 sulfur. The base line is based off of 2004 base line for 9 the ports. And there's a detailed chapter in the 10 technical report, Section 6, which goes over those 11 emission reductions and makes comparisons to the Goods 12 Movement Plan, the no net increase plan, and this plan. 13 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: If the Board 14 members will recall, one goal of ARB's emission reduction 15 plan was to return to 2001 emission levels by 2010. And 16 because the ports have such a big emphasis on early 17 actions, we haven't done all the calculations, but I think 18 they line up with our goals. And our plan if implemented 19 successfully got a better return than 2001 levels by 2010. 20 And then our end target or the longer term target was 85 21 percent emission reduction, risk reduction by 2020. It's 22 a good end point. 23 BOARD MEMBER BERG: Wonderful. Thank you for 24 clarifying that for me. 25 And then my other question was when we look at PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 41 1 the dollars that are being committed which is just shy of 2 400 million, how much do we think this project in total, 3 what kind of dollars are we looking at over the five years 4 when we're also looking at going out for bond and other 5 funding? 6 DR. KANTER: I think that's a real good question. 7 I'll start the answer, and I think Thomas can complement 8 it if he thinks necessary. 9 But we're in the multi millions of dollars for 10 this program. We don't have our arms around the actual 11 industry investment. That is, when we, for instance, 12 provide cold ironing infrastructure at the berth for a 13 vessel to plug in, that vessel has to be equipped to plug 14 in. And so the retrofit or fitting or the manufacturing 15 of new vessels to accommodate that, those costs have not 16 been calculated. We have done estimates based on actual 17 case studies. But again you're talking about a billions 18 of dollars of investment from the industry side as well. 19 BOARD MEMBER BERG: Thank you. 20 I'm sorry. I do have one other question, and 21 that is on the electricity. Sometimes I feel like we're, 22 you know, damned if we do, damned if we don't. As we have 23 experienced over the last week or so very warm weather, 24 and we're hearing on the news about the shortage of 25 electricity or the monitoring of electricity. And I PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 42 1 personally have some friends where the electrical company 2 has purchased back their electricity for the day and have 3 shut down their plant. If we're going to bring more 4 electricity needs to the port, what's our plan? 5 DR. APPY: We have a little different situation. 6 We have different electricity providers. So I'll let Bob 7 talk to this. As our provider, we have the Department of 8 Water and Power. In our discussions with them, they have 9 the capacity to deliver the power that we need for the 10 program that we have laid out in front of us. 11 Interestingly, you should see when I went to 12 Shanghai, one of their big problems with that is because 13 their economy is growing so incredible, they're afraid if 14 they plug in a ship the lights will go out. So that is a 15 real concern in a lot of areas. I know Long Beach has a 16 different concern. 17 I should tell you that another cost to maybe not 18 think about, but another cost to our customers is a 19 differential between the cost of fuel which used to be 20 bunker, it was what they run in their auxiliaries at 21 berth, and the cost electricity is much higher. 22 The one thing we see a benefit is as we install 23 more and more electricity, our power rates are probably 24 going to come down. So sometime in the future between the 25 fact that we're going to be requiring cleaner fuels, more PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 43 1 expensive fuels in our auxiliaries at berth, your rule 2 helps that. It increases that differential and then runs 3 down the power cost. So hopefully out there 10, 15 years, 4 we may see an equilibrium of those costs as well. 5 DR. KANTER: I would just say we've been working 6 very closely with Southern California Edison is the major 7 provider for us. Although I think their general feeling 8 is they do have capacity to handle the loads, these are 9 intermittent loads that are going to be required. They're 10 not continuous loads. Still, when you get into the 11 situation as we have during this hot spell throughout the 12 state, it does raise that question. And we have not 13 really got a satisfactory answer yet as to whether we'll 14 be able to handle the loads during peak usage throughout 15 the state. 16 DR. APPY: Kind of an echo to that is that when 17 we do the power hook-up, you don't think about all the 18 details, but one of them is what's called cogeneration 19 agreement. Because when the ships hook up, there's two 20 ways of doing it. You can go black; turn it off, and turn 21 the other one on, which is what China Shipping did. But 22 the others are synchronized. So during the synchronizing, 23 there's a brief period when the power is one, they're 24 synchrony. So you have to enter a cogeneration agreement. 25 One of the jokes going around is if there is a power PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 44 1 failure or need for energy, we just fire up our ships. 2 They can generate the power and put it over the grid back 3 to the city. So not sure we want to do that but -- 4 BOARD MEMBER BERG: Thank you. 5 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Ms. D'Adamo. 6 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Well, this is very 7 impressive. Just want to thank you for your hard work and 8 also acknowledge staff, and I understand this is a 9 multi-agency effort. So job well done. 10 A question in terms of the shear numbers. 11 Looking at slide ten, replacement, retrofit of frequent, 12 semi-frequent callers. First of all, what's the 13 difference between frequent and semi-frequent? How are 14 you classified as semi-frequent? And what are we talking 15 about in terms of actual numbers? 16 DR. KANTER: That's a really good question. What 17 we did is took records to get a handle of actual calls in 18 the terminals to see how frequently we have license plates 19 returning and so on. We had divided it up into the 20 frequent flyers are guys that come here about once a day 21 or at least three times a week. For the semi-frequent 22 fliers, you've got once every other day. That combination 23 equates to about 16- to 17,000 trucks that we believe will 24 need to be either retrofit or replaced. So that's a huge 25 number. And even with the contributions that the ports PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 45 1 are committing at this point in time, we will not have 2 adequate funding just out of our pot alone. We definitely 3 need to get some bond money and then leverage that in 4 other ways to get at all those trucks. So that is a huge 5 number. 6 DR. APPY: And the strategy there is there are 7 40,000 unique license plates out of a million. So there's 8 40,000 unique trucks calling at the port over that time 9 period. So we said how do we get at this? What are the 10 ones we need to target the most? And also to target those 11 that are the more frequent callers tend to be the oldest 12 trucks there because quite often those are the long haul 13 trucks that can't be used for going across the nation so 14 they go into this very local short service. So that's the 15 other way of getting all those frequent callers. They're 16 also the trucks that we need to really remove from the 17 road to quickest. 18 DR. KANTER: I should add when we're talking 19 about frequent and semi-frequent callers, you're talking 20 about 80 percent of the truck trips. So that's a 21 significant target audience. 22 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Similar question on harbor 23 craft. And then also with regard to both areas. It 24 sounds like you're going to be capturing the major 25 component and especially going after the more dirty PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 46 1 diesels. But what about beyond the five-year plan? Are 2 you starting to have those discussions in an attempt to 3 capture the entire fleet? 4 DR. KANTER: Well, I think there's an intent. 5 Certainly from staff's perspective, this will role over 6 past the five years. We want to have our near-term goals 7 and start working towards those. But as we said, it's a 8 living document, living plan. We're going to go beyond 9 that. So I think we will be tackling those larger 10 numbers. 11 We did have a question about the harbor craft, 12 and maybe I can just pass that to Thomas here. 13 MR. JELLEMIC: With regard to the harbor craft, 14 one of our -- we're lucky that Carl Moyer has repowered 15 many of the tugs and harbor craft that operate in San 16 Pedro Bay. 17 Our goal right now through our inventory efforts 18 and working with South Coast and CARB is to identify any 19 remaining harbor craft that have not been repowered. 20 Either find funding or get them into the Carl Moyer 21 program to get them repowered. And then for the future 22 look towards new EPA standards for category one and two 23 engines, marine engines. And within a short period of 24 time of those being promulgated, get the harbor crafts 25 repowered once again. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 47 1 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: I want to remind 2 the Board about our own regulatory hearing schedule. 3 Staff will be bringing to you a cargo handling retrofit 4 replacement rule later this year which would put the 5 burden on those who own those vessels to trade out the 6 engines or retrofit them or -- I'm sorry -- harbor craft. 7 So there is a private participation to be accounted for. 8 But as we look at the possibility of having the 9 bond and what kinds of ships those vessels are, it 10 occurred to us that some members in the fishing industry 11 might not be capitalized in such a position that they can 12 change the engines out. There might be other low wealth 13 types of applications where we would need additional 14 subsidies beyond what we already do through Carl Moyer. 15 And so we sort of mentally set aside some portion of the 16 bond money to bring into harbor craft replacement. 17 And on trucks, staff is also bringing to the 18 Board a comprehensive regulation for retrofit and 19 retirement of older emitting trucks statewide. And a key 20 policy issue will be which of those need to be 21 incentivized and which of those can be regulated. How do 22 we split the financial burden between the State and 23 industry on making that transition? 24 DR. KANTER: I would just add that one area you 25 can really help us a lot and I think one of our biggest PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 48 1 challenges is certainly with the heavy duty trucks, get 2 them into this program, to get them into the replacement 3 and retrofit program. So regulations that would prod 4 them, push them gently in the direction, or maybe less 5 than gently to get into our program will be very much 6 welcome. We're going to need that help in order to make 7 this a reality, to make it happen within the next five 8 years. Thank you. 9 DR. APPY: The focus on the trucks is important, 10 because they're particularly difficult not only from their 11 diffuse nature but also the owner/operator relationship. 12 They're like individual companies running around out 13 there. Very difficult source to get at. That's why we 14 applied our incentive here to look to our customers to 15 take care of our ships and the yard equipment and those 16 things. But they have no control themselves over the 17 trucks. And so what we're doing in our environmental 18 documents, it's difficult for us to tell our tenants you 19 have to have only clean trucks calling at the terminal. 20 It's probably not appropriate. So that's why we're really 21 focusing our incentive programs on the trucks as well. 22 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Last question. I think 23 this is probably more for staff. Recognizing the unique 24 circumstances at these two ports especially with the 25 public interest, what is being done in other ports? Are PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 49 1 you starting to see a rippling effect, an interest in 2 perhaps entering into similar agreements elsewhere? 3 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: We absolutely 4 are. There was an announcement in the paper just the 5 other day about PG&E wanting to fund electrification of 6 cruise ships calling in the bay area. U.S. EPA has been 7 active in the port of Oakland and has a diesel cleanup 8 project there for some time. We included trucks moving in 9 and out of the port of Oakland as a crucial emission 10 source that the community wants abated as quickly as 11 possible, and we're sort of looking at the rail operations 12 there as well. 13 We're also doing a risk assessment for the port 14 of Oakland as we did for L.A./Long Beach so that we can 15 get a better handle on a proportionate share of emission 16 sources and tailor our strategies. And the Bay Area 17 district is very active with us. 18 There's less going on at the port of Stockton. 19 We're more focused on what percentage of the truck money 20 might flow into the valley. And I should say if the bond 21 passes, there needs to be implementing legislation 22 establishing the formulas by which it will be expended. 23 So although we have a lot of ideas and the ports of L.A. 24 and Long Beach have a lot of ideas, there'll be a 25 political process in part to guide us. The bond language PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 50 1 is very broad. It just says the Air Resources Board shall 2 use these funds to mitigate impacts of goods movement 3 throughout California. And I think we'll get more 4 guidance than that before we have the money in our hands 5 to spend. 6 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Ms. Riordan. 7 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 8 I, too, would like to commend you on your action 9 plan and really appreciate the in-depth work that you've 10 done and the collaborative work. 11 My hope is that you'll come back, that you'll 12 have the time to keep us informed about the progress. 13 Because I think if the collaborative work continues -- and 14 I know it works at the staff level. But sometimes the 15 Boards need to hear it as well. We need to be as helpful 16 as we can to your efforts. And so the communication will 17 be necessary to achieve that. And so I look forward to 18 maybe having another scheduled information item such as 19 this in perhaps about a year I hope and that you would 20 kind of keep us up to date on what's happening. 21 DR. KANTER: You have our commitment on that. 22 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you. 23 I would now like to call witnesses who have 24 signed up to speak on this item. 25 Dr. Wallerstein. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 51 1 DR. WALLERSTEIN: Good morning, Chairman Sawyer 2 and members of the Board. 3 As you've been hearing from the staff, we really 4 are on the edge of a new era in pollution control in the 5 ports. And the twin ports deserve a tremendous amount of 6 credit for the leadership they are now showing in the 7 pollution control. 8 I also wanted to note for you this morning that I 9 think this isn't clearly something that happened by 10 accident and that some of your previous actions and 11 actions through the work of your staff have helped in a 12 very big way in making this a reality. If we look at the 13 Roseville risk assessment, if we look at the risk 14 assessment you did for twin ports, if we look at your 15 Cargo Handling Rule, if we look at your Goods Movement 16 Emission Reduction Plan, I think those were all seeds that 17 have now yielded this through the ports. And so I think a 18 great deal of credit is deserved here and to your staff 19 who has worked cooperatively with the port staff in the 20 preparation of the plan, especially Mike Scheible who 21 spent many, many hours on this. 22 So I just wanted to note that for the Board and 23 again to congratulate the twin ports for their work. 24 Thank you. 25 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 52 1 Ms. Williams. 2 MS. WILLIAMS: Good afternoon. Stephanie 3 Williams of the California Trucking Association. 4 We'd like to be a bigger part of this process. 5 We've been a little bit excluded from the San Pedro/L.A. 6 ports complex and what they're doing with the trucks. We 7 have some valuable information on the trucks that operate 8 in the ports. Our membership represents 80 percent of 9 those vehicles that operate in and out of the port. 10 There are 12,000 vehicles that are allowed to 11 operate in and out of ports. They are registered 12 nationally with a group called IANA for purposes of 13 insurance, so there's a finite number. And that is 14 including Oakland and the Los Angeles area. So the 15 numbers are a little bit overstated. 16 Also these are intestate trucks. Anyone can 17 service the ports. The retailers procure trucking 18 services through brokers, freight forwarders, and many 19 other customs oriented companies. And this plan doesn't 20 reflect any of that. 21 So I think rather than run out with a plan that 22 doesn't do anything and can't be implemented, they should 23 sit down with a working group with the actual trucking 24 companies, because we believe we found a way to solve this 25 problem statewide and also control the negative impacts of PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 53 1 possible cabitauge when Mexico is allowed to service 2 California ports. 3 The only legal way to go after the interstate 4 trucks is registration prohibition. If people don't have 5 tags to come onto the roads and paid fees, they can't come 6 onto California roads. The Air Resources Board has no 7 authority over mobile sources. You can go to port and try 8 to get it and do all the things that take ten years, but 9 there is a foolproof legal way to do this. It would be a 10 level playing field for all trucking companies. No truck 11 would be able to enter California or have tags to enter 12 California without having the proper engine, model year. 13 And it could be enforced without any cost through the 14 three ways we register trucks: One, intestate, DMV 15 registration, which are trucks that never leave the state; 16 two, intestate registration, California-based, those 17 people who have tags to operate in and out of other 18 states, but home is California; and three, those trucks 19 which total 1.7 million compared to our 400,000 which are 20 operating from other states and pay fees to operate in 21 California. 22 This is a very simple thing to do. It's a 23 legislative solution. And the California Trucking 24 Association will walk hand in hand to the Capitol with the 25 Air Resources Board to do that. But short of that, the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 54 1 other plans which are unfair to small businesses would 2 only allow capitalized companies to come to ports and 3 would surely go to ports. They're unfair. The people 4 that have been sweating blood and tears in the ports for 5 the last 20 years are finally getting a little bit of 6 attention, and things are getting ready to get better. 7 Why would the people that have been sweating the blood and 8 tears be excluded from operating at ports now that it's 9 getting popular to clean it up? 10 We're asking you to do what is a level playing 11 field, fair to everybody, and will actually get clean air 12 starting January 1st, 2007, instead of ten years from now 13 when people figure out who has the authority to do what. 14 Thank you. 15 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you. 16 Ms. Witherspoon, does staff have any further 17 comments? 