Date of Meeting by mifei


									                                                                 ADVISORY COUNCIL MINUTES
                              1904 Third Avenue, Suite 105 Seattle, WA 98101 • p 206.343.8800 f 206.343.7522

Date of Meeting: March 12, 2008

Advisory Council Members:                                       Present         Absent
      Barbara Cole, representing Port of Seattle
      Bill Smith, representing Pierce County Public-at-Large
      Bobann Fogard, representing Transportation
      David Nemens, representing Suburban Cities
      Frank Migaiolo, representing Large Industry
      Greg Tisdel, representing Small Industry
      Jay Wellan, representing Snohomish County Public-at-Large
      Kathy Ross, representing Education
      Kimberly Freeman, representing Planning
      Linda Waltie, representing Kitsap County Public-at-Large
      Mary Basballe, representing Tribal
      Merlin Halverson, representing Fire Chiefs Association
      Michael Davis, representing Environmental Justice
      Mike Duval, representing Area Sources
      Scott Daniels, representing Health
      Steve Gerritson, representing Environment
      Sue Mauermann, representing Port of Tacoma
      Tim Gould, representing King County Public-at-Large
      vacant, representing Construction

Staff Present:
        Linda Hedstrom, Operations Director
        Jim Nolan, Compliance Director
        Alice Collingwood, Communications Manager
        Dave Kircher, Air Resources Manager
        Kathy Himes, Team Lead, Criteria and Toxic Pollutants
        Leslie Stanton, Team Lead, Climate and Transportation
        Steve Van Slyke, Supervisory Engineer
        Consuelo Davis, Administrative Specialist

         Nancy Martin, member of the public

David Nemens, Advisory Council Vice-Chair, called the meeting to order at 9:10 A.M. A
quorum to approve the minutes from the December and January Advisory Council meetings was
established by the members present for today’s meeting and by members voting via e-mail.
Revisions were made to the February meeting minutes; a final draft will be presented at the April
meeting. Kimberly Freeman was present by telephone.

                                                   1 - 11
Regional Status of PM2.5

Kathy Himes gave an overview of fine particulate matter (fine PM) as it relates to the whole
region and how the agency’s local health goal compares to the old and new federal standards.
(To view the presentation, visit .)

Fine particulate matter is basically soot from vehicle and engine exhaust and smoke from wood
burning. In December 2006, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established a new,
stricter standard for daily fine PM 2.5 -- 35 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3). (The former
daily standard was 65 ug/m3.) This new daily standard is substantially closer to our agency’s
local health goal of 25 ug/m3.

Kimberly Freeman asked if the local health goal is regulatory or if it is what the agency is trying
to achieve. Ms. Himes said the goal was a result of a stakeholder process conducted several
years ago. Dave Kircher said the agency’s Board of Directors did not formally adopt the health
goal, although they have blessed it. It is not intended to be a standard, but a goal that drives our
regional efforts beyond the areas where concentrations are the highest.

Ms. Himes presented graphs of the 3-year average concentrations of all air monitors in the Puget
Sound region. As of last year, the South L Street monitor in the South End of Tacoma was the
only one that violated the new federal standard.

In King County, there are four monitors much higher than any other monitor: Kent, South Park,
Duwamish Valley and Lake Forest Park. In Pierce County – South L Street and the Tacoma tide
flats area. In Snohomish County – Marysville. (Darrington is not listed because the agency does
not have thee years worth of data.)

There was some discussion about the methods the agency uses to monitor the air – federal
reference method and continuous. The federal reference is filter-based, which means there is a
filter that the air goes through. The continuous method uses nephelometers, which measures
light scattering and there is an equation that correlates the light scattering to a concentration.

Scott Daniels asked if both methods can be combined. Ms. Himes said EPA allows only the
filter-based method.

Mr. Kircher said the reasons the agency uses nephelometers versus filter-based monitors is
because of cost. It is much less expensive to run an electronic instrument than to handle filters.
Another reason is the nephelometers give continuous readings versus a 24-hour reading.

Linda Hedstrom said it is essential to have nephelometers for calling a burn ban because the
filters would be at least a day late, if not more, due to the required processing time. Therefore, a
burn ban would be called much later than if a nephelometer reading was used.

