BOARD MEETING DATE: December 5, 2003
AGENDA NO. 20

Mobile Source Committee

SYNOPSIS:

The Mobile Source Committee met Friday, November 21, 2003. Following is a summary of that meeting.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Receive and file.

S. Roy Wilson, Ed.D., Chair
Mobile Source Committee

Attendance

The meeting started at 9:05 a.m. Present: Committee Chair Roy Wilson, Vice Chair Jane Carney, and Committee Members Fred Aguiar and Jim Silva. Absent: Committee Members William Craycraft and Ron Loveridge

INFORMATION ITEMS:
 

1)	Resolution Proposing Summit Between Members of AQMD Governing Board and California Air Resources Board Jill Whynot, Planning and Rules Manager, gave a briefing on a Resolution for the December Governing Board meeting. This is one of the early action measures in the Cumulative Impacts Reduction Strategy. The resolution would propose a summit between a subset of members of both the AQMD Governing Board and CARB Board. This effort would help cooperative efforts to achieve emission reductions from on- and off-road sources. The committee members agreed with a suggestion by Dr. Barry Wallerstein, Executive Officer, that the summit include a discussion on the AB2766 program. The 2003 AQMP which was recently approved by CARB also included a technical summit, which would be separate from this effort. The Resolution suggests that the summit occur by March 31, 2004. The date and location will be determined later.
2)	AB2766 Annual Status Report Vasken Yardemian, Transportation Programs, presented an annual status report on the AB 2766 Subvention Fund. The report’s purpose was to present the outcome of FY 01-02 AB2766 Subvention Fund usage and program results to the AQMD Governing Board, California Air Resources Board (CARB), local governments and other entities. AB2766 was signed into law September 1990. It authorizes a $4 motor vehicle registration fee surcharge of which 40% is subvened to local governments on a quarterly basis to implement projects that reduce mobile source emissions. The financial summary indicated the following: the beginning balance was $25.3 million; funds received totaled $17.4 million; project spending totaled $17.8 million; earmarked funds totaled $18.3 million; and funds remaining after earmarking totaled $6.7 million. Expenditures in the 11 project categories indicated that Transportation Demand Management, Alternative Fuels, Public Transportation and Traffic Management had the highest spending allocations, with Public Education and Market Based Programs having the least. Staff also reported on the number of projects funded and quantified over the last five fiscal years. During FY 01-02, 392 projects were funded, of which 193 had reported emission reductions that resulted in approximately 4,406 tons of emissions (VOC, NOx, PM10 and CO/7) reduced. Cost-effectiveness ranged from $0.17 - $34.60 per pound of emissions reduced. AQMD staff provided outreach to local government staff in the form of meetings, telephone calls and training sessions. The overall summary of accomplishments indicated an increase in cost-effectiveness, use of automated reporting and earmarked funds. Project quantification and emission reductions were the areas that did not reflect an improvement, but remained relatively the same as in prior years. Future efforts by the AQMD staff will focus on continuing to provide technical assistance to local governments and continuing to interface with CARB. AQMD’s AB2766 staff will continue to coordinate with MSRC staff on outreach to local governments when funding opportunities develop, so that local jurisdictions can be encouraged to apply for applicable Discretionary AB 2766 projects funds. The full staff report will be presented to the Governing Board at its January 9, 2004 meeting and upon its approval will be forwarded to CARB. Committee members raised concern about the continued decrease in quantifiable reductions and associated expenditure and the types of projects selected by local governments After discussion by committee members on the program’s overall effectiveness, actual emission reductions achieved and program revenue usage, Dr. Wallerstein recommended that this be included as an agenda item for discussion at the proposed CARB and AQMD Board members Summit. The Summit discussion should focus on efficient project spending, cost effectiveness and to ensure implementation of future projects that provide quantifiable emission reductions.
3)	Report on San Joaquin Valley APCD’s Proposal on Indirect Source Fees Zorik Pirveysian, Planning and Rules Manager, Planning, Rule Development, and Area Sources, presented a report on the San Joaquin Valley APCD’s proposed rule on indirect source fees which is currently under development. The proposal originated from a control measure in the San Joaquin Valley APCD’s 2003 PM10 Plan adopted earlier this year. The San Joaquin Valley is currently designated as a "serious" non-attainment area for PM10 and a "severe" non-attainment area for ozone. The indirect source control measure called for an indirect source mitigation fee rule to be adopted by 2004 with implementation in 2005. Expected emission reductions are 6.2 tpd of PM10 and 4.1 tpd of NOx. The indirect source mitigation fee proposal would be applicable to any new land use project or development that attracts or generates motor vehicle trips. These would include commercial, residential, industrial, and institutional developments such as shopping malls, residential subdivisions, and distribution centers. The San