18 DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER SCHEIBLE: I'd just like 19 to say that we've established a great working relationship 20 with the ports and at the districts and U.S. EPA. We're 21 going to continue that. The plan adopted by the Board and 22 the plan proposed by the ports overlap in many, many 23 areas. They are different in some areas. Where they 24 overlap, they're compatible and complimentary. Things 25 like where we've adopted rules, the ports have taken those PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 55 1 and said when we do leases, we're going to do better than 2 that. The rule is a base. 3 We're proceeding in other areas where the port 4 has laid out measure for cold ironing, for trucks, for 5 ships. We're going to continue to develop our measures, 6 continue to look at rules. But we're going to do it in a 7 way where we say how do we complement each other, how do 8 we make our rule and their measure work better? And if we 9 become convinced that the rule is unnecessary, then we 10 don't need to pursue that so long as emission reduction 11 gets accomplished. So we're laying a foundation here to 12 go forward. 13 Major area that we addressed that the ports 14 haven't addressed so far, haven't started, is what about 15 the out years? They wanted to stress action and what can 16 happen in the next five years. A lot of things we need to 17 happen with the ships can begin in the next five years but 18 won't be completed in that time. But I just feel like the 19 plan represents great progress. We need to expand it to 20 some of the other areas. And we need to look at San Diego 21 and cruise terminals there and expanding business and see 22 how we can clean that up. We need to look at the Bay Area 23 and some of the other ports and jump off. But we have a 24 lot of work ahead of us, but I think we made great 25 progress to date. So I want to give my compliments to the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 56 1 two ports, the district, and EPA for their efforts. 2 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: And I just want 3 to add we're happy to work with the Trucking Association. 4 We have had several meetings with retailers and smaller 5 fleet companies. But the Trucking Association is a 6 critical participant and so are labor representatives. 7 And we don't get the drayage measure done or our own 8 private truck rule without their help and cooperation. So 9 we're looking forward to that. 10 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you. 11 I'd like to add my own commendation to all of the 12 parties who have been working together on this. It's not 13 always that we get the South Coast Air Quality Management 14 District and our own people, the ports, and others in EPA 15 working together so effectively. And I hope this is a 16 model for future activities. 17 Since this is not a regulatory item, it is not 18 necessary to officially close the record. 19 The next agenda item, 6-7-3, is the research plan 20 for the current fiscal year which will be presented 21 jointly by staff and the Research Screening Committee. 22 But before we take that up, we have a special 23 order of business in honor of a very special man, the 24 Board members' former colleague and friend, Dr. William 25 Friedman. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 57 1 I would like to welcome his wife Denise Friedman 2 to our meeting today. Denise, thank you so much for 3 joining us. 4 Dr. Friedman, a pediatric cardiologist, was the 5 Board's physician representative who during his tenure 6 played a major role in guiding the Air Resources Board 7 Health Research Program. His commitment to the citizens 8 of California was evident through his personal and 9 professional interest in the Board's health research, 10 especially in studies related to children's health. Dr. 11 Friedman's fellow Board members relied on him for his 12 medical expertise, his clinical experience, and his 13 no-nonsense approach to tackling public health problems. 14 When Dr. Friedman was present, there was very 15 little doubt where the truth lay, as he was quick to point 16 out the fallacy of arguments against taking action to 17 protect public health. His leadership and tenacity in 18 executing projects was valued by the Air Resources Board 19 staff and the researchers. Dr. Friedman not only ensured 20 that our research concepts were sound, but they were 21 executed and completed in a timely fashion. 22 Dr. Friedman advocated the health benefit of Air 23 Resources Board regulations be prominently featured in 24 staff reports, press releases, and other documents so that 25 the public would understand the significance of what we PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 58 1 did. 2 Those who have had the privilege of knowing Dr. 3 Friedman away from the dais know that he was unfailingly 4 kind, funny, curious about the world, and enthusiastic 5 about being part of it. He radiated life and good humor 6 and is sorely missed. The Board is sincerely greatful for 7 all of Dr. Friedman's personal and professional 8 contributions to the state of California. 9 In his honor, the Air Resources Board will 10 henceforth dedicate our annual Health Research Program to 11 his memory. All of our solicitations and awards for 12 health research proposals will bear his name and will ask 13 our contractors to acknowledge Dr. Friedman in their final 14 reports and resulting publications. In that way, the Air 15 Resources Board will keep Dr. Friedman's spirit alive to 16 inspire other medical researchers to follow in his giant 17 footsteps. 18 Now if we can all observe a moment of silence to 19 remember Dr. Friedman. Thank you very much. 20 (Thereupon a moment of silence was observed.) 21 (Applause) 22 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: I would like now to 23 introduce the item before the Board today, the Air 24 Pollution Research Plan for Fiscal Year 2006-2007. 25 I want to welcome the members of the Research PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 59 1 Screening Committee who could join us today and to tell 2 you that it is our honor to have you here with us. We 3 will have an opportunity to introduce you individually in 4 a few moments. 5 The Board's Research Program has been and 6 continues to be an integral part of the Board's success in 7 combating air pollution. A solid research foundation 8 provides the underlying basis for the Board's regulatory 9 and policy decision. The contributions of the Research 10 Program has made to the scientific community in 11 understanding the health impacts of air pollution, how to 12 reduce personal exposure, and how to control and reduce 13 emissions has been noteworthy. 14 This success is due largely to the leadership and 15 commitment of the Research Screening Committee. The 16 various disciplines that the Committee members represent 17 reflects the complexity of California's air pollution 18 problem. And we must continue to address the problem from 19 all angles and perspectives. I sincerely thank you for 20 your dedication to the Committee and to the mission of the 21 Air Resources Board. 22 I would now like to ask Ms. Witherspoon to 23 introduce the item and begin the staff's presentation. 24 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Thank you, Dr. 25 Sawyer. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 60 1 Today, we will present for your consideration the 2 Board's proposed research for this fiscal year. The 3 Research Screening Committee has guided the success of our 4 Research Program, and we're very appreciative of the 5 assessments they provide. At this point, I would like to 6 introduce Professor Hal Cota, Chairman of the Research 7 Screening Committee who will present the Committee to you 8 and provide comments on this year's research highlights. 9 PROFESSOR COTA: Thank you, Ms. Witherspoon. And 10 good morning, Chairman Sawyer and members of the Board. 11 It's a pleasure for us to be here as you consider 12 the 2006-2007 research plan. After the Committee 13 introduces themselves, I'd like to make a few brief 14 comments. And I'll start the introduction. 15 I currently am Director of Cal Poly's EPA 16 Training Center and Professor Emeritus in Environmental 17 Engineering at Cal Poly. My research efforts include air 18 pollution, noise, and it's control on measurement. 19 Now I'm going to ask the Committee that's here to 20 introduce themselves. 21 DR. LIPSETT: Good morning, Dr. Sawyer and 22 members of the Board. I'm Michael Lipsett. For about 15 23 or 16 years, I was with the Office of Environmental Health 24 Hazard Assessment and actually provided the standards 25 recommendations to you. I'm now at the Department of PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 61 1 Health Services. I specialize mainly in air pollution and 2 epidemiology. 3 PROFESSOR WILLIAMS: I'm Forman Williams, 4 Professor of Engineering, Physics, and Combustion in the 5 Department of Mechanical Aerospace Engineering at the 6 University of California San Diego. 7 PROFESSOR COTA: And there's about eight of our 8 Committee members who weren't able to be here today, and 9 I'd like to just read their names and let you know kind of 10 what they do. 11 John Balmes is Professor of Medicine at the 12 University of California San Francisco and Chief of the 13 Division of Occupational Environmental Medicine at 14 San Francisco General Hospital and a recognized world 15 renowned expert in asthma and clinical research. 16 Robert Devlin is Chief of Clinical Research 17 at EPA National Health Lab where he leads science 18 responsible for assessing the effects of environmental 19 pollutants on humans. 20 Barbara Finlayson-Pitts is Professor of Chemistry 21 at the University of California Irvine and is an expert in 22 atmospheric chemistry. 23 Steven Jafar is a retired supervisor of the 24 environmental impacts group in the research laboratory of 25 Ford Motor Company. His area of interest is atmospheric PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 62 1 chemistry and motor vehicle emissions. 2 Dr. Chung Liu is Deputy Executive Officer and 3 Chief Scientist in the Science and Technology Division at 4 the South Coast Air Quality Management District. And his 5 interest is in air quality modeling, technology 6 advancement, and air quality planning. 7 Dr. Rachell Morello-Frosch for is an Assistant 8 Professor at the Center of Environmental Studies in the 9 Department of Community Health School of Medicine at Brown 10 University. Her interest is in environmental justice. 11 Dr. Tracy Thatcher was formery at the Indoor Air 12 Department of Lawrence Berkeley Labs and now is an 13 Assistant Professor of Environmental Engineering at Cal 14 Poly. 15 And finally Michael Prather is an ex officio 16 member of the Committee, and he's Chair Professor at Earth 17 Systems Science at UC Irvine. And again, his primary 18 interest is in atmospheric chemistry and atmospheric 19 modeling. 20 So we have a wide group of expertise that 21 participates on this Committee. And indeed this Research 22 Program, as we've seen earlier this morning, is really one 23 of the outstanding ones in the country. And some of the 24 reasons for its success really include the direction of 25 the Chair of the Research Division Bart Croes and all of PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 63 1 the Research Division staff. This team works to identify 2 key air pollution issues that require research in 3 California. 4 Another reason for its success is the fact that 5 the top researchers in the state and around the country 6 are invited to participate in the program. 7 I'd like to thank all the members of the Research 8 Screening Committee for their efforts this past year to 9 ensure the RFPs were clear, the best researchers 10 participated, and finally the results were expressed 11 clearly. Actually, the Committee members frequently take 12 extra assignments on request of the staff. 13 Finally, I want to thank the Board for their 14 continuing support of the Research Program, because the 15 results of the program assist in decisions involving new 16 directions and air pollution control and ensure healthy 17 air for all of us who live in California. 18 At this time, if there are no further questions, 19 I'd like to turn the meeting over to Annmarie to continue 20 the presentation. 21 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 22 presented as follows.) 23 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST MORA: Good morning, Dr. 24 Sawyer and members of the Board. Today, I'm presenting 25 the planned air pollution research for fiscal year PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 64 1 2006-2007 which supports the Board's mission to conduct 2 research into the causes of and solutions to air 3 pollution. 4 The plan is comprised of projects that meet the 5 scientific and technical needs of the Board's future 6 regulatory and policy decisions. If approved today, these 7 projects will be developed into full proposals for review 8 by the Research Screening Committee and will be brought to 9 the Board for approval over the next few months. 10 --o0o-- 11 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST MORA: The process for 12 developing the annual plan starts with the general 13 solicitation inviting and encouraging stakeholders to 14 contribute ideas for project consideration. Typically, 15 members of the public, the academic community, and ARB 16 staff submit research ideas. To aid in the evaluation, 17 the Board's Executive Officer established internal 18 Committees to review the submissions. Proposed projects 19 are examined for relevance to regulatory questions facing 20 the Board and modified as necessary. Other research 21 organizations also provide reviews in order to avoid 22 duplication. 23 RSC members then review projects and provide 24 technical comments for the Executive Research Review 25 Committees, whose members are the Executive Officer, her PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 65 1 three Deputies, and the Chief of the Research Division. 2 The Executive Office reviews all of the proposed projects 3 and makes the final selection. The RSC reviews the 4 selected projects and recommends the plan to the Board as 5 they are today. 6 --o0o-- 7 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST MORA: This next slide 8 lists the research categories in the plan. These 9 categories were chosen because they defined the natural 10 sequence of air pollution research. Projects identified 11 the impacts of air pollution under health and welfare 12 effects and characterize exposure in the exposure 13 assessment area. Facilitating the application of effected 14 exposure reduction strategies is covered under technology 15 advancement and pollution prevention. The global air 16 pollution category not only encompasses all three of the 17 above categories but also contains elements that extend 18 well beyond their individual components. Later in the 19 presentation, I'll list the projects to be funded under 20 each category and highlight one project from each area. 21 --o0o-- 22 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST MORA: This figure 23 represents the 21 recommended projects based on ARB's base 24 line research projects for cofunding. The total budget 25 we're expecting this year is a little over $5 million, and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 66 1 we believe we have secured approximately $1.3 million in 2 cofunding. In addition to these projects, there are nine 3 projects in the plan that are recommended if additional 4 funding becomes available. The plan that we will ask you 5 to approve will be for ARB contribution. The projects 6 that will be presented today reflect the total project 7 cost which includes the cofunding amounts. 8 --o0o-- 9 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST MORA: In the health and 10 welfare effects section, there are three projects. These 11 projects focus on the investigation of health effects from 12 exposure to particulate matter. The first will look at 13 the toxicity from different source types and is being 14 cosponsored by the Electric Power Research Institute. The 15 other two will investigate higher mortality rates from an 16 in-city study using established cohorts and are being 17 cosponsored by the South Coast Air Quality Management 18 District. 19 --o0o-- 20 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST MORA: The project I'll 21 highlight is Investigating Particulate Air Pollution and 22 Mortality using the American Cancer Society cohort. 23 A study using an American Cancer Society cohort 24 assessed the relationship between particulate air 25 pollution and premature death. However, the assessment of PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 67 1 air pollution exposure using only community-averaged 2 numbers likely underestimates the health burden 3 attributable to elevated levels in the vicinity of 4 sources. The objective of this project is to derive 5 detailed assessment of the impacts of particulate air 6 pollution on all cause and cause specific death rates in 7 California. There are approximately 80,000 subjects in 8 the study who are widely distributed over California. 9 For the first time, subjects will be geocoded to 10 their home address, and investigators will be able to 11 address proximity to sources such as ports and major 12 highways. By looking at trends over time, the 13 investigators will also assess the effects of particulate 14 matter control efforts. 15 --o0o-- 16 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST MORA: The next section 17 is exposure assessment. The first group of projects focus 18 on understanding the atmosphere processes that impact the 19 behavior of pollutants. These projects aim to provide an 20 understanding of the spatial distribution, formation, 21 evolution, and quantification of pollutants such as NO2, 22 PM, and volatile organic compounds. 23 --o0o-- 24 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST MORA: There are three 25 projects that will focus on improving the current PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 68 1 inventory by providing new tools and techniques to acquire 2 new data. The final project in this section will quantify 3 exposure to sources such as fireplaces. 4 --o0o-- 5 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST MORA: The project I'll 6 highlight from this section is observational investigation 7 of off-shore ship emissions at a coastal site. Recently, 8 shipping emissions have been identified as having the 9 potential to adversely effect air quality in many high 10 traffic coastal regions. In order to accurately predict 11 their air quality impact and efficiently address these 12 sources, we must better understand the nature and 13 magnitude of emissions from ship traffic. 14 This project will expand and establish a 15 monitoring program at Bodega Bay to better characterize 16 emissions of carbon monoxide and oxides of nitrogen and 17 sulfur from off-shore shipping. These results will be 18 used to improve emission inventories that ultimately feed 19 into the assessment of air quality impacts via modeling. 20 --o0o-- 21 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST MORA: The next section 22 is technology advancement and pollution prevention. This 23 section supports projects that address the further 24 advancement of emission monitoring, emission 25 characterization, and emission control technology. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 69 1 Through these projects, staff works closely with industry 2 to take steps to enhance emission monitoring and 3 measurement methods. There are a total of five projects 4 in this area. The last project on this slide is being 5 cosponsored by the National Renewable Energy Lab and the 6 South Coast Air Quality Management District. 7 --o0o-- 8 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST MORA: I'd also like to 9 talk a little bit about this project. It's entitled, 10 "Engine Lubricating Oil Impacts on Mobile Source PM 11 Emissions." As fuels become cleaner and emission control 12 become more effective and durable, the contribution of a 13 lubricant becomes increasingly significant. Engine 14 lubricating oil is a significant contributor to the 15 formation of mobile source particulate matter emissions. 