Ms. Hedstrom also said Mike Gilroy, Manager of Technical Services, has been trying for several
years to get EPA to recognize the agency’s continuous monitoring method as equivalent to the
filter-based method.

                                                     2 - 11
Mr. Kircher said until the agency gets the continuous method approved, when a continuous
monitor reads above the federal standard, the agency also installs a reference method monitor, as
was done with Darrington.

Ms. Himes then presented the Snohomish County monitors. She said for 2007, Darrington was
at 36 ug/m3, which is slightly over the federal standard. It is not considered in violation because
the agency does not have the required three years of data. Marysville is on the cusp of the
standard at 35 ug/m3.

For Pierce County, the South L Street monitor is clearly above the federal standard. The
Alexander Avenue/tide flats is right below the standard at 34 ug/m3. In Puyallup, the 2007
concentration was 32 ug/m3.

For Kitsap County, all monitors are well below the federal standard – Bremerton’s Meadowdale
site is at 21 ug/m3, Silverdale is at 16 ug/m3.

Ms. Himes presented a chart showing how many days exceeded the daily fine PM health goal at
one or more monitoring sites in the Puget Sound region since 2000.

She concluded by noting the agency is making some progress, but the agency continues to fall
short of the health goal across the region. Pierce County is in violation of the daily federal
standard. Snohomish County is “on the cusp.” In King County there are several high
concentration (>30 ug/m3) monitors. The daily federal standard will likely strengthen in the
future, consistent with health research.

Mr. Daniels asked when the federal standard would go to a 25 ug/m3. Mr. Kircher said likely in

PM2.5 Monitoring Activities, Marysville Results

Mike Gilroy was out sick. Ms. Himes gave his presentation of the results of a temporary
monitoring study conducted in the Marysville area. (To view the presentation, visit .)

The study objectives were to determine if the high concentrations were just at the semi-
permanent Marysville site (junior high school) or more widespread. Four temporary monitors
were installed surrounding the permanent site, including Lake Stevens and north Everett.

A chart displaying data from November, 2007 to January, 2008 revealed that concentrations
were highest during these winter months. To the north of the semi-permanent monitor, there are
elevated concentrations. To the south and around Lake Stevens, the concentrations are not
elevated. The monitor at the semi-permanent site is reading higher than the other monitors.

Another chart displayed the wind direction and fine PM concentrations for 2004-2007. It
indicates the concentrations are coming from the north and the north-northeast. This is in
opposition to the thinking of Marysville residents that it comes from the west.

Mr. Daniels asked if there are impacts from Vancouver. Ms. Himes said she does not think the
concentrations come from that far of a distance. Mr. Kircher said he would like to have a

                                                     3 - 11
monitor located further north, beyond the Navy annex. It would have given a better picture of
how much is coming into the area.

Mr. Daniels asked if it is worthwhile to review the air monitoring data from the agency covering
Bellingham. Ms. Himes said she will look into it.

Ms. Himes concluded that the elevated concentrations are north of the semi-permanent monitor.
The study results are helpful in the event this area would become in non-attainment. It is also
helpful for targeting emission-reduction strategies. It confirmed that the semi-permanent site is
suitable for characterizing PM 2.5 for the Marysville area; there is no need to move it.

Current Local Activities and Regional Strategies Addressing PM2.5

Mr. Kircher gave an overview of the strategies to reduce fine PM emissions. The priority areas
are wood smoke and diesel.

Wood smoke is a priority because the highest fine particle pollution concentrations in our region
occur in wood smoke-impacted communities. Emissions inventories and monitoring data
indicate wood smoke is a major mass contributor.

Diesel exhaust is the agency’s other priority because studies show that the fine PM from diesel
exhaust (known as diesel particulate matter, or DPM), is highly carcinogenic. Levels of DPM in
our region present substantial potential cancer risk to our citizens, with >75% of the potential
cancer risk from all air toxics.

The agency addresses both priority areas regionally and also in targeted areas, for example, in
our ports.

Mr. Daniels said the 75% potential cancer risk is not well known in the public health community.
He asked for the source of the statistic. Ms. Himes said it is from the agency’s 2003 air toxics
evaluation. She will send him the report.

Mr. Kircher presented several components of the Diesel Solutions Program: school buses,
marine and port activities and other activities.

