Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAir Quality Advisory Board - Minutes - 08/15/2022 AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR Monday, August 15, 2022, 5:30 – 8:00 pm via Zoom 0 8 /15/22 – MINUTES Page 1 1. CALL TO ORDER 5:32pm 2. ROLL CALL • List of Board Members Present − Karen Artell – Chair − Wayne Chuang − Greg Boiarsky − Mark Houdashelt – Vice Chair − Dan Welsh − Greg Clark − Jason Miller • List of Board Members Absent • List of Staff Members Present − Cassie Archuleta, Staff Liaison − Jason Komes, Senior Environmental Specialist • List of Guests − Tom Moore, Technical Services Program Manager, CDPHE Air Pollution Control Division − John McDonagh, New Board Member starting 8/16/22 − Thomas Gifford, New Board Member starting 8/16/22 − Sandra LeBrun, New Board Member starting 8/16/22 3. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION • No public comment 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • Wayne moved and Mark seconded a motion to approve the June AQAB minutes as amended. Motion passed with one abstaining 6-0-1. 5. PREVIOUS BUSINESS 1. BOARD MEMBER INTRODUCTIONS AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 0 8 /15/22 – MINUTES Page 2 − Three new Board Members will be officially sworn in tomorrow at Council. The three new members are John McDonagh, Thomas Gifford, and Sandra LeBrun. The Board did introductions. 2. AIR QUALITY MONITORING − Cassie, Dan, and Jason K were part of a meeting about two weeks ago between City, State, and County officials. Each has funding for air quality monitors, and there is a lot of new infrastructure grant funding coming available for monitoring. They wanted to pull folks together to have a conversation about where the monitors should go to provide the best value and use for the community. There have been some models that showed ozone on the east side of town might be higher than you would expect and not represented well with current air quality measurements. The monitor in Downtown Fort Collins is not a good representative because of the vehicle emissions that are present there. The City has funding to buy equipment but does not have funding to operate the equipment. The City asked CDPHE to support them in operation and maintenance for new monitors. City/County didn’t come to any conclusions, but there might be some options and opportunities coming for Board input as they narrow down locations and have more conversations. − Dan provided context for those who are not familiar with ozone distribution throughout the Front Range. There is a nonattainment area for ozone that continues to violate the National Ambient Air Quality Standards which are set by the EPA. Dan also spoke on the formation of ozone and the upslope flow. CDPHE have monitors in Denver, Chatfield State Park, Golden at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Rocky Flats, Boulder Reservoir, and two monitors in Fort Collins. They also have temporary ozone monitors. They found higher ozone readings on the eastern side of Fort Collins and Larimer County than they had expected. − Dan did not have information on the Carter Lake temporary monitor. The temporary monitors are usually research-based, so they must first do data validation and filtration, and make sure there are not erroneous things happening. Cassie thinks we will hear more in the fall. − Dan believes some ozone is formed elsewhere and blows into the monitors, but it is also precursors coming into the area and forming there. If it was instantly converted to ozone and then transported to Denver, for example, you would see high readings in places like Platteville and North Denver to East Denver, but that is not always the case. Platteville readings get high but AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 0 8 /15/22 – MINUTES Page 3 then they plateau, so it doesn’t get as high as Chatfield, NREL, or Rocky Flats. It takes time for emissions to “cook.” That is why they use temporary monitors - they can relocate those monitors if they are not telling them new information. − Regulatory monitors are continuous monitoring. John asked if the monitor on the west side of Fort Collins is currently adequate. Dan stated that more monitoring is always better. From Fort Collins to Chatfield, there are monitors every 30 or so miles, so they have better coverage on the west side, but he always wants more data and more information. Karen stated that is why the temporary monitors have gone up, to look at where the good sites are for additional monitors between Fort Collins, Boulder, and the rest of Larimer County. 6. NEW BUSINESS a. CDPHE Air Pollution Control Division − Tom Moore, Technical Services Program Manager for the CDPHE Air Pollution Control Division, started his new position about seven weeks ago. He has been working regionally on air quality issues for over 20 years. − The Air Quality Enterprise Board is responsible for distributing resources collected from permanent sources such as fee payers. This will bring funding opportunities, focusing first on ozone modeling and databases. The division Tom is part of is going through a lot of changes and in the middle of a growth spurt. They have very specific responsibilities from the legislature and have a lot of work to do to encourage everyone in Colorado to behave differently. Another big focus that they have been staffing up for is the oil and gas sector, for permitting those sources and ensuring compliance. They restructured their permitting program and reorganized their business operations