16 This is true of engine-burning gasoline, diesel fuel, and 17 natural gas. This project will determine if the lube oil 18 can be reformulated to minimize the contribution to 19 particulate matter. Results will assist in emission 20 reduction strategies and in existing control programs. 21 --o0o-- 22 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST MORA: Our last section, 23 Global Air Pollution, has six recommended projects. These 24 projects focus on greenhouse gas emission estimation and 25 mitigation in accordance with the Governor's targets of PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 70 1 reducing greenhouse gas emissions which cause global 2 warming. In this area, we are investing a significant 3 effort in developing a refrigerant inventory. 4 --o0o-- 5 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST MORA: Instead of 6 focusing on one project from this section, I'd like to 7 explain our efforts related to characterizing and 8 quantifying emissions in order to advance our efforts on 9 emission inventory from refrigerants which can be potent 10 greenhouse gases. These studies will build on the 11 successful and extensive work already accomplished in 12 support of our landmark regulations on greenhouse gas 13 emission from light-duty vehicles adopted by the Board in 14 2004. 15 --o0o-- 16 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST MORA: HFC 134A is the 17 dominant refrigerant used in motor vehicle air 18 conditioning systems today. For this reason, this 19 greenhouse gas is the key focus of attention during the 20 development of the AB 1493 regulations. Some of the 21 projects presented today will advance our understanding of 22 the potential benefits of superior technology being 23 developed in response to demands for better environmental 24 performance here in California and abroad. Specifically, 25 we will implement several projects to understand the key PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 71 1 mechanisms for emissions and potential mitigation 2 measures. 3 Some of the areas of interest are end-of-life 4 emissions which occur when vehicles are dismantled, air 5 conditioning impacted systems in heavy-duty vehicles, and 6 emission during servicing of motor vehicles' air 7 conditioning systems. 8 We find emission estimates and approve 9 identification of the mechanisms that contribute the most 10 to the overall refrigerant impact on climate will allow 11 ARB to improve assessment of new control measures 12 consistent with the new Climate Action Plan for 13 California. 14 --o0o-- 15 AIR POLLUTION SPECIALIST MORA: The research that 16 is sponsored by the Board is crucial to the Board's 17 mission. We think the projects outlined in the plan 18 strongly support ARB's mission and therefore recommend 19 that you approve the planned air pollution research for 20 fiscal year 2006-2007. 21 Thank you for your attention. And we'd be happy 22 to answer any questions. 23 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you. 24 Do Board members have questions? 25 Dr. Gong. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 72 1 BOARD MEMBER GONG: Not really a question. 2 Certainly multiple compliments to staff and also the 3 Research Screening Committee for undergoing a rigorous 4 process developing this Air Pollution Research Program 5 which I strongly support. I think that I'm truly amazed 6 each year by the array of different ideas that come across 7 their desk from the community at large. And this actually 8 is a testimony to me to human ingenuity and creativity in 9 this area which we strongly need. It also makes the task 10 of the Research Division more difficult as well as the 11 Screening Committee to decide which projects get the magic 12 finger. 13 So I think if I look at the booklet correctly, we 14 probably -- it's a one-to-three ratio that we ultimately 15 grant. That's sort of a rough proportion I guess. So 16 there truly is a lot of competition out there that 17 undergoes a lot of scrutiny by the Research Division. 18 And I think particularly in view of our tribute 19 to Bill Friedman this morning, I think Dr. Friedman set 20 new bars of excellence that we need to adhere to and 21 uphold as much as we can. And I strongly encourage the 22 Research Screening Committee to keep that in mind when 23 we're going through these evaluations as best they can. 24 But I certainly do appreciate the efforts of you and your 25 colleagues. Thank you. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 73 1 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: I too would like to express 2 my appreciation to the Research Screening Committee for 3 their hard work throughout the year. And it's good to see 4 a small representation of your membership. Please extend 5 my congratulations to the entire Committee. 6 Does staff have any further comments? 7 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Nothing further. 8 SUPERVISOR ROBERTS: Would you indulge me? I 9 have one quick question. That is after the full morning 10 of ports and ships and things like that, the focus of 11 off-shore ship emissions seems like a real modest effort 12 in comparison with everything else that's being done, yet 13 it seems to be an increasing issue as it's been presented 14 today and in past meetings. And I'm curious if there's 15 some piece of that I'm missing. 16 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: No. We've been 17 asked about that project before. And essentially, we have 18 expanded an enormous amount of ARB resources, staff time, 19 and other contract dollars to do technical work at the two 20 ports, especially on emission inventory and on modeling 21 emission's behavior over the ocean and how far they travel 22 inland. 23 The particulate project in the research proposal 24 for next year was a fortuitous case of a monitor that 25 already exists in Bodega Bay where we could add to it PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 74 1 additional research objectives at a very low price and try 2 to get a background estimate of marine emissions in a 3 pristine environment. But it in no way reflects our 4 overall commitment to goods movement related work. It was 5 just a lucky coincidence. 6 SUPERVISOR ROBERTS: So these are highly 7 leveraged dollars I guess. 8 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Yes. 9 DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER SCHEIBLE: And we have 10 other contract funding that we can deliver more quickly 11 several division accounts we're using for various 12 cooperative projects. For example, Maersk is testing out 13 the SCR application on their ship engines, auxiliary 14 engines, and we are supporting that project and supporting 15 emission inventory. So we're also contributing money in 16 addition to the staff efforts to them. 17 SUPERVISOR ROBERTS: Okay. I was trying to think 18 of one question that maybe Dr. Friedman would ask if he 19 were here. I guarantee you it wouldn't go through like 20 this. He would have some insights and recommendations 21 that would drive this. But it looks as it has in the past 22 that it's cutting edge information that will help us with 23 regulatory efforts. 24 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Ms. Riordan. 25 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Mr. Chairman, I don't know PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 75 1 if you're ready for a motion on the Resolution, but I'm 2 prepared -- 3 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Almost, but we need to go 4 through our ex parte. 5 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Do your ex parte. 6 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Just a reminder to Board 7 members of our policy concerning ex parte communications. 8 While we may communicate off the record with outside 9 persons regarding rulemaking, we must disclose the names 10 of our contacts and the nature of the contents of our 11 communications on the record. This requirement applies 12 specifically to communications which take place after the 13 public agenda of the Board hearing has been published. 14 Are there any communications that you need to disclose? 15 Supervisor DeSaulnier? 16 Dr. Gong? 17 BOARD MEMBER GONG: No. 18 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: No. 19 I would remind my colleagues on the Board that 20 because of my recent association with University of 21 California, I will continue to recuse myself until next 22 January from all matters dealing with research and Board 23 research funds. 24 Have all members of the Board have an opportunity 25 to review the Resolution? And if so, do I have a motion PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 76 1 to adopt? 2 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Mr. Chairman, I would move 3 we adopt Resolution 06-22. And I would like to add 4 another therefore be further resolved in that these 5 projects under the health and welfare effects be dedicated 6 in memory of Dr. Friedman. I'd like to memorialize that 7 in the Resolution. 8 SUPERVISOR ROBERTS: Second. 9 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: We have a motion amended 10 appropriately and seconded. 11 BOARD MEMBER BERG: Second. 12 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: All those in favor please 13 say aye. 14 (Ayes) 15 CHAIRPERSON SAYWER: Opposed? 16 The motion is adopted. 17 I think this is probably an appropriate time to 18 take a short break for our court reporter. And we'll 19 resume in ten minutes. 20 (Thereupon a recess was taken.) 21 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: The next agenda item for 22 today is 6-7-4. The Board will consider amendments to 23 California's regulation for new 1997 and later off-highway 24 recreational vehicles and engines. Off-highway 25 recreational vehicles such as motorcycles and all-terrain PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 77 1 vehicles are a significant source of ozone forming 2 emissions. This is why this Board first adopted the 3 regulation for these vehicles in 1994. 4 Today's item would amend the regulation to 5 include new evaporative emission standards and test 6 procedures, reclassify certain types of vehicles that 7 would be subject to these regulations, and revise the 8 riding seasons for non-compliant vehicles. 9 I must add as a personal comment that when my 10 appointment as Chair of the Air Resources Board was 11 announced, the first comment I had from one of my 12 colleagues at Berkeley was from a dirt biker, and I got an 13 explanation about what the red tag program was all about. 14 Ms. Witherspoon, please begin the staff's 15 presentation. 16 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Thank you, Dr. 17 Sawyer. We've all have that experience with our family 18 and friends. 19 As you stated, the Board first adopted the 20 off-highway recreational vehicle in 1994. Since then, the 21 Board has amended the rule twice. In 1998, the Board 22 provided relief to California dealers because there was a 23 limited number of complying products. Specifically, the 24 Board created a red and green labeling system which 25 allowed non-complying vehicles to be sold and used. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 78 1 However, only compliant green label vehicles can be used 2 during ozone season in non-attainment areas. 3 This compromise provides emission reductions when 4 they are needed most. Then in 2003, the regulation was 5 amended to correct inconsistencies in vehicle 6 registration. Since then, vehicle registrations have been 7 issued accurately and enforcement has proceeded. 8 The proposal before the Board today relates to 9 the standards themselves and harmonizes with certain 10 requirements of a recently adopted federal rule and then 11 also simplifies and improves the enforcability of the 12 riding seasons for non-complying vehicles. 13 I would now like to turn the presentation over to 14 Andrew Spencer from the Mobile Source Control Section who 15 will describe staff's proposal. 16 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 17 presented as follows.) 18 MR. SPENCER: Good morning, Dr. Sawyer and 19 members of the Board. The following presentation is the 20 staff's proposal to amend California's off-highway 21 recreational vehicle regulation. 22 --o0o-- 23 MR. SPENCER: First, I will review the regulatory 24 history for this item, followed by the issues and events 25 that led staff to propose the amendments. After PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 79 1 describing the proposed amendments themselves and the 2 emission benefits and costs, I'll then summarize the 3 proposal for the Board. 4 --o0o-- 5 MR. SPENCER: First, some background regarding 6 the regulatory history of this item which began after the 7 Board was given the authority to regulate off-highway 8 vehicles by the California Clean Air Act of 1988. The 9 Board adopted the off-highway recreational vehicle 10 regulation in 1994 which established the first exhaust 11 emission standards for all-terrain vehicles, or ATVs, as 12 shown on the left, and off-road motorcycles as shown on 13 the right. 14 The rulemaking was aimed at reducing ozone 15 forming emissions, primarily hydrocarbon emissions. But a 16 carbon monoxide standard was developed as well. The 17 implementation of these standards began with the 1998 18 model year with a two-year delay for the smaller 19 displacement models. 20 --o0o-- 21 MR. SPENCER: During 1996, with the 22 implementation date of the off-highway regulation 23 approaching, dealer and consumer groups voiced concerns to 24 staff. Although manufacturers were preparing a full line 25 of complying ATVs, it became clear they would only produce PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 80 1 a few models of complying motorcycles. One of the reasons 2 for this involved competition motorcycles. The Health and 3 Safely Code exempts competition vehicles from our 4 regulations with the understanding that these vehicles are 5 used in close course racing venues. Many motorcycle 6 manufacturers continued to market noncomplying motorcycles 7 as competition models, even though the purchasers were 8 using them primarily for recreational riding and on public 9 lands. 10 Staff organized a stakeholders committee which 11 held several meetings during 1997 and '98 to collaborate 12 and find an equitable solution that would both provide 13 product for sale and retain emission reductions. To that 14 end, in 1998 the Board approved amendments providing for 15 the continued sale and use of noncomplying vehicles. 16 To reduce the pollution impact of these 17 motorcycles, riding was limited to times when ozone levels 18 did not exceed the State's ambient air quality standards. 19 Staff analyzed the air quality for each of the riding 20 areas throughout the state and assigned appropriate dates 21 for which the riding of non-complying vehicles could take 22 place. These dates are known as the riding seasons for 23 non-compliant vehicles. 24 --o0o-- 25 MR. SPENCER: The map with area classifications PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 81 1 for ozone parallels the arrangement of the riding seasons. 2 The riding seasons are shortest in the areas designated 3 extreme or severe. Longer riding seasons exist in the 4 serious and moderate areas. In areas that are in 5 attainment for ozone, the riding of non-compliant vehicles 6 is not restricted. Again, the riding seasons apply only 7 to the non-compliant vehicles. Vehicles that meet 8 California standards can be used year round in all 9 designated riding areas. 10 --o0o-- 11 MR. SPENCER: California law requires 12 registration of all vehicles that operate on public lands. 13 Since it was already common practice for the park rangers 14 and other enforcement personnel to check these vehicles 15 for current registration, a distinguishing form of 16 registration was chosen that would make non-compliant 17 vehicles instantly identifiable. So to go along with the 18 existing green sticker registration for which only the 19 emission compliant vehicles are eligible, red sticker 20 registration was created for the non-compliant vehicles 21 with the intent that it would apply immediately. However, 22 due to incorrect registration by the Department of Motor 23 Vehicles during the years following the 1998 amendments, 24 California's off-highway regulation could not be 25 implemented or enforced effectively. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 82 1 Once the registration process was corrected, ARB 2 returned to the Board with a revised implementation date 3 of 2003. In certain instances, the errors in registration 4 hindered enforcement of the riding seasons. There were 5 also economic impacts in the used vehicle market, namely 6 that incorrectly registered vehicles were in higher demand 7 than those that were properly registered. Therefore, the 8 effective date for issuing red sticker registration was 9 moved forward from the 1998 model year to 2003. This 10 regulatory action was determined to be the most fair way 11 to resolve these issues. 12 --o0o-- 13 MR. SPENCER: In 2002, the United States 14 Environmental Protection Agency promulgated its own 15 rulemaking for off-highway vehicles, including motorcycles 16 and ATVs. The federal exhaust emission standards for 17 hydrocarbons plus oxides of nitrogen and for carbon 18 monoxide are being phased in over this year and the next. 19 Unlike California, U.S. EPA has three sets of exhaust 20 standards: One set for motorcycles; another for ATVs; and 21 a third for vehicles with small displacement engines, all 22 are less stringent than the standards in place in 23 California. That is why staff is not proposing to 24 harmonize with the federal exhaust emission standards. 25 At present, California does not have evaporative PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 83 1 standards for these vehicles. The newer federal 2 regulations include permeation standards for fuel tanks 3 and hoses. They do not include a standard for reducing 4 diurnal emissions. Staff is proposing to harmonize with 5 the federal evaporative emission requirements for now 6 while evaluating the viability of diurnal emission 7 standards for a later date. 8 The federal rule also allows certain types of 9 utility vehicles to certify under the provisions of ATVs. 10 In some cases, these particular utility vehicles are 11 equipped with engines that are also used in ATVs. 12 Additionally, sand cars, often called dune buggies or sand 13 rails, are also classified as ATVs under the federal rule. 14 Some of these vehicles are powered by automotive engines 15 that are capable of meeting much more stringent standards 16 than those required of ATVs. 17 The implementation of the federal rule has helped 18 staff identify areas of our own rule that can be improved. 19 Comprising the staff's proposal today are three main 20 amendments. 21 One, recategorizing vehicles into this 22 regulation. This includes clarifying the vehicle 23 definitions, the appropriate test procedures, and labeling 24 requirements. This will reduce the cost to manufacturers. 25 Two, adopting evaporative emission standards for PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 84 1 California that harmonize with the federal standards. 2 This will assure that ozone forming emissions are further 3 reduced in California. 4 And three, revising the riding season schedule 5 for the non-complying vehicles. I shall discuss each of 6 those in more detail over the next few slides. 7 --o0o-- 8 MR. SPENCER: To provide some context for the 9 discussion of vehicle definitions, let's briefly view some 10 images of the vehicles we're discussing. On top is a 11 typical ATV. Below is an off-road motorcycle or dirt 12 bike. Both have been regulated under the off-highway 13 regulation since its inception. 