School Buses: In 2003, the legislature passed a bill that provided $25 million dollars to reduce
the emissions from school buses. Almost three-quarters of the region’s school buses have been
retrofitted so far. In addition to retrofitting, the agency also focuses on using cleaner fuels and
replacing old buses. After July, 2008, there is not a continuous source of funding for the

Marine and Port Activities: The agency partnered with many organizations to complete an
emission inventory of the marine sector. The inventory was completed in 2007. It confirmed
that our region’s emissions look like southern California, Texas, New York, New Jersey and
other areas that have large seaports.

While working on the emission inventory, the agency worked with its port partners on many
emission-reduction projects involving cargo handling equipment, rail, drayage trucks, harbor

                                                     4 - 11
vessels (ferries) and oceangoing vessels. (For more information on the maritime projects, see the
minutes from February’s Advisory Council meeting at .)

The agency also worked with its port partners on the development of the Northwest Ports Clean
Air Strategy which was completed in December, 2007 and adopted by Port Commissions in
Seattle and Tacoma in January, 2008.

The agency is also working with ports and Department of Ecology on a grant application for
EPA funds.

Other Vehicles and Fleets: The agency has worked with a variety of government and non-
government fleets to reduce DPM emissions:
    Most transit vehicles in our region have been retrofitted with diesel filters; Pierce Transit
       runs on compressed natural gas.
    Many local government fleets are now using biodiesel and a significant number have
       been retrofitted with clean diesel technology.
    Waste Management and Allied Waste solid waste trucks have also been retrofitted.
    The agency and the Puget Sound Clean Cities Coalition created the Puget Sound Green
       Fleets Program, which provides fleet managers with tools to help "green" public and
       private fleets, to reduce pollution, protect our climate and save money.

Wood Smoke PM Efforts:
   The agency has wood stove change-out programs in Marysville, Tacoma and Darrington.
   The agency has curtailment efforts that ban burning during episodes of impaired air
   The agency’s land-clearing was adopted by our Board of Directors for King, Snohomish,
      and Pierce counties.

Education and Outreach:
    Think Fresh, is the agency’s current ad campaign to get people to think about air quality
       and to make behavior changes to improve air quality and protect climate. It focuses on
       clean, efficient homes and clean, efficient transportation choices.
    The No-Idle Zone program, led by Amy Warren, educates people to stop vehicle idling.
    The agency partners with Duraflame because manufactured logs have much lower
       emissions than cord wood.

Next Steps:
    Wood smoke – The agency will: conduct a comprehensive evaluation of past strategies
       to see how the agency can do better; evaluate the change-out programs; and continue to
       design and implement targeted change-out programs.
       The agency will receive some money from an enforcement settlement that Ecology
       helped negotiate with a large source in Everett. The additional funds will allow Everett
       residents to be a part of the Marysville change-out program in the next year.

      Diesel exhaust: The agency will: continue to seek sustainable funding to expand to
       private fleets; continue to implement retrofit programs; and continue to reduce emissions
       through the Northwest Ports Clean Air Strategy.

                                                    5 - 11
Mr. Daniels asked how the agency identifies partner fleets. Mr. Kircher said his staff identified
that the waste haulers are on contract with cities and counties. The agency then approached the
contractors and local governments to include diesel retrofits into their contracts. Some
governments have cooperated; other times the agency has helped subsidize retrofits.

Ms. Hedstrom suggested that an environmental justice consideration also be a part of the
selection criteria. She would like the agency to consider possible partners who are located
and/or serve areas that are highly residential, near a school, daycare or nursing home.

Bill Smith asked if the agency has looked at an ability to pay as a way to extend the funding. For
example, have the companies that can afford it pay for the costs, like waste haulers, so there is
more money for drayage trucks. Mr. Kircher said with the current owner-operator model, there
is no ability to pay. The only way for them to get to a cleaner vehicle is to either change the
business model so they get paid more or provide them with 100-percent funding.

Mr. Kircher talked about an agency partner, Cascade Sierra Solutions. Cascade Sierra is a non-
profit organization working on equipping owner-operator trucks with technology that reduces
emissions and fuel consumption. Their centers allow truckers to see what equipment is available
and get a low-interest loan to have it installed. The agency is working with Cascade Sierra to get
them more funding so they can get the loan guarantees. The agency is trying to get them to
develop a drayage program that will refurbish trucks and make them available at a bargain price.