unit. They have a big planning and policy related program, a lot of new work in toxics, and expanded effort on ozone. They also continue to provide small business assistance and support. − The Division has a Technical Services Program that has been reorganized into six units. One group focuses on regulatory modeling and emission inventories, so they can support the planning and SIP type analyses that are required by the EPA. They have a meteorology, forecasting fire, and smoke group where they handle the daily air quality forecast and put out alerts. That group also manages a smoke management program for prescribed burning. There is also a data reports group that will be expanding their scope of responsibility with the additional monitoring AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 0 8 /15/22 – MINUTES Page 4 they are doing. − The Division has two types of monitoring or functions that will be in their program. One is the traditional criteria pollutant monitors, and they typically orient these towards continuous monitoring. There is also new effort in the monitoring and characterization of air toxics and hazardous air pollutants. − They are establishing sites called PAMs (photochemical assessment monitoring stations) that will run GC mass spectrometers on a real time basis and will capture aldehydes on cartridges. They also need to monitor not only NOx but NOy and the k (rate of reaction) to NO2, and those require a different kind of monitor. It allows you to better fingerprint the history of the ozone plume. That information would be helpful for forecasting work and the air quality planning efforts. Gas and oil monitoring is going to measure some of the same things. Although we don’t have oil and gas being produced in the middle of Fort Collins, there are people living in Colorado amongst the oil and gas production. They have a mobile monitoring station suite they are developing that will be designed to go out and see the individual air pollution sources types that communities experience. They also have legislation that requires them to do extensive monitoring in disproportionally impacted communities where people are already exposed to high levels of pollution. They are also going to be putting on very elaborate fence-line monitoring for major sources like refineries. − Dan provided some more context regarding national standards. The National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for 8hr ozone is 70 parts per billion. If meteorological modeling suggests that ozone levels may exceed the NAAQS, it triggers an ozone action day or air quality health advisory. The non-attainment zone extends from the Palmer Divide to the Wyoming border. The NAAQS allow three exceedances each year and averages over a three-year rolling period; we have somewhere between 30 and 60 exceedances per year within the non-attainment zone. When we exceed, it is usually only at 75 or 80 parts per billion. Dan tries to err on the side of caution regarding issuing alerts, as there are areas they can’t always see. That is also why they try to relocate monitors. − Greg C and John asked about what they will do with all the data and if they will use it in compliance. Ambient monitors are not used for compliance at sources. Tom stated that in the state air pollution control programs there is a complex agreement where sources, under the law, are allowed to release emissions at specified rates under specific limitations, and they must demonstrate that they are using specific control technology or best practices. Most of the data that he mentioned is data from the ambient air, not direct emissions from a source. They are sampling the impact of those emissions and background conditions that are already in the atmosphere and AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 0 8 /15/22 – MINUTES Page 5 relating those to health and effects on the ecosystem. They are tuning the allowable emissions and verifying their compliance with standards through what they observe in the ambient monitoring data. They still observe health effects at lower numbers in the ambient condition. Ozone would be present even if there were no anthropogenic pollution, albeit at lower concentrations. A better indicator of anthropogenic pollution would be to measure the total oxidants, not ozone, though ozone monitoring is more commonly required due to the health standards that have been done for decades. It is complicated and they try to monitor the ambient exposure and qualify that data. If human health values are exceeded, then there are specific plans that they must execute to reduce the sources. There are no plans to force sources to go to zero emissions, because that is the economy we live in. You must give people clear signals on what they can change. − John asked about unpermitted emissions and where that burden falls. Tom stated he has been working in oil and gas emission inventories for 20 years and is still learning. How to enforce it is still a very challenging thing. They would like to see more remote sensing that includes aerial overflights and satellite checking. People recognize the problem, and there must be an enforcement solution that is efficient and produces change. Thirty years ago, they had the same problem with the mobile source sector; over the last few decades there has been progress there and the EPA has been allowed to write better new source standards for mobile sources. Tom believes that oil and gas may follow the same direction as we develop more information about the