14 Motorcycle design has remained pretty much the 15 same over the years. Although this ATV meets the original 16 ATV definition, other ATVs have evolved into much 17 different looking vehicles. Some designs in fact no 18 longer meet the original ATV definition. The vehicle on 19 top, for instance, doesn't meet the definition because it 20 is designed to carry a passenger behind the driver. 21 Below is a vehicle that exceeds the cargo 22 capacity in the current ATV definition. It is currently 23 subject to California's large spark ignition regulation. 24 But in the federal rule, this six wheeled vehicle is 25 considered an ATV. For reasons of harmonization, industry PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 85 1 is asking California to do the same. 2 This next vehicle is an off-road utility vehicle. 3 It has several features that distinguish it from an ATV, 4 such as bucket seats, a steering wheel, greater cargo 5 capacity, and a vehicle width that exceeds even the 6 California vehicle codes ATV definition. 7 Because of these differences, these vehicles have 8 also been categorized in the large spark ignition engine 9 category, which has different standards and test 10 procedures. Under the federal rule, this vehicle 11 certifies under the ATV test procedures. Again, industry 12 would like us to harmonize with U.S. EPA. 13 Sand cars are a new class of vehicle to the 14 off-highway regulation. They are primarily used in areas 15 that have sand dunes such as the desert or the beach and 16 are powered by wide range of engine displacements. 17 Because they are a new category, the next slide contains 18 additional information about the industry. 19 --o0o-- 20 MR. SPENCER: After the proposal was published, 21 members from the sand car industry approached staff about 22 being included in the off-highway regulation. Because of 23 the engine displacements and horsepower ratings, most of 24 these vehicles are subject to the large spark ignition 25 regulation, although some of the smaller models are PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 86 1 currently certified under our regulations for small 2 off-road engines. 3 The federal rule treats sand cars as ATVs 4 regardless of engine displacement or horsepower. Because 5 of this, industry would like California to do the same. 6 The sales volumes of these vehicles are extremely small. 7 Many manufacturers build only 30 to 60 units a year nation 8 wide. After meeting with these manufacturers, staff has 9 learned this cottage industry is just beginning to come to 10 grips with the regulatory requirements and therefore needs 11 additional time before it can accommodate a California 12 specific regulation. Therefore, staff proposes to include 13 these vehicles in the off-highway category harmonizing 14 with the federal rule to minimize the cost of 15 certification. 16 --o0o-- 17 MR. SPENCER: Now I will summarize the regulatory 18 amendments including several changes which address 19 comments received since the staff proposal was published. 20 Staff proposes to recategorize the sport and 21 utility vehicles and sand cars with engines below one 22 liter as recreational vehicles. This will allow 23 manufacturers to test their engines under one test cycle 24 for both the California and federal regulations. Staff 25 proposes that these vehicles continue to meet the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 87 1 hydrocarbon plus oxides of nitrogen standard found in the 2 small engine and large spark ignition engine regulations. 3 For sand cars above one liter, staff proposes to 4 harmonize with the federal rule, which would include using 5 the ATV test procedures and the ATV standards. We are 6 proposing this because certifying to separate California 7 regulations given the low production volume would be too 8 costly. 9 For evaporative emissions, staff proposes 10 adopting the federal standards and procedures. These 11 requirements control losses from fuel tanks and hoses due 12 to permeation. Adoption of the federal standards by 13 California allows us to enforce them. Staff is also 14 evaluating whether diurnal emission control requirements 15 should be adopted in the future. 16 --o0o-- 17 MR. SPENCER: Lastly, staff proposes ways to 18 improve the riding season program. Currently, 17 19 different sets of dates comprise the riding seasons. 20 Among both the land agencies and the off-road enthusiasts, 21 there's a desire for a more uniform set of dates. This is 22 especially needed in cases where riding areas are adjacent 23 to other riding areas or where trails connect several 24 areas. 25 The proposal consolidates these dates down from PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 88 1 17 to a more easily manageable six. The regulation 2 provides for changes to the riding seasons when supported 3 by ozone data from California's air quality monitoring 4 system. In response to stakeholder comments, staff 5 analyzed more recent ozone data for the riding areas. 6 Since the initial analysis, there have been fewer 7 exceedances of the ambient air quality standards for 8 ozone. Moreover, the data supported staff's desire to 9 make the dates of the riding seasons more uniform. 10 We also propose to give bordering riding areas 11 the same riding seasons which should simplify things for 12 the land agencies and for the off-road enthusiasts. For 13 reasons of more efficient enforcement of the riding season 14 restrictions, the riding areas under the federal 15 jurisdiction have been consolidated by ranger district or 16 field office and are identified by such, instead of just 17 the individual riding area names. 18 --o0o-- 19 MR. SPENCER: The emission benefits of the 20 proposal come from the adoption of the evaporative 21 emission control requirements. By 2010, just under two 22 tons per day of reactive organic gases will be reduced. 23 By 2020, the reductions will increase to four-and-a-half 24 tons per day. 25 --o0o-- PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 89 1 MR. SPENCER: The economic impacts of the 2 proposal are positive. The evaporative requirements for 3 California would be identical to the federal requirements. 4 Therefore, manufacturers would not incur any additional 5 costs to comply with California's regulation. By allowing 6 the sport and utility vehicle manufacturers to use the ATV 7 test procedures, certification testing would be 8 simplified. 9 Similarly, the sand car manufacturers would also 10 have a harmonized test procedure to follow for both 11 California and federal certification. Lastly, because the 12 dates of the riding seasons would not vary as much as 13 before, enforcement efforts by the land agencies would be 14 eased. 15 --o0o-- 16 MR. SPENCER: Allowing utility vehicles to 17 certify using the ATV test procedures reduces compliance 18 costs. But because these vehicles will continue to meet 19 standards equivalent to the large spark ignition 20 regulation, emission reductions will not be compromised. 21 Sand car manufacturers also benefit from harmonizing with 22 the federal requirements. 23 The staff's proposal for evaporative controls 24 results in significant emission reductions. Because it 25 harmonizes with the federal requirements, manufacturers PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 90 1 incur no additional burden. And the revisions to the 2 riding seasons would provide more opportunities for the 3 off road enthusiasts and more efficient and equitable 4 enforcement. 5 --o0o-- 6 MR. SPENCER: In conclusion, staff recommends the 7 Board approve the proposal with minor changes. Staff will 8 prepare the 15-day changes that will assure the utility 9 vehicles and cars and any other vehicles appropriate for 10 the regulation are probably defined and in compliance with 11 the exhaust and the evaporative requirements. 12 In preparing this package, it became apparent 13 that several sub-groups of off-road vehicles could meet 14 more stringent exhaust and evaporative emission 15 requirements. Given our continuing need to reduce 16 emissions, staff has begun evaluating additional emission 17 reductions from these vehicles. We will share our 18 findings with the Board at a future hearing. 19 This concludes the presentation. Staff is 20 prepared to answer questions that the Board may now have. 21 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you, Spencer. 22 Madam Ombudsman, will you please describe the 23 public participation process that occurred while this item 24 was being developed and share any concerns or comments you 25 may have with the Board at this time? PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 91 1 OMBUDSMAN TSCHOGL: I'd be glad to. 2 Dr. Sawyer and members of the Board, this 3 regulation has been developed with input from the off-road 4 motorcycle manufacturers, all-terrain vehicle 5 manufacturers, off-road utility vehicle manufacturers, 6 dune buggy, sand car manufacturers, public land agencies, 7 California Motorcycle Dealers Association, and the 8 American Motorcyclist Association. 9 Staff began analyzing data for ambient ozone 10 levels in 2004 which relates to the changing of the riding 11 seasons for non-complying off-highway recreational 12 vehicles. The actual process for the drafting the 13 amendments to the regulation began in December 2005. 14 One workshop was held in El Monte on March 23rd, 15 2006. Approximately 50 to 60 people attended representing 16 the groups I previously mentioned as well as members of 17 the off-road enthusiasts community. 18 Over the past years, there have been numerous 19 teleconferences and individual meetings with stakeholders. 20 A teleconference was held with the California State Parks 21 on March 12th, 2004. Staff also held an additional 22 meeting with them on March 25th, 2005, in Lebec, 23 California. They met with the ATV utility vehicle 24 manufacturers on May 12th, 2004, and on March 9th, 16, 20 25 and 22nd of 2006. In addition, they met with the dune PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 92 1 buggy sand car manufacturers on July 6, 2006. 2 The staff report and the notice of the public 3 hearing were released on June 2nd, 2006. Nearly 600 4 stakeholders received the information via the list serve, 5 and several stakeholders and interested parties received 6 the information in the mail. Thank you. 7 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you. 8 Do any of the Board members have questions? I 9 notice that the number of vehicles in this category seems 10 to be increasing rather rapidly. Could you comment on 11 that, what the population is and what we expect it to 12 become? 13 MR. SPENCER: As we did in 1990, we referred to 14 the Department of Motor Vehicles to look at registration 15 data when we did the first rule. And currently there are 16 644,000 actively registered motorcycles and all-terrain 17 vehicles in California. 18 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: And one small technical 19 question. The hydrocarbon emissions is split between 20 exhaust and evaporative. Do the evaporative emissions 21 dominate in this for these vehicles or -- 22 MR. SPENCER: No. There's more emissions in 23 exhaust. 24 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: I'm just thinking they 25 probably weren't used very much, so the evaporative PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 93 1 emissions would continue 24 hours a day. 2 MR. SPENCER: Yeah. They do occur year round. 3 But the emissions that come out of the tailpipes of these 4 are pretty high. 5 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Okay. 6 CHIEF DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER CACKETTE: Just to 7 add to that. The non-complying ones that are allowed to 8 ride in clean areas are two stroke motors, and they have 9 inordinately high hydrocarbon emissions. 10 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Okay. I now will call the 11 first three witnesses who have signed up to speak on this 12 item. This is John Paliwoda, Pamela Amette, and Tom 13 Austin. 14 MR. PALIWODA: Thank you, Dr. Sawyer and members 15 of the Board, for letting me comment on this important 16 rule making for the Motorcycle Dealers of California. I'm 17 John Paliwoda, Executive Director of the California 18 Motorcycle Dealers Association. We've been around for 35 19 years. And basically most of the franchise motorcycle 20 dealers in California belong to the CMDA as we are called. 21 Back in 1998, we were intimately involved with 22 the formulation of the riding area seasons segment of this 23 rulemaking, and we had hoped since then another look would 24 have been taken at expanding the riding areas times and 25 usages for non-certified motorcycles. That is the red PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 94 1 sticker motorcycles and ATVs. And we are pleased that 2 indeed the staff has made these recommendations, and we do 3 support these recommendations. 4 It also is gratifying to see there is more data 5 available. I've counted another net 19 monitoring sites 6 since the data was reviewed back in 1998, and I think that 7 speaks to expanding sometimes by days, sometimes by weeks, 8 and sometimes by months and sometimes in two cases you 9 basically have recommended that two SVRAs, that's state 10 vehicle recreation areas, be granted year-round use. And 11 we certainly welcome that. 12 So again, we look at 39 sites with expanded times 13 and usage times and seasonal usages, 13 new listings. You 14 basically establish 13 new areas where these vehicles can 15 be used, and the two SVRAs that have been granted 16 year-round usage. 17 So again, our agenda here is to be able to have 18 the regulated use of the vehicles that our dealers sell to 19 the public. There's been an expansion, a tremendous 20 expansion of off-road use recreational usage. And the 21 more legal places that these units can be used at and can 22 be regulated is so much the better. So we generally 23 support the staff recommendations on this particular 24 issue. We'll leave the technical issues to the 25 manufacturers. But we do certainly support these. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 95 1 There are two areas though I would respectfully 2 ask the staff and you folks to take a look at. There's 3 two SVRAs. One, Clay Pit, is outside of Oroville, 4 California in northern California. It currently will have 5 a -- it is being recommended to have a ten-month riding 6 season. I would like perhaps to recommend that that be 7 made year-round. I mean, you're only missing two months, 8 albeit July and August. But if you could take a look at 9 that one, perhaps make that one year-round. 10 And the last one is Hungry Valley SVRA. Hungry 11 Valley SVRA is the second largest SVRA in the system. It 12 is at the uppermost point of Los Angeles County where it 13 meets Kern County. The elevation is 3,000 feet. So it's 14 above the inversion layer. The main pollution generator 15 in that area is quite frankly a narrow band of the 5 16 freeway. And that SVRA is adjacent to it, and it is 17 fairly restricted. 18 There's seven months of usage there, and we would 19 ask that in the interest of -- I wouldn't say justice, but 20 in the interest of equality perhaps taking a look and 21 seeing whether you can make that year-round. It's a very 22 large SVRA. It attracts an enormous amount of people from 23 the L.A. basin and giving them the opportunity to recreate 24 there year-round would cut down on the possible illegal 25 use of these non-certified vehicles on private property, PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 96 1 on public lands. And I think it would be a very 2 worthwhile thing to do. 3 So again, I thank you very much and I'd certainly 4 be glad to answer any questions you might have. 5 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you. 6 Does staff have comments on this? Are these 7 rules applied basin wide or countywide, and are they 8 assessed area by area? 9 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Non-attainment 10 area wide. So those boundaries have been established in 11 prior actions having to do with standard setting and area 12 designations. And staff has simplified them to the extent 13 they can where riding areas cross district boundaries or 14 air basin boundaries. And we have for years had a 15 convention of ozone seasons being roughly May through 16 November. When it's hot in California, ozone forms. And 17 staff has tried to shave that and be practical. And not 18 just in this arena, but as we look at the use of ethanol 19 and when we get volatility impacts and trying to move low 20 blend ethanol into the winter season. Can we expand what 21 winter is and really just concentrate the restrictions on 22 the core ozone season. 23 There are competing effects here though. The 24 area the gentleman is talking about does have monitors, is 25 measuring non-attainment values of pollution. And as we PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 97 1 shift from the current one-hour ozone standard to the more 2 stringent eight-hour ozone standard, more areas of the 3 state will come into non-attainment that are currently 4 clean where there are no restrictions at all. So we'll 5 have to look at whether some areas are acquiring new 6 restrictions at the same time other areas are getting 7 expanded riding seasons. So that's the balance we're 8 trying to strike here. 9 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you. 10 Are there any other questions? 11 MR. PALIWODA: Thank you very much. 12 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Pamela Amette. 13 MS. AMETTE: Good morning. I'm Pamela Amette 14 with the Motorcycle Industry Council. It's a national 15 trade association that represents 300 manufacturers and 16 distributors of motorcycles, parts and accessories, and 17 members of the allied trades. And I'm also here 18 representing the Specialty Vehicle Institute of America 19 that represents twelve ATV manufacturers and distributors. 20 We have with us Tom Austin our consultant with 21 Sierra Research who will be happy to answer any questions 22 you may have about our comments. I think he has a few 23 additional brief comments to make. And then also he would 24 summarize our comments if you'd like. 25 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 98 1 Mr. Austin. 2 MR. AUSTIN: Good morning, Dr. Sawyer and members 3 of the Board. 4 I won't bore you with most of what's in our 5 written statement, because we've resolved about 90 percent 6 of the issues we had during communications with your staff 7 over the last week or so. Your staff has covered some of 8 the concerns we raised in the materials they've already 9 provided to you. 10 There are just a couple of last minute items I'd 11 like to mention that you haven't yet I don't think seen 12 any information on. The labeling requirements that are 13 proposed, we don't have any real problem with the proposal 14 except for the fact that the way it's written it would 15 apply immediately. And we're in the middle of the 2007 16 model year right now, and we would like to have a minor 17 modification to delay the change in the labeling 18 requirements to the 2008 model year. It's our 19 understanding your staff is basically okay with that. 20 There is a really minor change we'd like to have 21 made having to do with harmonizing the federal and 22 California definitions for utility vehicles. We think 23 this is just inadvertent, but the federal definition is 24 for vehicles that have a speed of equal to or greater than 25 25 miles per hour. And the staff is proposal is greater PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 99 1 than 25 miles an hour, leaving vehicles that have a 2 maximum speed of 25 in different categories under 3 California and federal definitions. We also understand 4 your staff is okay making that change with the 15-day 5 notice. 