State of California

State Personnel Building
Room 150
801 Capitol Mall
Sacramento, CA

May 15, 1975
9:00 a.m.



75-10-1 Approval of Minutes of April 17, 1975 Meeting.

75-10-2 Continuation of Public Hearings - Proposed 1
Revisions to Air Pollution Emergency Plan.

a. Oxidant Criteria Levels
b. Revisions to Sections III, V, VI, and VII.

75-10-3 Continuation of Public Hearing - Proposed 115
Amendments to the Meteorological Criteria for
Regulating Agricultural Burning.

75-10-4 Consideration of the California Transportation 141
Control Plan for Inclusion in the State
Implementation Plan.

75-10-5 Consideration of Basinwide Regulations for the 183
Control of Emissions from Agricultural Processing
Operations in the Sacramento Valley.

75-10-6 Investigation of Odors in Richmond Area, Bay Area 210
Air Pollution Control District.

75-10-7 Progress Report - Stationary Source Monitoring 248

75-10-8 Progress Report - Test Procedures for Evaluating 266
Gasoline Vapor Recovery Systems.

75-10-9 Other Business -
a. Executive Session - Personnel & Litigation
b. Board Member Reports & Assignments
c. Research Proposals

75-10-10 Remarks from Audience.

ITEM NO.: 75-10-2

Continuation of Public Hearing - Proposed Revisions to the
California Air Pollution Emergency Plan.


1. If the oxidant calibration method is not resolvable at this
time, adopt Resolution 75-24A, thereby making changes
clarifying policy and procedures, continue until July 1,
1975 the use of the 0.8 adjustment factor for oxidant
measurements and continue this hearing until June 12, 1975
to consider changes to the episode criteria levels.

2. If an oxidant calibration method can be established, adopt
Resolution 75-24B, thereby, revising the oxidant episode
criteria as proposed of amended, and making other related


On November 13, 1973 the Board adopted the State Air Pollution
Emergency Plan, establishing episode criteria for three
pollutants including oxidant. The EPA has indicated that certain
modifications must be made before the Plan is approvable. In
1974 it was determined that procedures in use for calibration of
the oxidant monitoring instruments would produce significantly
different results. The Board, therefore, directed, at its August
5, 1974 meeting, that an 0.8 factor be used to standardize
measurement results and that an Ad-Hoc Oxidant Measurement
Committee be established to evaluate the problem.

At its April 17, 1975 meeting the Board extended the use of the
adjustment factor to June 1, 1975. Consideration of other
revisions was deferred to the May 15, 1975 Board meeting.

The revisions proposed for consideration at this meeting include
those held over from the March meeting and new proposals listed
in the March 13, 1975 notice of public hearing (copy attached).
The new proposals are intended to meet some of the EPA

Also attached are proposed Resolutions 75-24A, 75-24B and their
respective versions of the proposed revised Plan.

ITEM NO.: 75-10-3

Continuation of Public Hearing - Proposed Amendments to the
Meteorological Criteria for Regulating Agricultural Burning.


Defer action until June 12, 1975 at which time the Sacramento
Valley Air Basin Coordinating Council will have submitted adopted
changes to basin plan for agricultural burning for approval.


At the February 20, 1975 Air Resources Board Meeting the Board
adopted changes to its "Meteorological Criteria for Regulating
Agricultural Burning." The Board postponed, however, the
adoption of an additional modification to the meteorological
criteria which would restrict the tonnage of agricultural waste
burned on any one day in the Sacramento Valley and San Joaquin
Valley Air Basins if the expected tonnage to be burned would
seriously affect air quality.

The Board continued the matter until May 15, 1975. This report
summarizes the actions the staff has taken to develop regulations
to limit the daily tonnage of rice straw burned in the Sacramento
Valley Air Basin during the fall months. Rice straw burning in
the Sacramento Valley Air Basins is the only burning practice
being reviewed at this time because of the large quantity

ITEM NO.: 75-10-4

Consideration of California Transportation Control Plan for
Inclusion in the State Implementation Plan.


Informational Report.


At an April 16, 1975 Board workshop CALTRANS representatives
discussed the Transportation Control Plan (TCP) they are
developing. The Board and members of the staff expressed some
concern with several aspects of the TCP. This report summarizes
these concerns and discusses the advantages and disadvantages of
submitting the TCP to EPA as a revision to the State
Implementation Plan. This report concludes that it would be in
the best interest of the State to submit the TCP to EPA with
qualifications to recognize the Plan's shortcomings and with a
commitment to reevaluate these areas soon.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. California Transportation Control Plan
promulgated by EPA November 12, 1973.