There was some discussion about the loan rate and amounts. Mr. Kircher said loan rates are
about 3-5% and are $25,000 or less.

Mr. Smith asked if the ports can use their borrowing capacity to generate the funding. Mr.
Kircher said it is a good idea.

Tim Gould asked if the Green Fleets program will target courier truck fleets, e.g., FedEx, UPS.
Mr. Kircher said not yet, but it is our intent.

Climate Change: Regulatory Options for Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Point Source Controls

Leslie Stanton gave an overview of the regulatory options the agency could take to regulate
GHG emissions from point sources in our region.

The agency’s general counsel determined the agency does have legal authority regulate carbon
dioxide (CO2) and other GHG emissions from stationary sources under the state Clean Air Act
and the State Environmental Policy Act.

Ms. Stanton presented research of how much CO2 regional point sources are emitting. At the
top of the list are the cement manufacturing facilities, Ash Grove and Lafarge, followed by
Frederickson Power and King County’s Landfill at Cedar Hills. (For more information, visit .)

The agency identified the following options to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emission from
point sources in our region:

          Evaluate our emissions inventory data and prioritize our sources based on emissions.

                                                    6 - 11
       Determine if the high priority sources are employing Reasonably Available Control
          Technology (RACT) to control GHG emissions.
        Include a Best Available Control Technology (BACT) determination for GHG
         emissions as part of our review of new sources. We are currently working with
         Ecology and the other local agencies throughout the state on a protocol for this
       Evaluate opportunities to make beneficial use of GHG emissions from burning fossil
         fuel or waste gases that are not currently used for heat or power (e.g. burn landfill gas
         to create power rather than just flaring it).
          Identify opportunities for leadership by the public sector in controlling or making
           beneficial use of GHG emissions (e.g. make use of gas from anaerobic digesters at
           waste water treatment plants).

Ms. Stanton asked council members for thoughts on these options, feedback for talking to the
board about this topic, are there other discussions or additional research the agency should do
before looking into regulatory policy.

Mr. Gould asked how the list of major CO2 emitters compares with non-point sources. Ms.
Stanton said the Puget Sound region has approximately 44 million metric tons per year. The
highest source is emitting about a half a million metric ton. Point sources are relatively small,
about two percent. Most GHG emissions are due to transportation and about a quarter is from
electricity generation.

Ms. Hedstrom asked if the agency required a RACT or BACT if it would require a regulation
change by the board. Mr. Nolan said no, it is a policy decision the board has to make about
whether or not the agency should be involved in reducing GHG. He said if the agency is going
to be involved, we need to determine how the work will fit in the GHG framework recently
passed by the legislature.

Ms. Stanton said a potential challenge can be if a facility is actively engaged in a voluntary
program, like an offset program offered by the Chicago Climate Exchange, and a regulation is
passed requiring the facility to reduce their emissions, the facility cannot count those reductions
toward their goal of the voluntary program.

Mr. Daniels said with all the new climate change laws coming out of the legislature, the
landscape is changing so quickly. Is the legislature ready to adopt a policy at this point? It
seems a matter of timing to some degree. Ms. Stanton agreed; it is all about timing. The
window of opportunity for leadership will close quickly. If there are board members who think
it is time for the agency to show some leadership, it should be done earlier rather than later.

Mr. Daniels asked if the agency is comfortable with where the state is headed in this direction.
Ms. Stanton said the state is engaged in the Western Climate Initiative, which has just released
their guide on regulating GHG. She has heard it is not very rigorous, and some have expressed
disappointment in their recommendations. There is not a lot of confidence that the Western
Climate Initiative will perform as the Northeast Cap and Trade System has performed.

                                                     7 - 11
Mr. Daniels asked which option staff would recommend. Mr. Nolan thinks that if the board
believes this is the right direction, that they should take a leadership role. Given the number of
public facilities on the list of major CO2 emitters and the list of wastewater treatment plants and
landfills, they ought to regulate themselves first. The agency can still do more research and
outreach. Regulatory action could be requiring a facility to explain why it is not making
beneficial use of the gas that comes from the landfill. It might mean they have to recover the
energy from the gas being released.

