State of California

Summary of Board Meeting
July 24, 1997

Air Resources Board
Board Hearing Room, Lower Level
2020 "L" Street
Sacramento, California

MEMBERS PRESENT: Hons. John D. Dunlap, III, Chairman
Joseph C. Calhoun, P.E.
Lynne T. Edgerton, Esq.
William F. Friedman, M.D.
M. Patricia Hilligoss
Barbara Riordan
Ron Roberts
James W. Silva


97-6-1 Public Meeting to Consider Adoption of New Certification Tests and Standards to Control Emissions From Aggressive Driving and Air-Conditioner Usage for Passenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks, and Medium-Duty Vehicles Under 8,501 Pounds Gross Vehicle Weight Rating


In recent studies, the current motor vehicle certification test procedure, known as the Federal Test Procedure (FTP), was found to have several major shortcomings in representing conditions under which motor vehicles are driven. For example, speeds greater than 57 miles per hour are not represented and the air-conditioner is not in operation during the test.

After several years of cooper ative effort with the Air Resources Board (ARB) and the motor vehicle industry, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) finalized a set of test procedures on October 22, 1996 to address these shortcomings. A final rule was promulgated to adopt two supplemental test procedures, collectively known as the SFTP, which consist of the SC03 air-conditioner test and a high-speed, high-acceleration test known as the US06 test. Emission standards were also adopted for vehicles subject to the federal "Tier 1" emission standards.

To develop SFTP emission standards for California's low-emission vehicles, the motor vehicle industry and ARB conducted a series of test programs from 1995 to 1997. Over 60 vehicles were tested in which vehicle modifications, such as the "rich-bias" software calibration, were used to reduce SFTP emissions. These optimized emission levels were ultimately used to develop SFTP standards for California vehicles.

Staff proposed the new SFTP and emission standards to control emissions during driving conditions outside of the FTP from low-emission vehicles, ultra-low-emission vehicles, and super-ultra-low-emission vehicles. The proposed test procedures were, in all respects, identical to the procedures adopted by the U.S. EPA. The proposed standards were technologically feasible, where at least 70 percent of the vehicles would comply with only software modifications. The remaining vehicles were expected to comply through the use of catalyst hardware modifications.

The proposed phase-in implementation schedule for passenger cars and light-duty trucks would begin in the 2001 model. A later phase-in implementation schedule was proposed for medium-duty vehicles beginning in the 2003 model year. The staff also proposed various other related elements, including SFTP standards for California "Tier 1" and transitional-low-emission vehicles that are identical to the Federal SFTP standards; specifications of new improved dynamometer systems for SFTP and FTP testing identical to those adopted by the U.S. EPA; and application of the new vehicle compliance requirements with the SFTP standards beginning in the 2002 model year.

The regulation would result in 2020 statewide emission reductions of 133 tons per day reactive organic gases plus oxides of nitrogen. The air quality impacts of aggressive driving and air-conditioner usage were not included in the 1994 State Implementation Plan (SIP), and thus, the projected air quality emission reductions of the proposed regulation do not directly affect the SIP. The projected costs to comply with the proposed regulation were $43.2 to $47.9 million annually, or $28.80 to $38.60 per vehicle. The estimated cost-effectiveness was $890 to $1,200 per ton, or $0.44 to $0.60 per pound.


Glen Heiser and                 American Automobile Manufacturers
Greg Dana                         Association and Association of
                                          International Automotive Manufacturers

David Millerick                   Ford Motor Company

Frank Bohanan, Jr.             Specialty Equipment Market Association


Approved Resolution 97-34 by a unanimous vote.


STAFF REPORT: Yes (63 pages)

97-6-2 Public Meeting to Consider a Draft Report: Planned Air Pollution Research: 1997 Update


Staff presented its annual update of ARB's planned air pollution research, Planned Air Pollution Research: 1997 Update, that was reviewed and approved by the Research Screening Committee.

A $3,469,000 research budget is anticipated for fiscal year 1997-98. The report describes new research projects; some are recommended for funding this fiscal year, while others are recommended if additional funding becomes available. Projects are allocated by research area. Appendices include a budgetary breakdown of proposed research projects for fiscal year 1997-98 and more detailed descriptions of the projects.