6 The one thing that we really didn't agree on was 7 the statement you heard about the federal standards not 8 being as stringent as the California standards. EPA 9 didn't agree with that. We don't agree with that. We 10 think in the aggregate the federal standards are more 11 stringent, but it's really not that big a deal because 12 most of the ATVs at least are certified under the optional 13 standards, the engine dyno test standards rather than 14 chassis test standards. And under those optional 15 standards, all the ATVs above 100 CCs have to meet exactly 16 the same standards under the federal program, under the 17 California program. So there's no real practical 18 difference. 19 For the vehicles that are less than 100 CCs, 20 there is a less stringent federal standard than the 21 California standard, but California has the red sticker 22 program. So if you'd prefer to see some more vehicles 23 brought in under the red sticker program, we can live with 24 that. We think you'd be better off with the federal 25 standard. But it's not an issue that's worth arguing PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 100 1 over. 2 One thing we would like to point out that's not 3 addressed in the staff report because it's too preliminary 4 right now, MIC has been working with EPA for about six 5 years now on ATV and off-highway motorcycle standards and 6 test procedures. And it's likely we think in the next few 7 weeks possibly there's going to be a new set of optional 8 standards for ATVs that will be published by EPA. We 9 think that we'll be able to demonstrate at that time those 10 optional standards are more stringent than the current 11 optional standards that apply in California and apply 12 federally. And so we think it would be a good idea to 13 delegate to your Executive Officer the authority to 14 harmonize with the new optional federal standards should 15 those be published in the immediate future and if your 16 staff agrees they are, in fact, more stringent than the 17 current optional standards. 18 And the only other thing I wanted to comment on 19 is related to a comment you made, Dr. Sawyer, about 20 whether the hydrocarbon emissions from evaporation of 21 these vehicles are, in fact, more significant than the 22 exhaust emissions. We think when you consider urbanized 23 areas or areas that are not NOX limited, that is the case. 24 One of the reasons we think it's the case is that we have 25 concerns with the activity estimates that are in the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 101 1 California emissions inventory. We haven't seen detailed 2 calculations of how the staff came up with its latest 3 inventory estimates. But when we've looked at the beta 4 version of the model we think that was used, we believe 5 the activity in terms of miles per year is probably 6 overstated by about a factor of four. 7 We're also very concerned about the duty cycle 8 that's assumed, the load factors that are assumed in those 9 estimates. And that's one of the reasons why we think 10 evap especially in urban areas is probably a much more 11 significant factor for these vehicles than is indicated by 12 the current staff analysis. And we really think it would 13 make sense for MIC and the staff to get together and to 14 discuss some of these inventory issues before we move 15 forward with further controls in this category, because we 16 really think there are some issues that need to be 17 resolved. 18 I'd be happy to answer any questions. 19 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Does staff have any comments 20 on Mr. Austin's remarks? 21 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: I think we're 22 fine with his remarks in terms of the suggestions he made 23 for the discretion to adjust if the standards are in 24 effect more stringent. We're always looking at inventory 25 issues in rough and low, not high. So it would be very PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 102 1 good news indeed if we were calculating too many emissions 2 from exhaust. 3 And I think the comment about getting the evap 4 versus exhaust ratio right speaks to whether we would move 5 to diurnal standards. And if Mr. Austin is right, that 6 would be more reason to do the diurnal standards. So 7 again, there's nothing that he said that troubles us. And 8 as he also said, we've already fixed 90 some percent of 9 the issues he raised and we're fixing a few more in the 15 10 day. 11 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you. 12 The next speaker is Susan Matthews and then 13 Robert Wyman. 14 MS. MATTHEWS: Good morning, Dr. Sawyer and 15 members of the Board. Thank you for the opportunity to 16 speak today. 17 I did want to share with you that I was asked to 18 represent our manufacturer, and am not real familiar with 19 mechanical things. But I do have one question that they 20 asked me to ask. And I think it may be handled -- if I 21 understood what you're stating this morning that you're 22 going to adopt federal regulations for the emissions 23 versus your own. Is that what I understood this morning, 24 that your proposal is to adopt the federal regulations for 25 emission? No. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 103 1 Okay. Let me ask my question. I'm Susan 2 Matthews from Points West ARGO, and I'm representing our 3 manufacturer this morning, Ontario Drive & Gear. And what 4 their question is or concern is for class three off-road 5 utility vehicles, would you be willing to consider for the 6 low volume manufacturers to have a low volume tank 7 exception? 8 EMISSION RESEARCH & REGULATORY DEVELOPMENT BRANCH 9 CHIEF CARTER: If you're talking about the evaporative 10 requirements, as we mentioned, we intend to adopt what EPA 11 has already done. And so we're not proposing anything 12 above and beyond what EPA has already done and therefore 13 what they are already on the hook for. 14 MS. MATTHEWS: Okay. So that is what I 15 understood this morning is a change from the initial 16 comments that went out before. Correct. 17 EMISSION RESEARCH & REGULATORY DEVELOPMENT BRANCH 18 CHIEF CARTER: Yes. 19 MS. MATTHEWS: So that effects the rule tank. 20 Thank you. Sorry for my question. Thank you so much. 21 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you. 22 Robert Wyman, and then we have John Begin. 23 MR. WYMAN: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and 24 members of the Board. Bob Wyman, I'm of Latham & Watkins 25 here on behalf of a group of ATV manufacturers including PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 104 1 Artic, CAT, Bombardier Recreational Products, Polaris 2 Industries, and Yamaha Motor Corporation. 3 As you heard in the staff presentation, there's 4 been a great deal of innovation over the last few years in 5 the ATV industry sector. And as a result, the 6 configuration of the vehicles, whether it's seating or 7 steering, sometimes the configuration of the vehicle has 8 changed sufficiently so that these vehicles do not neatly 9 fit within the existing or preexisting ATV definition. As 10 a result, from our perspective there was a gap in exactly 11 how these should be processed. The staff we think has 12 moved quickly to address. And the proposals they placed 13 before you today would plug this gap in a way which we 14 think makes perfect sense. 15 We're here to support the proposed modifications 16 that you've heard about. Be happy to answer questions if 17 they are any. But we appreciate the staff's effort and we 18 support the proposal. 19 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you. 20 John Begin. 21 MR. BEGIN: My name is John Begin. I represent 22 the sand rail industry. We just want to thank the members 23 at CARB and Michael Carter, Scott Rowland, and Andrew 24 Spencer for allowing us to participate and be considered 25 in the process. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 105 1 We are a very small, very small industry. Most 2 of us came from a garage builder aspect, and nobody in 3 this industry has a large deal of money by any sort. But 4 we still are required to comply to the rules, and we would 5 just like for you to consider possibly a low volume 6 exemption of some sort, possibly some day. 7 Once again, there's very, very few of these being 8 made. Most manufacturers build one to three a month if 9 that. But what they do produce, they're using expensive 10 engines that generally come from the racing background. 11 And the racing background doesn't necessarily have 12 catalytic converters on them and things that are -- 13 they're competition engines that are used in our product. 14 And I'm just real concerned that some of the people in our 15 industry are going to be using these engines or are using 16 these engines that will give the people that are here and 17 trying to comply and make everything work a bad name 18 because their engines do not necessarily -- they think 19 they fall under the racing exemption. 20 So I just would like to have you guys consider 21 some of those possibilities that are IC, sand rail market 22 going to everything is getting bigger and more powerful. 23 And if the guy next door has a powerful one and they're 24 out at the same locations, it's obvious and the next guy 25 wants to have one like that because he didn't know it PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 106 1 existed. 2 And since most of these products there's probably 3 less than 750 of them produced per year throughout the 4 whole United States, and they are absolutely used in the 5 winter months of the year, which would be October through 6 Easter at the very latest, we would just like to consider 7 maybe the measures of performance a factor for the future 8 requirements of the levels we put in place for us. 9 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you. 10 Could staff comment upon what we just heard? 11 MOBILE SOURCE CONTROL DIVISION CHIEF CROSS: 12 We've met, as the staff presentation said, with this 13 industry already and heard this story and a lot more 14 pieces of this story. And I think what we need to do is 15 spend some more time kind of going through the data with 16 them. Many of them are using engines which are similar to 17 the high performance engines you find in boats. And in 18 fact some of them are the same. But we're not sure 19 whether or not they're totally amenable to the controls 20 that would be used in the boats in the sand rail 21 configuration or not. In other words, whether or not 22 there's a connect there where you could use marine engines 23 for low cost complying engines for this industry or if 24 they really have a problem where they're sort of so far 25 out in the field in terms of how they are from any PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 107 1 conventional engines there's nothing they can do. We just 2 need to basically meet with them and put that together and 3 look at their impact as well. 4 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: A philosophical 5 answer to the question, we're evolving towards the state 6 of mind that every engine in California ought to have a 7 catalytic converter on it. And we're looking at our rules 8 to see whether they do or don't in all size categories and 9 similar thinking about evaporative standards. And we 10 don't start off with the supposition that anything below a 11 certain threshold should be exempt. We have kit car 12 issues, gray market vehicle issues. We have one-off 13 specialty vehicles. And so it's a precedent we haven't 14 wanted to set. 15 Now that being said, when we get into these 16 regulatory areas, we do come up with various phase-in 17 schedules, low volume exemptions, these riding seasons. 18 And all of it is on the table. But just the basic theory 19 there's so few of them, why do anything, is not something 20 that staff responds to well. We say if it's an engine and 21 it can be controlled, why not. And then try to come up 22 with the most practical regulation for that. And that's 23 just what being in California is all about. 24 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: The issue of time of use of 25 these vehicles, time of the year? PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 108 1 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: They do drive on 2 dunes so they would predominantly be in the winter when 3 it's tolerable to drive in the desert. 4 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you very much. I now 5 close the record on this agenda item. However, the record 6 will be reopened when the 15-day notice of public 7 availability is issued. Written or oral comments received 8 after this hearing date but before the 15-day notice is 9 issued will not be accepted as part of the official record 10 on this agenda item. When the record is reopened for a 11 15-day comment period, the public may submit written 12 comments on the proposed changes which will be considered 13 and responded to in the final statement of reasons for the 14 regulation. 15 In fulfillment of our ex parte communications 16 policy, which I've gone over before, we will take 17 statements from the Board members. Are there any? No. 18 No. We have none. 19 Please take a moment to read the Resolution we 20 have before us reflecting the staff recommendations. Do 21 we have a motion to act on this Resolution? 22 BOARD MEMBER BERG: I move to accept Resolution 23 06-2-3 with the 15-day changes. 24 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Second. 25 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: I have a motion to adopt and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 109 1 a second. 2 All those in favor please indicate by stating 3 aye. 4 (Ayes) 5 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Opposed? 6 The motion is adopted. 7 We have one final agenda item, which I believe we 8 can deal with in a reasonable length of time. As the 9 Board members know, we have scheduled a luncheon with the 10 Researched Screening Committee which is flexible in the 11 time which we do that, so we will move ahead. 12 The last agenda item on our schedule is 6-7-5, an 13 update on the 2005 statewide railroad agreement. At our 14 January meeting, the Board allowed the statewide agreement 15 signed by our Executive Officer to proceed and asked staff 16 to update us on its implementation every six months 17 starting today. We look forward to staff's 18 presentation. 19 Following the staff presentation and Board member 20 questions, we will take testimony from any who have signed 21 up to speak on this item. If you're planning to testify, 22 please be aware that the Board is focused on the status 23 report today. If you have questions or concerns about the 24 work that is going on in the field, we certainly will want 25 to hear about that. We will not be taking testimony on PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 110 1 the underlying statewide agreement, because we've already 2 have two separate Board meetings to discuss it. We thank 3 you for your cooperation. 4 Ms. Witherspoon, will you please provide 5 additional background on this agenda item? 6 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Thank you, Dr. 7 Sawyer. 8 Per the Board's direction, staff intends to give 9 you semi-annual updates on implementation of the statewide 10 railroad agreement. The first report is a good one, and 11 the bottom line is that the railroads have met or exceeded 12 all the requirements in the statewide agreement to date 13 related to anti-idling devices, low sulfur fuels, health 14 risk assessments, community outreach, and advanced 15 technology development. We aren't just taking the 16 railroad's word for that either. Since January, ARB staff 17 has visited every covered and designated rail yard in the 18 agreement and has inspected nearly 700 locomotives. 19 Compliance in the field was not perfect. We 20 found one smoking locomotive and another 23 where staff 21 believed idling times were excessive. Our inspectors 22 issued notices of violation accordingly. But overall, 23 compliance is very good. Ninty-six percent of a 24 locomotives ARB staff inspected met the idling 25 requirements, and we found 99 percent compliance rate for PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 111 1 excessive smoke. 2 I'll now turn it over to Mr. Harold Holmes of the 3 Stationary Source Division to provide the staff 4 presentation. Harold. 5 (Thereupon an overhead presentation was 6 presented as follows.) 7 ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECTION MANAGER HOLMES: 8 Thank you, Ms. Witherspoon, Dr. Sawyer, members of the 9 Board. Staff is here today in response to the Board's 10 direction at the last January's Board meeting to provide 11 an update on the implementation of the ARB railroad 12 statewide agreement and to do that within six months. 13 --o0o-- 14 ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECTION MANAGER HOLMES: 15 As a brief summary, the agreement contains numerous 16 elements to reduce locomotive emissions and rail yard 17 risk. Staff estimates that the agreement provides a 20 18 percent reduction in diesel particulate emissions in and 19 around rail yards throughout the state. 20 Today's progress report addresses how the ARB and 21 railroads have met their obligations to: Install idling 22 reduction devices on their intrastate or California-based 23 locomotives; to comply with statewide limitation on 24 non-essential idling; to use ultra low sulfur diesel fuel 25 for locomotives fueled in California; to identify and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 112 1 repair smoking locomotives; to conduct health risk 2 assessments and risk mitigation at 16 major rail yards; to 3 develop and implement a locomotive remote sensing pilot 4 program in consultation with an advisory committee; and to 5 evaluate future technologies to reduce locomotive 6 emissions. 7 --o0o-- 8 ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECTION MANAGER HOLMES: 9 As an update overall, the required data submittals have 10 been received on time, and the railroads have complied 11 with the program requirements on schedule. 12 --o0o-- 13 ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECTION MANAGER HOLMES: 14 The agreement requires UP and BNSF to install idle 15 reduction devices on all of their California based fleet 16 by June 30th, 2008. Both railroads are currently on 17 schedule to meet this requirement. Currently, UP and BNSF 18 operate 438 intrastate or California-based locomotives. 19 At the time the agreement was signed last June, 117 20 California based locomotives already used idle reduction 21 devices. Under the agreement, 112, or 35 percent of the 22 remaining 321 unequipped locomotives, were required to be 23 retrofitted with idle reduction devices this past year. 24 This requirement was met by the railroads who combined 25 retrofitted 113 locomotives. This brings the total number PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 113 1 of intrastate locomotives equipped with idle reduction 2 devices up to 230, which is more than half of UP and 3 BNSF's California based fleet. 4 --o0o-- 5 ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECTION MANAGER HOLMES: 6 Because of the agreement, the rate of installations to 7 date in the state are nearly twice the level of the rest 8 of the country. 9 --o0o-- 10 ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECTION MANAGER HOLMES: 11 With respect to locomotive diesel fuel requirements, both 12 railroads are currently on schedule to comply with the ARB 13 regulation which mandates the use of CARB diesel fuel for 14 intrastate locomotives by January 1, 2007. Please note 15 that the CARB diesel fuel regulation is also referenced in 16 the agreement. 17 As required under the agreement, both railroads 18 are also on schedule to dispense a minimum of 80 percent 19 low sulfur diesel to locomotives fueled in California by 20 January 1, 2007. Staff believes that both railroads will 21 likely comply with this requirement by this fall, or about 22 three months earlier than the compliance date. 23 --o0o-- 24 ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECTION MANAGER HOLMES: 25 Both railroads have established employee training for the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 114 1 idling and visible emission reduction programs. This 2 training consists of visual materials such as videos and 3 presentations as well as printed materials for use in the 4 field. An example of the materials developed is shown on 5 this slide. 