Mr. Daniels said he strongly urges the council to support that member agencies on the agency’s
board take the first action and lead the way. It is consistent with what the agency has done in
other programs.

Mr. Gould said it has to start at that level. He recommends the agency move ahead with a RACT

Mr. Smith said he agrees. If there is going to be a requirement that facilities put reasonable
strategies into place, also list the cost differences. For example, in Tacoma, they want to
compost food waste, but the anaerobic digester costs $5-6 million. Maybe the board would
consider creating opportunities to fund pilot projects to determine the cost effectiveness of
different strategies.

Mr. Gould said he agrees that the agency could start with public facilities to see what can be
achieved. There would then be a model to show to private companies.

Mr. Nolan said he would like to learn about the impediments to action because some of the
facilities have energy recovery equipment that they do not use. Mr. Smith said Tacoma’s landfill
gas system that was installed in the 80s is of such poor quality that they cannot keep the flare
going without supplementing it with natural gas.

There was some discussion about using SEPA checklists as tools to require sources to evaluate
and mitigate their GHG emissions. The agency is currently revising its SEPA checklist to
include GHGs. The agency does not routinely lead SEPA projects for point source emitters in
the Puget Sound region.

Ms. Freeman said she is concerned about implementing regulatory measures for sources that
contribute only three to four percent of the GHG emissions. She suggests the agency work on
inventorying what is there, what can be done, identify why these things are not being done, and
to identify partnerships and pilot projects to reduce GHG emissions.

Mr. Nolan summarized that the agency will present the following recommendation to the board:
    Evaluate our emissions inventory data and prioritize our sources based on emissions.
      Evaluate opportunities to make beneficial use of GHG emissions from burning fossil fuel
       or waste gases that are not currently used for heat or power (e.g. burn landfill gas to
       create power rather than just flaring it)
      Identify opportunities for leadership by the public sector in controlling or making
       beneficial use of GHG emissions

                                                     8 - 11
Mr. Nolan said the agency will also strongly recommend to the board that the agency do this in
concert with the other regulatory agencies in Washington. It is clear that the legislature wants to
regulate GHG emissions. The challenge is how the agency integrates that into permit regulations.

Mr. Gould said while the board has instructed the agency to look at the major point sources, he
thinks the transportation sector should also be a focus, given it’s such a large share of GHG
emissions. There should be some coordination with Ecology, Puget Sound Regional Council and
Department of Transportation.

Mr. Smith said many local governments have environmentally-preferable purchasing policies.
To the extent there are elected officials on the board, the agency can encourage them to revise
their policies.


FY09 Work Planning

Ms. Hedstrom said this year’s work plan topics are the same as last year’s. Work plan leads are
currently drafting work plan budgets. Drafts of all six work plans will be presented at the April
Advisory Council for feedback before presenting them to the board. Council members who have
been involved in the work planning will have another opportunity to give comments prior to next
month’s meeting. Drafts will be available on the internal Advisory Council web page prior to
the meeting.

Legislative Update

Mr. Nolan said the burn ban trigger bill passed. He recognized Bill Danworth from Spokane for
getting it moved out of the Rules Committee. The climate change framework bill passed along
with many other climate bills. The real estate disclosure bill did not move out of the Rules
Committee. It would have required that at the time of the sale of a house, the seller would have
to disclose whether the wood burning device is certified or not.

New monies totaling $2.5M will come from the Model Toxic Control Act (MTCA) for diesel
clean-up. There is another $1.5M for wood stove change-outs. Our agency will apply again for
and will likely receive funds for repeat efforts in the Tacoma and Marysville areas. Other
funding recipients may be Spokane and Yakima.

Mr. Daniels asked if the money comes from the solid waste programs. Mr. Nolan said MTCA is
calculated by a percentage of the cost of crude. It is additional funds coming into the MTCA
because of the higher cost of crude.

Ms. Freeman asked if the bill designates how much will go to each area or is it the Clean Air
Agency’s decision. Mr. Nolan said it is an Ecology decision.

Environmental Justice Work Plan Update

Ms. Hedstrom said the purpose of the environmental justice work plan is to achieve the Next 10
Years vision and goals to work more effectively with our communities in our jurisdiction to have
clean and healthy air for all.