2. CALTRANS teletype of April 2, 1975 (proposed
addition to TCP).

ITEM NO.: 75-10-5

Consideration of Basinwide Regulations for the Control of
Emissions from Agricultural Processing Operations in the
Sacramento Valley.


Affirm the staff's position, that the regulation adopted by the
Coordinating Council is unenforceable, and inform the
Coordinating Council of this decision; inform the Coordinating
Council that the Basin Plan should retain the opacity, process-weight, and
particulate matter=concentration rules for application to agricultural
processing facilities.


The Sacramento Valley Air Basin Coordinating Council has recently
adopted a regulation concerning emissions from agricultural
processing in the Basin. This regulation prohibits a source from
contributing more than 35 ug/m3 of particulate matter to the
ambient air measured mile from the source. In 1974 the Board
considered a similar regulation, proposed by the Coordinating
Council, and concluded that such regulations were not

The recently adopted regulation is based on ambient air quality
measurements, which cannot be used to determine the origin of
pollutants, and requires the use of diffusion calculations which
are probably invalid for particulate matter and in any case are
unreliable. Estimated contributions of a source to pollutant
concentrations at a given site downwind can vary by a factor of
20 as a result of changes in meteorological conditions.

ITEM NO.: 75-10-6

Investigation of Odors in the Richmond Area, Bay Area Air
Pollution Control District.


None, this is an informational item.


On April 17, 1975 the Air Resources Board directed the staff to
investigate the odor problem in the Richmond area and to find out
what the people were smelling when they complained of odors.

The investigators toured the industrial complex where the odors
probably originate, visited some of the APCD and company-operated
air monitoring stations in the area, and visited two of the
people who complained at the April 17th meeting. They also
visited the offices of the Bay Area APCD, reviewed District
records and interviewed APCD personnel. The personnel of the Bay
Area APCD cooperated fully.

The air quality in the area around the Standard Oil Refinery and
Allied Chemical industrial complex is well monitored for SO2 and
H2S. Some concentrations above the air quality standards have
been reported, but there is no correlation between the reported
excesses and odor complaints.

It is unlikely that SO2 and H2S are the sole or most important
causes of the odor complaints. There are many sources of odors
in a refinery and many odorous compounds may be released into the
air. Most of the compounds can be detected by odor at
concentrations too low to be measured by instruments currently

Emissions and odor sources in the refinery complex have been
reduced significantly in the last few years and will be further
reduced when Standard Oil starts operating a new sulfur recovery
unit within a few months.

ITEM NO.: 75-10-7

Progress Report - Stationary Monitoring Devices.


Informational Report.


The Board and APCD's are authorized to adopt regulations to
require in-stack monitoring. Regulations that have been adopted
require in-stack monitoring if devices are available and should
be installed. Section 39052.12 of the Health and Safety Code
requires the Board to complete an initial review of submitted in-stack
monitoring devices by June 1, 1975. This progress report
summarizes the staff activities taken in response to this and
prior legislative requirements.

KVB, under contract to the Board, completed a review of such
devices in January, 1975. The staff has contacted manufacturers,
vendors and users of these devices for information regarding
availability, technological feasibility and economic
reasonableness. The information obtained by both KVB and the
staff indicated that devices are available for the continuous
monitoring of concentrations of particulate matter, oxides of
nitrogen, oxides of sulfur, nonmethane hydrocarbons, reduced
sulfur compounds and carbon monoxide. The availability of
similar devices for the continuous measurement of mass rates of
emission is not well established. Present law encourages
districts in the South Coast Air Basin, and the Bay Area and San
Diego Air Pollution Control Districts to require installation of
instruments by certain specified categories of sources proposed
legislation would require such installation within 12 months
after the Board determines that two or more technological and
economically feasible devices are available.

ITEM NO.: 75-10-8

Status Report on Test Procedures for Vapor Recovery Systems.


This is an informational report.


At the June 1974 meeting the Board asked its Technical Committee
to draft test procedures for vapor recovery systems. At the
October, 1974 meeting, the draft test procedures were adopted as
guidelines by the Board and the Board instructed the staff to
conduct tests to determine the emissions of gasoline vapor to
atmosphere during the refueling of vehicles at an uncontrolled
service station (baseline data) for use with the procedures. The
staff obtained equipment and started tests in March, 1975. The
tests are now completed and the analysis of the data is in
progress. After the analysis is completed, the staff intends to
test both a displacement and a vacuum assisted vapor recovery
system, and to revise the procedures if indicated by these tests.
If satisfactory, the test procedure will then be presented to the
Board for adoption pursuant to Section 39051(e) of the Health and
Safety Code.