The Chairman of the Board's Research Screening Committee provided highlights of recently completed and ongoing contracts, and expressed the Committee's approval for the report. Staff described the process by which the proposed projects in the 1997 update were selected and listed these projects. Staff also described the State's procedures for obtaining contracts, and provided details on the budgetary aspects of proposal review, contract approval, and contract management.



Approved Resolution 97-35 by a unanimous vote.


STAFF REPORT: Yes (78 pages)

97-6-3 Consideration of Research Proposal

Approved Resolution 97-36 by a unanimous vote.
97-6-4 Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of Proposed Amendments to the California Consumer Products Regulation


Staff proposed amendments to the existing California consumer products regulation which would add volatile organic compound (VOC) standards for 18 additional consumer product categories. Staff also proposed adding product category definitions for the new categories, recordkeeping requirements necessary to track the usage of perchloroethylene and methylene chloride, labeling requirements for floor wax strippers, and other minor changes.

The proposed amendments fulfill, in part, the Air Resources Board's commitment in the State Implementation Plan (SIP) to develop "Mid-term Measures" that will achieve an additional 25% emission reduction from consumer products. The proposed amendments would reduce VOC emissions from the affected product categories by about 50%
(or 16 tons per day).

The staff proposal included some modifications to the original proposal mailed out for public comment. These changes include the following:

- extend all January 1, 2000 effective dates to January 1, 2001;
- eliminate the first tier of the two-tiered VOC standards for four product categories;
- eliminate the additional reporting requirements for product categories with two-tiered standards;
- extend the effective dates of the VOC standards for "metal polish/cleanser," and non-aerosol "rubber and vinyl protectant;" and
- increase the VOC standards for "automotive rubbing or polishing compound," "heavy duty hand cleaner or soap," "multipurpose lubricants," "penetrants," and "carpet & upholstery cleaner (ready-to-use non-aerosol)."

Twenty-one individuals testified at the hearing. Twelve expressed concerns regarding the "automotive rubbing or polishing compound" and/or "automotive wax, polish, sealant, or glaze" categories. Primarily, the manufacturers expressed concern that they would not be able to formulate "premium" products at the proposed VOC levels, but indicated that they would participate on a staff-proposed working group to determine if tests can be developed to measure product attributes that can be used to define a "premium" product. The staff committed to return to the Board to address the findings of the working group and the potential feasibility or need to revise VOC standards for these categories.

Two testifiers expressed concerns that they would not be able to reformulate their "premium" solvent-based non-aerosol rubber and vinyl protectant to the proposed VOC standard. The staff agreed to address these concerns when they perform a technology assessment of manufacturers' progress toward attaining the proposed standard for this category.

Seven testifiers expressed support for the proposed amendments in general, or for specific areas of the proposal.

The Board directed the staff to form a working group with all interested parties regarding the ability of manufacturers to produce premium "automotive rubbing or polishing compounds," and "automotive wax, polish, sealant, or glaze" products.


Michael Thompson                   Chemical Specialties Manufacturers Association

Catherine Beckley                     Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association

Paul Haluza                               Automotive Chemical Manufacturers Council/Motor and                                                  Equipment Manufacturers Association

Barry Meguiar                           Meguiar's Inc.

Gary Silvers                               Meguiar's Inc.

Dennis Holloway                        Mother's Polishes, Waxes, Cleaners

Craig Burnett                              Mother's Polishes, Waxes, Cleaners

Robert Marchese                        Mark V Products

Elsie Jordan                                 Eagle One

Laurent Streichenberger               Oscar's Professional

Ron Lane                                     Chief Auto Parts

Don Williams                               Blackhawk Museum

Aaron Lowe                                Automotive Parts and Accessories Association

Frank Bohannon                          Specialty Equipment Market Association

Dennis Halton                              No Touch

Cheryl Hill                                   Quaker State

Herb Schreiber                            Blue Coral

Douglas Dykstra                          Lily Industries Inc.

Chip Brewer                                S.C. Johnson Wax

Denny Stein                                 3M

Robert Graham                            Diversified Brands/Sherwin Williams


Approved Resolution #97-37 by a unanimous vote.


STAFF REPORT: Yes (252 pages)