                                                    9 - 11
There are five work plan elements:
    Training – to raise the awareness and knowledge of environmental justice with our staff
    Partnerships – identify partnerships and build relationships with others who can else in
       our journey by sharing their experiences and giving us guidance and feedback
    Create and test some assessment tools to identify within our jurisdiction those areas
       where there might be vulnerable populations that are at a greater risk to exposure of
       different pollutants, particularly air toxics
    Expand our outreach into communities with environmental justice issues
    Continue work with South Park and Georgetown communities

Ms. Hedstrom said the agency has made some progress, but not as much as planned. There has
been a lot of learning. The environmental justice training by Al Chun that managers received
back in September was more skill development. It was determined that there needs to be context
before the skill development so staff better understands why the skills are necessary.

She released an request for proposal (RFP) in January to design and implement a training
program that would start this fiscal year. Only two responses were received. Both responses
were unrealistic so she rejected them. She has been working with an internal team to revise the
RFP. The team decided to do two separate RFPs. The first RFP is to develop an assessment of
the agency to determine the level of knowledge and skill levels. The second RFP to be released
next fiscal year will be to design a training program based on the assessment.

To help set the context for staff, the team agreed to have someone who is articulate, passionate
and who has great oratory skills present at a kick-off meeting with all staff, someone like Ron
Sims or Lyle Quasim.

In terms of partnerships, the agency has been fortunate in finding many partners. Many of
sought out the agency, which is great. Most of the partnerships are within King County and the
City of Seattle. It has been a struggle to find partnerships with agencies that are involved in
environmental justice issues outside of King County. There has been some success in Pierce
County and Tacoma in a large part due to the wood stove replacement program. Next year, more
effort will be placed in expanding partnerships beyond King County.

Last summer a summer intern, Aerica Banks, did some research on existing assessment tools just
before her term ended. In a meeting with Steve Gerritson and Michael Davis, it was suggested
that the agency hire another intern this summer to solely work on researching existing
assessment tools. Ms. Hedstrom plans to test the draft assessment tool before the end of the

As for outreach, the Communications department is doing a lot of outreach. The agency is still
working with communities like South Park. She will work with the agency’s events coordinator
to do more outreach in those communities where the agency has not done much work. Perhaps a
pilot where the agency works with a community where there are language or cultural barriers.

The agency continues to stay active with the inter-agency group that formed two years ago as a
result of some public meetings. The group tries to coordinate their efforts and to keep informed
of what other agencies are doing in those communities.

                                                    10 - 11
Outdoor Burning Public Hearing Results

Mr. Nolan said the board took action last month to ban land clearing burning in Snohomish, King
and Pierce counties beginning July 1, 2008. They tabled the decision about residential burning.
They believe, as the agency does, that there are rural areas that have reasonable alternatives to
burning. The agency will focus its proposal on denser developments that are outside the urban
growth area. The agency will also look at the land use patterns in these communities. The board
wants an update about policy options by October. They expect to do some rule-making in early
spring and they might make it effective sooner than 2010. Mr. Nolan has been in contact with
King County, and Pierce County is next.

Mr. Nolan said over 450 public comments were received. Mr. Gould asked about attendance at
the public hearing. Mr. Nolan said about 30 people attended.

Mr. Nolan said the board believes it is an important issue to move forward. They understood the
concern that there may not be reasonable alternatives for larger rural properties. They want to
test that assumption. They also want to include Kitsap in the next round of rule-making.


Ms. Freeman said Pierce County is in the process of updating their transportation plan by the end
of this year. They are starting the SEPA process. She asked for help from the agency and other
council members to discuss how to address the non-attainment issue, climate change, and air

Ms. Hedstrom said Mr. Kircher, manager of Air Resources department, is her contact with the

Mr. Nemens said the City of Covington is monitoring the SEPA process on two major
developments planned for southeast King County – the Donut Hole near Maple Valley, the other
is in Black Diamond. Covington’s primary focus is on traffic impacts on their city streets. Mr.
Nemens said he would be willing to coordinate efforts with the Clean Air Agency.

ADJOURNMENT: With no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:59 a.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Dennis J. McLerran
Executive Director


                                                   11 - 11

To top