6 As of June 30th, both railroads combined have 7 trained about 4400 employees on both the idle reduction 8 and visible emission program requirements. The railroad's 9 plan is to train about 1,600 more employees system wide to 10 complete this requirement. 11 --o0o-- 12 ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECTION MANAGER HOLMES: 13 As specified in the visible emission reduction and repair 14 program, UP and BNSF are required to perform inspections 15 to identify and repair smoking locomotives. During the 16 first six months of this calendar year, the railroads 17 conducted over 8300 visible emission inspections on their 18 national locomotive fleets. As of June 30th, both 19 railroads are currently meeting the 99 percent compliance 20 rate. 21 --o0o-- 22 ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECTION MANAGER HOLMES: 23 Under the agreement, health risk assessments will be 24 performed at 16 designated rail yards. The risk 25 assessments will quantify the community risk resulting PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 115 1 from diesel emissions with these rail yards. The risk 2 assessments will be based on guidelines prepared by the 3 Air Resources Board. The guidelines have been developed 4 to be consistent with the risk assessment guidelines 5 published by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard 6 Assessment and based on staff experience with the 7 Roseville rail yard risk assessment. Staff released the 8 draft guidelines this month for public comment. In 9 August, staff will also hold workshops in both northern 10 and southern California to consider any additional public 11 comments on the draft guidelines. 12 Staff expects to begin to receive data by late 13 summer from the railroads for the nine risk assessments 14 that are due this year. And then the remaining health 15 risk assessments are scheduled to be completed by the end 16 of next year. 17 --o0o-- 18 ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECTION MANAGER HOLMES: 19 As required under AB 1222, legislation passed last year 20 and is referenced in the agreement, ARB staff, the 21 railroads, South Coast, and Sacramento Air Quality 22 Management Districts, and several community 23 representatives have devoted considerable effort to 24 develop and implement a pilot program to evaluate the 25 feasibility of using remote sensing devices to identify PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 116 1 high emitting locomotives. Staff anticipates that testing 2 will begin later this summer. Staff also in consultation 3 with the advisory committee is required to submit a report 4 to the Legislature by the end of this year. 5 --o0o-- 6 ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECTION MANAGER HOLMES: 7 The technology assessments specified in the agreement are 8 also underway. The ARB and railroads have been 9 participating over the past five years in the California 10 emission research and demonstration program. This program 11 has resulted in two older switch locomotives being 12 retrofitted with diesel particulate filters, and plans are 13 to have them placed in the California service this fall. 14 U.S. EPA and UP recently announced a separate testing 15 program to evaluate the use of a set of diesel oxidation 16 catalysts on an older line haul locomotive. Once this 17 locomotive is retrofitted, it will be placed in the 18 California service as well. 19 The Air Resources Board, South Coast, railroads, 20 and industry staff also recently visited Europe last May 21 to enhance their knowledge of European experiences with 22 locomotive emission controls. Details of this trip can be 23 found in the staff report. 24 --o0o-- 25 ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECTION MANAGER HOLMES: PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 117 1 Under the agreement, ARB and the railroads also agreed to 2 hold technical evaluation meetings with the public every 3 six months. These meetings provide an open forum for the 4 discussion of existing and potential technologies to 5 reduce locomotive emissions. U.S. EPA, locomotive engine 6 manufacturers, the railroads, community members, local air 7 districts, and other interested parties have attended and 8 offered their perspectives at these meetings. The first 9 technology assessment meeting was held this past spring in 10 Los Angeles, and the second technology assessment meeting 11 was held in Sacramento last week. 12 --o0o-- 13 ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECTION MANAGER HOLMES: 14 Under the agreement, ARB is required to develop and 15 conduct an idling and smoking locomotive enforcement 16 training program for ARB and air district staff. To date, 17 staff has trained 36 ARB and nine air district inspectors. 18 In addition, 13 representatives from the railroads 19 participated in this training. In August, staff has 20 scheduled training for an additional 60 air district 21 inspectors. 22 ARB enforcement staff performed inspections at 23 the 31 designated and covered rail yards from May 8th to 24 June 16th. In conducting these inspections, ARB 25 inspectors observed nearly 700 locomotives and issued 23 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 118 1 idling notices of violations, which represents about a 96 2 percent compliance rate. 3 Also as Ms. Witherspoon mentioned earlier, 4 smoking locomotives were identified and the rate of 5 non-compliance was also consistant with the railroad's 6 national compliance data of 99 percent. 7 ARB enforcement staff will conduct future 8 inspections at the designated and covered rail yards about 9 each six months and at other locations statewide as 10 needed. 11 --o0o-- 12 ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECTION MANAGER HOLMES: 13 There have also been a number of other activities that 14 have occurred to reduce locomotive emissions and to 15 support the implementation of the agreement. These 16 various activities include modernization of both the line 17 haul and switch locomotive fleets that operate in 18 California, visiting designated and covered rail yards, 19 meeting with the communities, and implementing the 20 community complaint process. 21 --o0o-- 22 ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECTION MANAGER HOLMES: 23 UP and BNSF has made a strong commitment to upgrade their 24 national line haul locomotive fleet over the past six 25 years. The system wide investments have provided benefits PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 119 1 that directly support the implementation of the agreement. 2 UP and BNSF combined own or lease about 14,000 locomotives 3 nationwide. Since 2000, they have purchased over 4,000 4 new line haul locomotives. Most of these new line haul 5 locomotives were built with idle reduction devices. 6 Seven-hundred of these new locomotives were bought in 2005 7 and meet the U.S. EPA's most stringent or Tier II 8 locomotive emission standards. The Tier II locomotives 9 provide up to a 65 percent reduction in NOX and a 10 50 percent reduction in diesel PM emissions from 11 unregulated line haul locomotives. Over the past years, 12 staff has begun to see many these new line haul 13 locomotives operating on many of the major rail lines in 14 California. 15 --o0o-- 16 ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECTION MANAGER HOLMES: 17 UP and BNSF currently have 438 intrastate or 18 California-based locomotives as I mentioned earlier. One 19 of the significant changes that will occur in the near 20 future is the replacement of many of California's 30-plus 21 year old switchers with new low emitting switch 22 locomotives. 23 A total of 69 genset switch locomotives have 24 recently been purchased. These are powered by two or 25 three 700 horsepower engines which are equivalent in power PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 120 1 to an average single engine 2,000 horsepower switch 2 locomotive. The genset has the advantage of employing 3 only the number of engines needed to perform the required 4 work. 5 Another advantage of the genset engines is they 6 can be upgraded when the engines are remanufactured with 7 the next generation of non-road engines. 8 California will have twelve electric hybrid or 9 green builts as they are called that employ a single small 10 300 horsepower engine to recharge the large number of 11 batteries used to power the locomotive. In addition, BNSF 12 has been operating four liquified natural gas switch 13 locomotives in the Los Angeles area since the mid 1990s. 14 These low emitting switch locomotives significantly reduce 15 fuel consumption and can provide up to a 90 percent 16 reduction in NOX and diesel PM emissions as compared to a 17 typical California switch locomotive. 18 California will have 85 low emitting switch 19 locomotives by next year which will represent about 20 20 percent of California's intrastate locomotive fleet. We'd 21 like to mention that incentive funds like bonds and other 22 funding sources can be used to accelerate the full 23 replacement of the California intrastate locomotive fleet. 24 --o0o-- 25 ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECTION MANAGER HOLMES: PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 121 1 ARB staff and interested air districts have worked with 2 the railroads to schedule visits at each of the designated 3 and covered rail yards. The purpose of these visits has 4 been to assess the overall types of operations, the 5 relative levels of activities, and proximity of residences 6 and businesses to the rail yards to be able to improve 7 program implementation, including preparations for the 8 upcoming health risk assessments. 9 --o0o-- 10 ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECTION MANAGER HOLMES: 11 Staff and the railroads have placed a high priority on 12 ensuring improved and ongoing community involvement. The 13 first round of community meetings were completed last 14 month. The next round of community meetings will begin in 15 early 2007. The major focus of these next set of meetings 16 will be to seek public input on the nine draft rail yard 17 health risk assessments due at the end of this year and to 18 begin to identify potential mitigation measures for those 19 rail yards. 20 --o0o-- 21 ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECTION MANAGER HOLMES: 22 The railroads have implemented the community complaint 23 process and continue to work with ARB staff and the public 24 to improve the responsiveness of the system. Each 25 railroad employs a national phone call center that PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 122 1 operates 24 hours per day and 365 days per year. All 2 idling and visible emission calls received at these 3 centers are forwarded to the railroad's operations and 4 environmental management staff to investigate and resolve. 5 The railroads's 800 numbers are provided on the slide. 6 --o0o-- 7 ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECTION MANAGER HOLMES: 8 In summary, the agreement is being successfully 9 implemented on schedule to achieve the anticipated 10 emission reductions. Lower emitting locomotives continue 11 to enter California service. The technology evaluations 12 are underway, and the health risk assessments are on 13 schedule. Additional emission reductions are possible 14 through community participation and the implementation of 15 additional rail yard mitigation strategies. Enforcement 16 and community outreach efforts are ongoing. 17 In conclusion, staff recommends a subsequent 18 update on the implementation of the statewide rail yard 19 agreement in six months. I'd be glad to respond to any 20 questions. 21 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you. 22 Do Board members have questions? 23 Dr. Gong. 24 BOARD MEMBER GONG: I realize that we're having 25 the community meetings, but I didn't sense how the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 123 1 community responses are coming out during these meetings 2 or in between. Is the communities involved finding that 3 the railroads are more responsive? 4 ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECTION MANAGER HOLMES: 5 Well, I can certainly offer my perspective. There was 6 sort of a range especially down in the South Coast. We 7 have a two or three meetings that were very well attended, 8 in particulate, Mira Loma, Commerce, and Long Beach. And 9 there was some sentiment still existing about the process 10 of the MOU. However, one of the things I noticed is that 11 many of the folks who participated were looking for ways 12 to find solutions and trying to move ahead. However, 13 there were still some that were expressing some of the 14 sentiments the Board has heard over the past year as well. 15 BOARD MEMBER GONG: You're sharing with these 16 people the progress that has been made as well, I hope? 17 ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECTION MANAGER HOLMES: 18 Yes. Actually, this updated report was distributed to our 19 very large rail yard locomotive environmental justice 20 e-mail list. We've made copies available, hard copies 21 available to the public. And again, with the community 22 meetings, this has really been an ongoing process to 23 communicate with the public. And just recently we had the 24 health risk assessment guidelines which were published as 25 well and provided to the public too. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 124 1 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: I assume that in the longer 2 term the EPA Tier III rulemaking will play a big role in 3 getting even more substantial reductions. Do we know how 4 that's coming? 5 ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECTION MANAGER HOLMES: 6 Well, recently we just held a locomotive technology 7 symposium. And actually, U.S. EPA was here to talk about 8 the progress in the Tier III rulemaking. Also we had 9 manufacturers in the railroad industry here as well. And 10 they are indicating to us that they are hoping that a 11 draft rulemaking may be out at the end of this year or 12 early next year with the hopes a final rulemaking would be 13 completed by 2008. 14 STATIONARY SOURCE DIVISION CHIEF FLETCHER: If I 15 could add to that. We believe we're going to need to put 16 some pressure on U.S. EPA to ensure they impose the most 17 stringent standards they can. So we have submitted 18 comments to them in the past on our recommendations. And 19 we have another letter in process that we hope to send 20 within the next week or two again encouraging them to look 21 at tight standards. Because this is as you mentioned 22 really a critical process for it. 23 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Is it correct to assume this 24 will involve aftertreatment for both PM and NOX? 25 STATIONARY SOURCE DIVISION CHIEF FLETCHER: Yes. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 125 1 Certainly for the new locomotives. One of the tough 2 issues is what do you do about the existing line haul 3 locomotives. And that is an area that we are looking at 4 and I think is going to be the hardest part for EPA. 5 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: This would be treated as an 6 overhaul rule. 7 STATIONARY SOURCE DIVISION CHIEF FLETCHER: Yeah. 8 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Are there any other 9 questions from Board members? 10 If not, we'll proceed with the public testimony. 11 Our first three witnesses are Maureen Kane, Dr. 12 Wallerstein, and Ed Pupka. 13 MS. KANE: Good afternoon. My name is Mareen 14 Kane, and I appreciate being able to spend a few moments 15 just to convey some messages from your fellow Board Member 16 Ron Loveridge. 17 I serve as a consultant to the Mayor as he sits 18 on this Board. And as you know, this was a very important 19 issue to him. And he wanted me to convey his regrets that 20 because of a prior commitment he's out of the state today 21 and wasn't able to be here to hear the report. But he 22 wanted me to assure you he got briefed on this report 23 prior to his leaving. And he wanted me to also mention he 24 was very pleased with the tone of the report. It was very 25 reassuring to him that the report have been given indeed PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 126 1 at the six month time line and that the content of the 2 report was very encouraging. And so he wanted that 3 message. 4 And I know it's kind of odd for a Board member to 5 be conveying a message from an absentee position. But he 6 did want that message conveyed, and also wanted to say 7 that he looks forward to being here for the next six-month 8 report. So I thank you for your time. 9 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you very much. 10 Dr. Wallerstein. 11 DR. WALLERSTEIN: Now I get to say good 12 afternoon, Dr. Sawyer and members of the Board. We have 13 four staff members including myself to testify. We're 14 each going to take about three minutes. And I will be 15 specific to obligations being met. 16 First let me say that I think your staff has 17 worked hard to meet its obligations. However, we think 18 the railroads are falling short of meeting their 19 obligations to the breathing public. What I'd like to do 20 is play a short news clip, it's about two minutes and 30 21 seconds, of a recent incident in Riverside where an idling 22 locomotive was left running. 23 (Thereupon a news clip was presented.) 24 DR. WALLERSTEIN: This is not an isolated 25 incident over the last few months about excessive idling PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 127 1 of trains. Ed Pupka will now describe another couple of 2 incidences. 3 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Dr. Sawyer, 4 before we go to the next witness, I want to remind the 5 Board the Goods Movement Action Plan that has been jointly 6 developed by Business Transportation and Housing Agency 7 and the California Environmental Protection Agency and ARB 8 is a member of that effort has placed a very high priority 9 on grade crossing on what they call the East Alameda 10 Corridor to prevent exactly this problem from occurring. 11 Because the frequency of train hauls, whether they stop 12 for crew changes or not, is such that traffic is delayed 13 routinely in the eastern part of the basin. And everyone 14 considers it a very high priority to add over crossings 15 which are at least a million a piece to ease up these 16 competing transportation corridors. 17 And the railroads are behind that, the 18 Administration is behind that. We're behind that. 19 Because when traffic stops, emissions increase from the 20 idling vehicles. If the bond goes through, a big fraction 21 of the funds is to be devoted on those over crossings. 22 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you. Mr. Pupka. 23 MR. PUPKA: Thank you, Board members, Dr. Sawyer. 24 My name is Ed Pupka. I'm a senior enforcement manager 25 with the South Coast Air Quality Management District. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 128 1 Over the past three years, South Coast Air 2 Quality has received and responded to well over 300 air 3 quality complaints alleging smoke and odors from idling 4 diesel engine locomotives that are operating within our 5 four-county jurisdiction. Eighty-five of those complaints 6 were received by South Coast in the last seven months 7 alone. Sixty-nine of those complaints alleged odor from 8 diesel exhaust. Sixteen of those complaints alleged smoke 9 and visible emissions. 10 During this same time frame, since January 1st of 11 '06, the AQMD has issued several notices of violations to 12 train operators, two of which are for creating a public 13 nuisance, discharging air contaminants in such quantities 14 that caused injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to 15 any civil persons or to the public, which is a violation 16 not only of South Coast Air Quality's Rule 402, but also 17 the Health and Safety Code 41700. 