frequency and magnitude of these emissions. − Karen asked what type of issues Tom thinks the Board should work on or concentrate on moving forward. Tom stated the mobile source sector that uses oil and gas to operate is important. The Board could look for improvements in how traffic is managed and how preference is given to zero emission vehicles in the City. Land use zoning could also be modified to address that. Tom also believes that bicycles should be completely separated from cars and given their own separate routes so they can ride safely. He mentioned possible incentives for bicycles and walking. b. Budget Process − Cassie shared context regarding the upcoming City budget discussion and what opportunities the Board will have to provide input. She also shared a snapshot of the City Structure, the City strategic plan, and how the City gets revenue. − The budget process starts with staff listing what they propose to continue funding (ongoing) along with additional requests (enhancements). That moves to a team AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 0 8 /15/22 – MINUTES Page 6 that will talk about specific topic offers, like environmental services. It then goes to a lot of the City executives before it reaches the public. The City will release what we call the City Manager’s Recommended Budget. This is when you will see the first picture of an initial recommendation for what will and won’t be funded. This will be published on September 2nd. After that, it goes to City Council, where they will discuss, amend and adopt the budget. While it is at City Council, there will be different public participation opportunities. The next budget is for two years. The budget offers will feature a snapshot description of what each does. − There two types of budget offers. The first is called an ongoing offer. This is something that is currently funded and most likely going to get funded again. There can be some cuts and expansions, but it might not be the most influential place to weigh in as a Board. The second type of offer is enhancements. These could be things that Council requested or made a priority; City staff cannot just add anything they want. An example of an enhancement is one the Air Quality Team did for air quality monitoring. − The whole budget document is over 1,000 pages and if you look for keywords like air quality you still might not find all of the relevant offers, so Cassie highlighted some examples like the xeriscape incentive program and one that helps replace city gas equipment with electric options. She also pulled a couple examples from transportation funding offers to show the Board that there are options that could affect Air Quality but might not jump out when they are searching for them. She also pointed out that budget offers can be for many different things, like new full-time employees, managing grants, or new programs. − In the budget you will see terminology like “above the line” and “below the line.” “Above the line” means it is proposed for funding, and “below the line” means it is not proposed for funding. An advocacy opportunity for the Board is to take something below the line and say it is important and City Council should consider it. Ongoing offers can be a good place to reinforce investments and programs but are not necessarily the ones that might not get funding. − Cassie shared that the Air Quality Team can also pull revenue from federal and state money through grants. The Air Quality Team is currently managing grants for indoor air quality, regulatory monitors, air toxics and more that are currently pending. − Karen mentioned that she has started a memo of support for certain basic air quality offers but knows there are other offers the Board should address as well. Mark was not sure if this was the right time or if we should wait until after the City Manager’s Budget Recommendation was published. There was discussion on when the best AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 0 8 /15/22 – MINUTES Page 7 time to send a memo with having a short timeline between when it is published and when City Council starts discussing. The Board also discussed if they need to meet again to discuss budget offers, wait until their next meeting, or just have one person write up a recommendation for City Council fo rthe AQAB tovote on. There was also concern with how many offers there are and the best way to find the ones that apply to the Board. There is a fine line as Cassie is unable to paraphrase and advocate for other employee’s offers. It was decided that Karen and Mark will meet to discuss priorities and work on a memo. They will send it out for edits to the Board, and we will vote on it at the next meeting. 7. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS • Jason M gave an update on the Bicycle Advisory Committee. He said that electrified bicycles and electric small mobility devices are on the rise and here to stay. Regarding the Spin bikes and scooters, the scooters significantly outpace the bike usage by about ten times. They have had hundreds of thousands of miles of e-trips since the program started and it is expanding rapidly. The City of Denver has had an incentive program for purchasing e-bikes and the State is looking at implementing one soon. • This is Jason M’s last meeting, so the Board will need to vote at an upcoming meeting on their next representative for the Bicycle Advisory Committee. 9. OTHER BUSINESS • Next meeting will be hybrid. 10. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:08 pm.