Joaquin Valley APCD cites their existing authority under Health & Safety Code Sections 40716 and 42311 to impose requirements and fees on indirect sources. Additionally, a recently signed Senate Bill 709 requires the San Joaquin Valley APCD to adopt a fee schedule for indirect sources. The proposal will require the calculation of the emissions associated with the increase in vehicle trips from the new projects using the ARB’s land use Urban Emissions Model (URBEMIS). The District will then evaluate mitigation measures proposed by the developer and consider those and other feasible measures. Credits will be given for infrastructure and equipment proposed by the developer which would reduce vehicle trips and emissions. Any emissions that cannot be mitigated will be subject to a fee. The San Joaquin Valley APCD has proposed several options to implement the proposed indirect source mitigation fee program. The first option would establish a district permit program that would require developers to obtain a District permit prior to paying the city/county’s building permit fees. The District could then require mitigation measures as conditions of permit approval. Examples of mitigation measure include construction of on-site services such as restaurants and banks; residential developments that include retail services on-site; establishment of telecommunication centers; shuttle service from residential subdivisions to commercial core areas; and construction of on-site transit drop-off and pick-up stations. The second option would utilize the existing city/county review process to review the project and collect mitigation fee, if any. Any fees collected would be transferred to the District’s mitigation fund account. The third option would require a site-specific review process by the District, but would not require a district permit. Implementation of proposed mitigation measures and collection of fees would be incorporated into the city/county approval process. The final option would charge a fee based on the size of the project (e.g., retail space, number of housing units). Under this option, the city or county would collect the fee. In all approaches, the monies collected from the indirect source mitigation fee program would be used to fund cost-effective emission reduction projects on- or off-site. The tentative schedule for adoption of the indirect source mitigation fee rule is summer 2004.
4)	Year End Ozone Season Report This presentation summarized the year to date Basin ozone statistics and analyzed potential contributing factors to the upturn in days exceeding the federal standards. The recent trends of ozone for several sites in the Basin were assessed and the Basin statistics were compared to other areas nation-wide. A meteorological adjustment of the air quality trends was presented that supported the contribution of weather to the higher number of violations of the standard observed in 2003. Other factors, including mobile source (fuel reformulation) and growth were discussed. The presentation concluded with a brief review of the October wildfires and the resulting impact to particulate air quality in the Basin.
5)	Discussion of Bond Amendment Dr. Barry Wallerstein, presented a report on a proposed amendment to the 2004 VA-HUD appropriations bill. Introduced by Senator Bond from Missouri, the Bond amendment would prohibit California and other states from regulating new spark-ignited non-road engines less than 50 horsepower. These engines are used in non-road applications such as lawn and garden equipment, forklifts, recreational boats, and off-road motorcycles. The amendment would also require EPA to propose new regulations for these engines by December 1, 2004. California recently adopted new emission standards for lawn and garden engines less than 25 horsepower and has also a number of existing regulations that set emission standards for other classes of spark-ignited engines less than 50 horsepower such as off-road motorcycles. The estimated emission reductions foregone associated with this amendment are 25 tpd of VOC and NOx in 2010. These are significant reductions that are necessary for attainment demonstration in the Basin. The proposed amendment passed the Senate but was recently dropped in a conference committee as a result of strong lobbying efforts by Governor Schwarzenegger, Senator Diane Feinstein, and California’s congressional representatives. However, Senator Bond has indicated that he would bring back a revised amendment for Congress’ consideration. In addition, Governor Schwarzenegger has signed Executive Order S-2-03, which directs state government to place a six-month stay on implementing any regulation adopted since January 6, 1999, while the agencies conduct a review of each regulation for its impact on the economy and affected businesses. The recently adopted small spark-ignited engine regulation, which is the subject of the Bond amendment, would be effected by this order.
6)	Rule 2202 Activity Report Rule 2202 Summary Status Report submitted, no comments.
7)	Monthly Report on Environmental Justice Initiatives Item #4 – CEQA Commenting: a. CEQA Document Commenting Update: Written report submitted, no comments.
8)	Status Report on Mobile and Area Source Pilot Credit Generation Rules Written report submitted, no comments.
9)	Other Business None.
10)	Public Comment None.

The meeting adjourned at 10:03 a.m.

Attachment

Attendance Roster

SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
MOBILE SOURCE COMMITTEE

November 21, 2003

ATTENDANCE ROSTER
 

/ / /