18 If I could indulge you, I'd like to take just a 19 few moments and summarize for you those two public 20 nuisance incidents, the results of our complaint 21 investigation into those. 22 Of the 85 air quality complaints received since 23 January 1st, '06, 27 of those were received from residents 24 in the city of Yorba Linda whose homes are within 250 feet 25 or less of two main tracks in a siting that is owned and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 129 1 operated by Burlington Norther Sante Fe Railroads. While 2 the residents in this community have alleged a total of 3 five separate dates when they've experienced smoke and 4 odors from idling diesel locomotives, one particulate 5 incident resulted in a documented public nuisance 6 violation. 7 In summary, on the evening of June 7th, '06, 8 between the hours of approximately 8:00 and 9:00 p.m., the 9 AQMD received six air quality complaints alleging odors 10 from diesel locomotives idling in proximities to these 11 residents' homes. AQMD inspectors arrived shortly 12 thereafter and found eight diesel locomotives parked on 13 one main track. Six engines were observe idling, two 14 engines were not. 15 Complainants allege the locomotives had been 16 idling at that same location since approximately 7:15 that 17 evening. AQMD inspectors confirmed with the operators of 18 diesel locomotives during their one-and-a-half hour 19 investigation. Residents later told our inspectors that 20 the locomotives did not depart the location until 21 approximately 10:30 that evening, three hours and 15 22 minutes after they had initiated their idling. 23 In the complainants' written declarations to the 24 South Coast, some of the complainants reported headaches, 25 elevated blood pressure, and having to keep their PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 130 1 asthmatic children indoors during this event. 2 --o0o-- 3 STATIONARY SOURCE DIVISION CHIEF FLETCHER: The 4 next incident occurred on the afternoon of June 25th, '06, 5 on a Sunday. The AQMD received one air quality complaint 6 representing numerous complainants alleging odors from a 7 nearby idling diesel engine locomotive that was effecting 8 a large number of people at a church gathering where over 9 250 people were in attendance. 10 --o0o-- 11 STATIONARY SOURCE DIVISION CHIEF FLETCHER: Our 12 AQMD inspector arrived shortly thereafter and found five 13 idling locomotive diesel engines that were parked on an 14 adjacent main track owned and operated by Union Pacific 15 Railroad. Complainants there alleged the locomotives had 16 been idling at that same location since approximately 3:15 17 that afternoon. South Coast inspectors confirmed diesel 18 engine locomotives remained at that location for 19 approximately three hours during this social event at this 20 church. 21 In their written declarations to South Coast, 22 some complainants reported headaches, difficulty 23 breathing, nausea, and choking. One of the complainants 24 even reported experiencing an asthma attack during the 25 incident and required treatment with an inhaler. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 131 1 These two incidents illustrate the nature of our 2 complaint investigation observations involving emissions 3 from idling trains. And I thank you for your time. 4 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you. 5 BOARD MEMBER BERG: I have a question. Excuse 6 me. Good afternoon. On your two examples here, what were 7 the notice of violations and what were the fines on these? 8 MR. PUPKA: I cannot speak to the fines. That is 9 something that can be handled by the prosecutor's office. 10 But in those two instances, we issued Notices of 11 Violations for creating a public nuisance. So they were 12 sited under the California Health and Safely Code 41700 13 and also our District Rule 402. 14 BOARD MEMBER BERG: Is that one incident or five 15 incidents? 16 MR. PUPKA: No. That is one incident on one date 17 for a specific time. 18 BOARD MEMBER BERG: So even though they have five 19 or three locomotives -- 20 MR. PUPKA: That's correct. That is correct. So 21 they were cited for a public nuisance on that date and 22 that event. 23 DR. WALLERSTEIN: If I could just clarify. These 24 are recent violations, so they haven't been fully acted on 25 yet. That's why we can't tell you what the ultimate PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 132 1 penalties will be. They're still being evaluated by the 2 prosecutor's office. 3 BOARD MEMBER BERG: And also the homes and the 4 picture looks like a nice area, relatively new. So they 5 were built -- 6 MR. PUPKA: They are residents, yes, and they are 7 adjacent to railroad tracks with the citing. 8 BOARD MEMBER BERG: But they did build those 9 homes next to the railroads tracks. The railroad tracks 10 did not come through the homes. 11 DR. WALLERSTEIN: I think that's probably 12 correct. What we would point out is that the issues being 13 raised by the community to us are not the railroads moving 14 through at a brisk speed. It is when they park their 15 locomotives there and leave them idling for hours. 16 BOARD MEMBER BERG: And I agree with that. Thank 17 you. 18 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: The next three speakers are 19 Kurt Wiese, Henry Hogo, and Mark Stehly. 20 MR. WIESE: Good afternoon, Chairman Sawyer and 21 members of the Board. I'm Kurt Wiese, the District 22 Council for the South Coast Air Quality Management 23 District. I'd like to update you on a certain aspect of 24 the railroad MOU, and that's how it's being used in a 25 lawsuit that the railroads have brought against the South PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 133 1 Coast trying to invalidate our railroad rules. 2 As you probably all know, at the time that the 3 MOU was adopted, the AQMD had been developing a series of 4 regulations covering many of the program areas addressed 5 by the MOU. The first of the three AQMD regulations was 6 adopted in October of 2005, and the other two were 7 adopted -- the other regulation was adopted in February 8 2006. 9 Shortly after the AQMD adopted its regulations, 10 the railroad sued the AQMD in federal court in March of 11 2006. And shortly after that, the railroads filed a 12 motion for a preliminary injunction asking the judge to 13 invalidate the AQMD's rules until the lawsuit was 14 completed. The injunction papers that the railroad 15 submitted to the court are full of references to the MOU. 16 And you can see on the screen the injunction papers and 17 the many reference there that are highlighted, these are 18 instances in the injunction papers where the railroads 19 have used the MOU in their argument. 20 The railroads have adopted a key strategy in the 21 lawsuit of arguing that because of the MOU, the AQMD's 22 rules are unnecessary and should be invalidated. The 23 railroads have also argued that the court should 24 invalidate the AQMD's rules because they address the same 25 program areas as the MOU and conflict with the MOU. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 134 1 As your staff pointed out several months ago, in 2 the first hearings on the MOU, there is nothing in the MOU 3 per se that prevents the AQMD or any other local air 4 district from adopting regulations addressing train 5 emissions. However, as a practical matter, the railroads 6 have been using the MOU as a litigation strategy. In 7 fact, a key litigation strategy to seek legal invalidation 8 of local air district regulations addressing locomotive 9 emissions. 10 Thank you very much. 11 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you. 12 Mr. Hogo. 13 MR. HOGO: Good afternoon, Dr. Sawyer and members 14 of the Board. For the record, I'm Henry Hogo. I'm the 15 Assistant Deputy Executive Officer in Science and 16 Technology Advancement at the AQMD. I'm going to limit my 17 comments to Section 8(C)(2) of the MOU which deals with 18 the retrofit or rebuild of the existing line haul 19 locomotives with low emitting technologies. As your staff 20 mentioned last week, we have a technology forum here. 21 --o0o-- 22 MR. HOGO: This slide was presented by U.S. EPA 23 last week which shows the projection of locomotive 24 emission out to the year 2040. What you see here is that 25 the various locomotive engines from uncontrolled engines PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 135 1 to the new Tier II engines which is shown in orange. And 2 what you see here is that over time with the older 3 uncontrolled engines, dirtier engines taken off the tracks 4 in this case and replaced with Tier II engines that even 5 over time with economic growth that we actually don't see 6 reductions in overall, in this case particulate matter 7 emissions. And this is of grave concern to us because we 8 believe that as new locomotives are coming in, they should 9 be as clean as possible. And we strongly urge the need to 10 move ahead with looking at retrofit technologies for 11 existing locomotives. We're talking about existing Tier 12 II locomotives even. 13 If we can go to the next slide. 14 --o0o-- 15 MR. HOGO: We believe because of the need for the 16 retrofit technologies to move forward, our staff is 17 recommending to our Board to move ahead with three 18 locomotive projects relative to the installation of 19 particulate filters or catalytic converters. And we 20 believe this is an important step in identifying 21 technologies that we could move forward. 22 My next three slides highlight the three projects 23 if we can go to the next slide. 24 --o0o-- 25 MR. HOGO: And the uniqueness of these projects. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 136 1 The first one is to equip a Metrolink passenger locomotive 2 with an SCR DPF unit on what we call the head-in power of 3 the locomotive. That's an auxiliary engine that's used to 4 generate the hoteling power used in a passenger 5 locomotive. These emissions account for about 30 percent 6 of that locomotive. We believe this is a strong project 7 to move forward with. 8 Next slide. 9 --o0o-- 10 MR. HOGO: It was mentioned earlier by the ports 11 they're moving -- Pacific Harbor Lines moving ahead and 12 replacing their existing fleet with 16 new locomotives. 13 An agreement with Pacific Harbor Lines was to demonstrate 14 an oxidation catalyst technology. We've been able to work 15 with PHL to move ahead with a DPF demonstration which will 16 reduce the emissions further down to 90 percent level. 17 Next slide. 18 --o0o-- 19 MR. HOGO: This is probably the most unique 20 application that we found to date, which is a compact SCR 21 unit that will replace a muffler system on the locomotive. 22 And we believe this is a very good look at the space 23 issues related to locomotive design. 24 Next slide. 25 --o0o-- PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 137 1 MR. HOGO: So relative to line haul locomotives, 2 we believe there are technologies out there that could fit 3 into the car body or above the locomotive. The two 4 technologies out there are the standard wall flow units, 5 but these could be modularized into smaller units and 6 different design. 7 A new technology that's out there is called 8 fibrous ceramic media unit, which is actually less weight 9 and occupies a smaller space. So this technology we 10 believe could be implemented into an existing locomotive. 11 If we look at the different locations of the locomotive, 12 we believe the engine room compartment which is above the 13 engine or the vent wings or even the silencer/muffler 14 location there may be designs that can fit in. 15 We understand at this point there's still $3.5 16 million left in the technology demonstration portion of 17 the MOU. 18 --o0o-- 19 MR. HOGO: As such, we urge your Board to issue a 20 request for proposal to complete these type of designs for 21 the predominant line haul locomotives, not just one engine 22 type but both, and prior to any further field 23 demonstration. We believe this is a strong point to make 24 here. Thank you. 25 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you very much. And PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 138 1 let me say that we share your optimism about the 2 applicability of retrofit technology to locomotives. And 3 we look forward to doing our part to moving that ahead and 4 working with you. 5 Mr. Stehly, and then we'll have Lupe Valdez and 6 Mike Barr. 7 MR. STEHLY: Dr. Sawyer, Board members, thanks 8 for letting me present here before you. I'm in a bit of a 9 quandary with a previous discussion on Yorba Linda that I 10 would like to address the circumstances concerning that. 11 If I did that, I wouldn't be able to give the rest of your 12 testimony. Would you mind if I abbreviated my testimony a 13 little and then discussed it? But it's likely to take 14 more than three minutes. 15 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: That would be fine. I've 16 given a little bit more than the usual three minutes to 17 the previous speakers. 18 MR. STEHLY: Thank you. I'm Assistant Vice 19 President of Environment and Research and Development at 20 BNSF Railway. As your staff has noted, the 2005 railroad 21 MOU is working well. And it's pulling in a great deal of 22 new technology reducing emissions in California. And I'd 23 like to show you a chart that's been circulated to the 24 Board. It's a multi-colored chart, and it covers all the 25 investments we have made and are making on improving our PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 139 1 emissions. 2 The blue line shows the additional Tier II 3 locomotives required to meet the fleet average 4 requirements of the '98 MOU. The green line shows current 5 and future investment driven by the 2005 MOU, the most 6 recent one. The tan lines is things that are addressed 7 under both of the '98 and '95 MOUs. 8 What does the chart mean to me? The blue line 9 shows that to meet the 2010 fleet average agreement that 10 the railroads combined will purchase 80 Tier II units to 11 cover the inefficiencies of changing power outside the 12 basin so that only the green locomotives go into southern 13 California. That's an investment of $160 million that is 14 about waste in our operations that goes to the benefit of 15 reducing air emissions. We're not complaining about it, 16 but it's a large sum of money solely for the benefit of 17 air quality. 18 The orange line shows by the end of 2007 about 60 19 percent of the switch locomotives in California will emit 20 at the ultra low emissions level 60 percent lower NOX than 21 Tier II units. These include the four previously 22 discussed spark-ignited LNG locomotives, the 70 new genset 23 switchers, twelve hybrid switchers, four in-service now, 24 and remaining eight in the end of 2006. 25 As compared to the older switch units, these PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 140 1 ultra low emitting units will reduce NOX and diesel PM by 2 about 90 percent. And they operate almost exclusively 3 around yards. So they really do effect our neighbors that 4 need the help the most. 5 Since we briefed you last in January, we've 6 purchased an additional 420 Tier II locomotives, bringing 7 our total inventory up to about 1,060 of the lowest 8 emitting locomotives. 9 There have been some new things happening too 10 since January. We are on the rails testing the diesel 11 particulate filter that's going to occur this year. There 12 are two of them that are quite close to being done, and 13 we'll run those for a while and then retrofit another two 14 if they work well. 15 The UP has done a proof of concept of that hood 16 system to capture locomotives if they're not moving very 17 quickly if they're essentially near stationary. We've got 18 a commitment to purchase ten LNG, but also road legal yard 19 tractors for our Hobart facility in the City of Commerce. 20 And then they were purchased -- they will be purchased 21 with some funding by Carl Moyer funds. 22 And then in Seattle, we're installing the first 23 ever electric crane on a rail yard to move containers on 24 and off rail equipment that's totally electric, large 25 take-up reel. The system's been in use in Hamburg, PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 141 1 Germany for a while. It's the first time ever in the U.S. 2 Our first one was delivered in December, and we have three 3 more coming through March. So again, cargo handling 4 equipment that's way beyond the cargo handling rules, but 5 is a new technology that we all can use to reduce 6 emissions. 7 Bottom line, because the MOUs, the railroads will 8 invest a quarter of a million dollars to reduce locomotive 9 emissions in California. No agency could have required us 10 to make the investment. I think it just goes to show 11 oftentimes voluntary and innovative agreements can work 12 very well. So we've accomplished a lot. 13 Has our implementation been without bumps, no. 14 The warts you've seen in the slides before, proof that we 15 still have plenty of opportunities for improvement. We're 16 committed to making those improvements. And we very much 17 appreciate the partnership with ARB, the several local air 18 districts and communities that are effected by rail 19 operations. 20 So I could answer questions or talk about Yorba 21 Linda or both. 22 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Maybe just give us a quick 23 explanation of Yorba Linda. 24 MR. STEHLY: Yorba Linda, we've made some new 25 citings. We're actually initiating trains from there. So PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 142 1 we will build a train, park it there. It won't have 2 locomotives on it. Our crew will bring up locomotives. 3 They connect it to the train. In order for the train to 4 move, we have to pump the air up in the train. So the 5 locomotives run to provide air pressure so that the 6 brakes, there's a cylinder reservoir on each of them that 7 has to get filled with air before we have brakes on the 8 train. When that gets filled up and the air compresses on 9 the locomotives that do that, we anticipated that this 10 could be a problem. And so we already have plans to 11 install wayside air compressors and an air line to charge 12 the train so we don't have to charge it with a locomotive. 13 So that's the ultimate solution to avoid the idling. 14 But it was for train operations for charging the 15 train. It wasn't the train that just came up, stopped, 16 and idled because it was there. We can't move those cars 17 without charging the train. But the solution is a wayside 18 air compressor. 19 You might ask them when they phoned us about the 20 issue. You might find it was, you know, better than a 21 week after it occurred, when they know the 800 number. 22 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Okay. Ms. Berg. 23 Thank you very much. 24 Lupe Valdez. 25 MS. VALDEZ: Good afternoon, Chairman Sawyer and PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 143 1 members of the ARB Board. My name is Lupe Valdez. I 2 serve as the Director of Public Policy for Union Pacific. 3 And previously I served as the Deputy Executive Officer 4 for the South Coast Air Quality Management District and 5 also served as the public affairs administrator for 6 Metrolink in southern California. I live and work in 7 southern California, and I wanted to briefly touch on the 8 following. 9 We have also initiated obviously and established 10 our 1-800 number. I brought two samples with me today 11 just to show you. We're trying to pass these out as much 12 as possible. One is a BNSF number and card. One is a 13 sticker we have. We also have some bigger stickers for 14 those of us that our eyesight this is a little difficult 15 to read from afar. What we're trying to do is remind 16 people, and it's an educational process to use that 1-800 17 number, because that's really critical in terms of our 18 processes to be responsive to the community. So it is one 19 of those critical things that I continuously work on. 20 Both railroads are reaching out, working with 21 communities. This includes 17 meetings that we have had 22 with the MOU in mind obviously as well as 13 other 23 meetings and tours of the rail facilities. We've made 24 sure even post the 911 world we all live in that we try to 25 give our folks that are interested in looking at our PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 144 1 facilities understanding what we do and working with 2 communities, and we're doing this particularly where our 3 rail yards obviously interface with our residents. 4 Additionally, almost 250 community members, local 5 officials, and air district employees attended our first 6 series of meetings, by the way. The first round of 7 meetings gave the railroads a lot of insights into the 8 issues and particularly the needs of each community. 9 These insights will allow us to further refine our ongoing 10 outreach efforts, especially for the next series of 11 meetings. And we did receive a lot of valuable input from 12 all the communities. 13 Although there are community groups that decided 14 not to participate in the railroad's outreach activities, 15 we will continue to work with any and all community 16 members and other stakeholders who are interested in 17 working with us. We will continually seek to improve 18 relationships with residents living near our facilities as 19 well as local representatives. Both railroads continue to 20 be involved with various local efforts such as the City of 21 Commerce's railroad task force, the AQMD port monitoring 22 project, the city of Riverside's transportation and 23 accountability performance group, as well as numerous 24 numbers of goods movement initiatives that are happening 25 through the state of California. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 145 1 I do want to mention also that we have 2 cooperatively worked with -- earlier you heard today about 3 the San Pedro Bay plan. And we were actually able to loan 4 them our genset switcher, our prototype, so they could 5 take it to their facility, the Pacific Harbor Lines and 6 test it and have their train engineers work with that 7 equipment to understand how it works, how it could 8 operate, et cetera. They did a good field test. So we 9 have a lot of those cooperative relationships that are 10 also occurring. 11 I do want to mention while I am not familiar with 12 the issue in San Bernardino, I am very familiar with the 13 issue in Riverside because we actually met with Councilman 14 Steve Adams who was in the Channel 9 report. It was one 15 of the first times UP took a superintendent to the city of 16 Riverside which I think was long overdue unfortunately. 17 But we took the superintendent that was in charge of all 18 the operations for the Los Angeles division which includes 19 more than L.A. County. It includes San Bernardino, 20 Riverside, Orange, goes out to Las Vegas. But we took 21 them with us to discuss what we could do to park these 22 trains when we have a problem. 23 And the situation that occurred and unfortunately 24 it occurred Friday the weekend of Memorial Day weekend, a 25 train went into an emergency mode situation. Our PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 146 1 dispatcher decided to move our train out of the way 2 thinking he had plenty of time. He did until that 3 emergency happened. Basically, they had to stop 4 everything, because when it goes into an emergency mode, 5 that means there may be a failure somewhere and you need 6 to keep everyone safe on the tracks. And we delayed 7 Metrolink service, and we delayed obviously the blocked 8 crossings. 9 We have now designated a new area where to pull 10 over. But we also understand when there's emergencies, we 11 basically have to go with the flow and deal with the 12 situation at hand and make sure a train doesn't derail or 13 any other situation doesn't come up from it. But we did 14 meet with the city. And we are continuing to refine that 15 process and make sure that we get reports back from the 16 city in terms of making sure we try to not block those 17 crossings. 18 I do want to mention one of the things 19 Ms. Witherspoon mentioned earlier that is also near a 20 future grade crossing. Herupa is underway to be grade 21 separated, which means it will be a long area where trains 22 can pull over and not block crossings. That's something 23 the Riverside County Transportation Commission is actively 24 pursuing, as is the city of Riverside. So there is a 25 solution at hand, but it is costly needless to say. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 147 1 Thanks. 2 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you. 3 Ms. Berg. 4 BOARD MEMBER BERG: In the newscast, it seemed 5 that the problem was a switching out staff, scheduling of 6 staff. That doesn't seem like to be an emergency. 7 MS. VALDEZ: No. It was a domino effect. Once 8 you had a delay, a crew ran out of time, there's specific 9 rules and regulations where a crew cannot stay on that 10 train for over -- I want to say 12 hours. And they have 11 to get off the train. Very strict regulation. That's 12 what created that part of the development. 13 So what we looked is for a switching area for a 14 crew switch that's outside of the -- not outside of the 15 city. It's still within the city limits, but not near 16 those crossings. That's what we came up to as a 17 short-term plan for these situations should they happen in 18 the future. 19 BOARD MEMBER BERG: It does seem to me as 20 watching that film that if there is an emergency 21 situation, the railroad is responsible for assuring the 22 public safely. And having public going through and up and 23 over rail cars is not a very good idea. And there was no 24 railroad staff there. And I'm sure you've heard about all 25 that, but it just seems that that was a bigger problem PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 148 1 than just air. 2 Do they leave the trains idling during that 3 period? 4 MS. VALDEZ: I'm not -- I can't answer that 5 question. Normally, they would shut one down if they 6 leave for obviously safely reasons. And I believe -- I 7 don't know you can address that. But I believe they need 8 to shut them down when they're in that mode. But I don't 9 know the rule, per se. 10 BOARD MEMBER BERG: And then back to our MOU. I 11 was wondering if you are keeping track of the 1-800 phone 12 calls and how often -- I mean how long it takes to respond 13 to them and if you are seeing any new trends since you've 14 been keeping track. 15 MS. VALDEZ: We have been keeping track. From 16 January to June, we received about 210 calls between both 17 railroads. And one of the things that we are continually 18 explaining to individuals is separate from giving us a 19 situation to give us two critical pieces of detailed 20 information if they can see the engine locomotive number 21 and if they give us the location. Because obviously when 22 they call this number for both of us, it's a system wide 23 number, 24/7 that's covered 24/7. So it is important for 24 us to get those details. In some cases, we run into 25 trouble where they may not be able to see it. It's on the PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 149 1 other side of a high wall. That happened to us at LATC. 2 We're trying to figure out ways to be able to 3 better respond to those issues when the caller cannot see 4 the engine number. So it's something we're trying to 5 focus on. But we are also looking at a responsiveness in 6 terms of making sure we respond back to the person that's 7 called. 8 BOARD MEMBER BERG: Does a railroad have to keep 9 records as to locomotives and their idling time? 10 MS. VALDEZ: When a caller calls are you stating? 11 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: The MOU doesn't 12 specify that, but we have expressed interest in seeing the 13 reports that they're generating and the kinds of 14 complaints that are coming in. 15 BOARD MEMBER BERG: Thank you very much. 16 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Dr. Gong. 17 BOARD MEMBER GONG: Ms. Berg asked all the 18 questions I wanted to ask. I'll have a comment anyway. 19 It seems to me from what I hear so far there had 20 been progress made according to the MOU, which is great. 21 That's what we want. But when you get a newscast like 22 that, a picture is worth a thousand words. And it's sort 23 of to me gives me a setback in my thinking about how well 24 the railroads are honing into this agreement in a sense. 25 And I note we are trying this is the first year, PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 150 1 and there are going to be glitches and bumps as I heard. 2 I understand that. But it certainly doesn't do PR any 3 good for anybody, this Board, the railroads, you know, 4 just looks bad. And I hope next time when we hear a 5 progress report I don't see any news clippings or visuals 6 like that. I think it really offsets the progress -- the 7 meaningful progress we can make. And I hope every party 8 does their just share in trying to create a better 9 environment for all this and make sure that's implemented. 10 I assume that these -- well, I guess you said it 11 was an emergency situation in Riverside, so I won't go any 12 further. You had your own policies, et cetera. But 13 obviously if I were a citizen sitting in a car on that 14 side waiting to pick up my child, I'd feel the same way as 15 that lady expressed in the news clipping. So anyway, 16 that's just something -- 17 MS. VALDEZ: And again, I think the grade 18 separation program will help a great deal, particularly to 19 these areas in terms of our congestion as well as in terms 20 of the residents living around. Because one of the 21 benefits separate from air quality complaints I do get 22 horn complaints. And one of the benefits of grade 23 separations is the horns no longer have to blow. And that 24 is a big deal to the local residents in any community that 25 obviously hear these trains 24/7. So that is, to be quite PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 151 1 frank, the more frequent complaint that I receive in 2 southern California. And that was the case when I was 3 with Metrolink as well. So that hasn't changed from my 4 life. 5 ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECTION MANAGER HOLMES: 6 Dr. Gong, one thing I wanted to mention. I went in 7 cautious and skeptical having to do the implementation of 8 the agreement. One of the things that was brought up and 9 I didn't comment earlier was the comments. For whatever 10 reasons, I got involved in the middle of a lot of the 11 complaints, because they got ahold off my number for 12 whatever reason. So I was able to actually track a lot of 13 what was going on over the past year. 14 And initially when we started last July, there 15 was a lot of difficulties. And I had a lot of people 16 expressing concern about the railroad's ability to 17 respond. And I can tell you from my personal experience 18 at least in the complaints I was involved in, the 19 responsiveness especially as far as the time to get out to 20 the field to correct the problem with local operations 21 people has dramatically improved especially over the past 22 six months. In addition, as it relates to getting this 23 information to their environmental management staff back 24 in Omaha and Dallas and Fort Worth, every morning at 5:00 25 a.m. I get a call from those people, and they tell me PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 152 1 exactly how they're following up on this. So I have not a 2 single complaint that has not been followed up especially 3 over the past six months. 4 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you. 5 Mike Barr and Kirk Marckwald. 6 MR. BARR: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members. 7 A couple of points back to the 2005 MOU. It is 8 part of the record in the lawsuit. Like your staff, the 9 railroads did share the 2005 MOU with the district staff 10 and the district board in an attempt to persuade the 11 district that its rules would not be necessary or 12 desirable in light of the 1998 and 2005 MOUs. So the 2005 13 MOU is part of the administrative record of the district 14 rules. And therefore since the lawsuit challenges the 15 rules, it's part of the record before the court. 16 For a further update on the litigation, on June 17 19th, 2006, the railroads and the district agreed that the 18 district's rules would not be implemented or enforced 19 until after the federal district court trial judge enters 20 a final judgment. The judge approved that agreement on 21 June 21st. So the railroads are implementing the 2005 22 MOU, as your staff has reported. And the ARB and some of 23 the districts are enforcing it in consultation and 24 collaboration as the staff reported. 25 In particulate on complaints, I think that all PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 153 1 the districts are working with the ARB to provide that 2 timely information to the railroads except for one 3 district except for the South Coast district. So we did 4 ask the district for copies of all of its idling and other 5 complaints in a request under the California Public 6 Records Act. The California Public Records Act required 7 the district to provide those complaints to the railroads 8 by June 25th, 2006. But to date, the district has not 9 produced any documents showing any of the complaints even 10 though they mention the complaints in their testimony 11 before you today. 12 When we receive those complaints and information 13 from the district, we'll certainly share them with the 14 ARB. We can respond as required by the 2005 MOU and by 15 company policy. Thank you. 16 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you. 17 Kirk Marckwald. 18 MR. MARCKWALD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Board 19 members. 20 Just want to touch on briefly a couple of things, 21 three or four things, because I know you have a lunch to 22 go to. 23 First with respect to unexpected benefits of the 24 MOU. Mark Stehly mentioned, but I think we talk too 25 quickly sometimes. So I just want to re-emphasize what it PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 154 1 means that these new switchers are going to be operating 2 in California. These switchers from a NOX perspective are 3 60 percent cleaner than the cleanest currently certified 4 locomotive. Eighty-eight percent of the switchers in the 5 South Coast District by the end of next year will be 6 emitting at this ultra low emitting locomotive rate. And 7 that is a remarkable commitment. It is driven in part by 8 the 2005 MOU and also by the '98 MOU. As Mark said and 9 the real beneficiaries are the people who live adjacent to 10 rail yards. So 88 percent of the switch units will be 11 this ultra clean locomotive by the December of next year. 12 Second unanticipated benefit is that the 13 community meetings which Lupe noted have really in some 14 cases become community conversations. For instance, last 15 week after the initial meetings were held in the Bay Area 16 region, combined environmental activists from San Leandro, 17 Richmond, and Oakland asked railroads to come forth and 18 provide a deeper discussion about railroad operations, 19 about ports. They said we want the local air districts 20 there. They were there. We want the port officials 21 there. They were there. And both railroads presented 22 operating people as well as environmental people to talk 23 about how railroads operations really work. So it's not 24 just the meeting that is occurring. It is really the 25 conversation. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 155 1 And finally, the other advantage, and Mike Barr 2 touched on this briefly, is in several air districts we 3 have either formal implementation agreements or working 4 arrangements. We have a formal agreement in the San 5 Joaquin. We have a working arrangement in the Bay Area. 6 The Executive Officer of the Bay Area co-convened the 7 public meeting that was held under the MOU, because he 8 wanted to hear firsthand and be in the chair to understand 9 what his citizens were concerned about. Several of their 10 representatives of that district participated in the 11 meeting we had last week with the joint groups there. 12 And finally, as your staff noted, we're training 13 all 60 inspectors from that air district on how to 14 implement the MOU. And I want to underscore, and perhaps 15 your staff can make sure in case there's any uncertainty 16 about the importance of calling the 800 number when 17 there's a complaint, because the railroads are committed 18 to addressing the concerns right away. And the way to 19 stop those complaints or address them as quickly as 20 possible is to get it into the railroad system on the 800 21 number. I've seen the list of various public entities 22 that have called that, and it's really important to 23 reinforce how important it is to first address the 24 problem, then diagnosis it, and then correct it, and then 25 provide the feedback loop that Lupe had talked about. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 156 1 Finally, it is truly unfortunate that Mayor 2 Loveridge was not here today, because here's what he said 3 to me last week about the Riverside incident. He said we 4 had a bad incident in Riverside a week or so ago. We 5 talked to him last week. But I want you to know that 6 never before has the railroad and specifically Union 7 Pacific been so responsive. Lupe Valdez came here, dealt 8 with a very difficult situation, ensured on the operating 9 side we got the kind of response we wanted. And I want 10 you to tell me Lupe's supervisor's e-mail because I would 11 like to make sure what a great job I think she is doing 12 for the railroad. 13 Now, I think if he were here today he would tell 14 you the same thing. And when you see him next month, you 15 can ask him that. But I think Member Berg is exactly 16 right and Member Gong. We can certainly do better. We 17 are committed to doing better. A key to doing better is 18 to knowing the problems when they occur and working in a 19 cooperative partnership to make sure that happens. 20 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: Thank you. That concludes 21 the public testimony. 22 Ms. Witherspoon, does staff have further 23 comments? 24 EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITHERSPOON: Nothing further 25 unless the Board members have questions. PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 157 1 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: I see no questions. 2 Since this is not a regulatory item, it's not 3 necessary to officially close the record. However, I 4 would like to thank staff for their presentation and to 5 thank Union Pacific and BNSF Railway to working with us to 6 protect the public health of California. We look forward 7 to continued progress and will receive a second report at 8 our January 2007 Board meeting. 9 Do Board members have any comments on any other 10 issues they'd like to make at this time? 11 I have no requests or comments from the public, 12 and therefore I would like a motion to adjourn. 13 SUPERVISOR PATRICK: So moved. 14 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Second. 15 CHAIRPERSON SAWYER: We stand adjourned. Thank 16 you all very much. 17 (Thereupon the California Air Resources Board 18 adjourned at 12:57 p.m.) 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345 158 1 CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER 2 I, TIFFANY C. KRAFT, a Certified Shorthand 3 Reporter of the State of California, and Registered 4 Professional Reporter, do hereby certify: 5 That I am a disinterested person herein; that the 6 foregoing hearing was reported in shorthand by me, 7 Tiffany C. Kraft, a Certified Shorthand Reporter of the 8 State of California, and thereafter transcribed into 9 typewriting. 10 I further certify that I am not of counsel or 11 attorney for any of the parties to said hearing nor in any 12 way interested in the outcome of said hearing. 13 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand 14 this 1st day of August, 2006. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 TIFFANY C. KRAFT, CSR, RPR 24 Certified Shorthand Reporter 25 License No. 12277 PETERS SHORTHAND REPORTING CORPORATION (916) 362-2345