Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAir Quality Advisory Board - Minutes - 12/16/2004MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD REGULAR MEETING 281 N. COLLEGE AVE. December 16, 2004 For Reference: Linda Stanley, Chair - 493-7225 Eric Hamrick, Council Liaison 226-4824 Lucinda Smith, Staff Liaison 224-6085 Board Members Present John Long, Ken Moore, Linda Stanley, Katie Walters, Nancy York Board Members Absent Cherie Trine Staff Present Natural Resources Department Lucinda Smith, Liz Skelton Guests None The meeting was called to order at 5:34 p.m. Minutes Due to lack of quorum at the time of this item, there was no action on the minutes of the November 16, 2004 meeting. West Nile Virus The board continued their discussion of the City's 2005 West Nile policy. • Smith: Tom mentioned that he has not developed a staff recommendation yet. But he is leaning towards no action or the action of the City larviciding as opposed to larviciding and adulticiding, for a variety of reasons. With the budget crunch, adulticiding is more expensive. Also, the cost of adulticiding can be highly variable and hard to plan for. There is no staff recommendation, but he indicated he is leaning towards a lesser action. As a recommendation then, Council will give whatever feedback they do at the study session and then I believe it is coming back and you will have an opportunity to make a recommendation on that for Council action. • Stanley: OK, we'll still have a chance to hear it. Just not before the study session. • York: I do like the larvicide idea, even if in conjunction with the neighboring community, to speak of doing nothing... I would like us to recommend that you'll see that roads are not built close to heavily traveled highways and... mobility issues. • Stanley: Basically that there are other priorities. • York: Yes. But it impacts people all the time. • Stanley: I guess the question is: do we want to make a recommendation to City Council? Air Quality Advisory Board 12/16/2004 Page 2 of 15 • Moore: I'd like us to make a recommendation, as far as West Nile goes, of a minimum effort of larviciding. • Walters: I would say the maximum effort be larvicide. Or maybe just larvicide. There is too much controversy with adulticiding. • Stanley: Most of those mosquitoes that were killed with adulticiding weren't the kind that carry West Nile anyway. • Walters: And it all goes back to money. Was it worth it to adulticide? Certainly larviciding is cheaper, or more reliable. • Stanley: Certainly based upon the study that we saw last time, larviciding is much more cost effective. • Long: Will it be more effective as well? • Stanley: Yes, that's the finding. At the same time they have to continue doing public outreach. • Smith: Tom did say the City has planned to continue with whatever level of education outreach program they had. • Stanley: I think Katie should make her final motion. • Walters: Well the other thing I was going to say was we need to tie it to air quality at some point. If we don't, I would rather we just let the City make a decision. We should base our decision on the air quality impacts. • Long: Will this be a secondary supporting statement to what you said first? • Walters: Sure. • Moore: Can I ask what the air quality impacts are? • Walters: That's the thing... • Long: They are debatable. • Walters: That may be something we can say — `Sve don't know effects." • Moore: Like Group A says "this is perfectly safe to do and has no long term health effects" based on how long of a period they studied it or Group B is saying "Yes but I don't trust anything they say". • Walters: That's why I'm hesitant to say anything. • York: There are people who are chemically sensitive. • Walters: But again that speaks to... I don't know that that is our jurisdiction. • Stanley: Well, how do they get that? How does it reach them? If it reaches them through the air, then I think it is. If it reaches them through other means then it is not necessarily an air quality problem. • Smith: This is a challenging issue because some pesticides are defined as HAPS, but pesticides in general are not regulated under air pollution laws, they are regulated under the fungicide/germicide law. They are not viewed, collectively, as air pollutants. There is clearly crossover and they are transported through the air. It is a vague area. • Moore: It is a matter of opinion. • Walters: That's why I'm hesitant to say anything if the City is going to give a recommendation anyways. • Stanley: In terms of the health effects, I do think there are health impacts, especially to children. As far as I understand it, there have been studies that show them to have negative impacts. I just remember from going to Iowa, where they crop dust the fields, and the number of instances of respiratory problems. They recommend that people stay inside on the days they spray. Air Quality Advisory Board 12/16/2004 Page 3 of 15 • York: They are considered an immunosuppressant too. • Stanley: Certainly long term use is not good. Katie Walters made the following motion: I move that we recommend to City Council to not use an adulticiding program in this next upcoming West Nile season, due to the several unknowns there are surrounding the pesticides and the effects that they have on the public health of the citizens of Fort Collins through air quality and their use. Something like that. • York: You only want next season? • Stanley: I think that is all Council is looking for. • Long: Is there any way to measure it up to last year and do a comparison study? • York: Everything changes from year to year, unless our larvicide program is very effective. Colorado didn't have much of a crop. John Long seconded the motion • York: I'd like to make a friendly amendment that we continue the personal responsibility education • Walters: I am fine with that amendment. • York: I guess I could say it better ... the outreach and emphasizing personal responsibility. • Moore: I think the minimum should be larviciding. • Stanley: Katie, did you want to leave that out? • Walters: I'd like to. I understand that we want to make a recommendation to them, but we need to focus on air quality. We need to say that the only part that we know we don't want is the one that impacts air quality. And it may or may not impact public health. • Long: Somehow it is between the lines that if we say we don't want them to adulticide, but because of these issues ... I don't see what's wrong with stating that we do support the larvicide program in light of the problems associated with adulticiding. • Walters: As a second part to that; "We do recommend the use of larvicide to prevent the spread of West Nile"? • Long: "To target known areas of breeding grounds of ..to tackle the problem before it gets to that point." • Walters: I would be fine as adding that as an afterthought. • Stanley: "As an alternative to adulticiding." We're not saying we don't want you to do anything, we're not saying we don't care about public health here at all. If you larvicide, then there is going to be less chance that you do have to adulticide. • Moore: It's preemptive. • Stanley: That's a good way of putting it. The motion passed with 4 votes in favor and I member abstaining (Ken Moore) • Stanley: I will create a memo to Council before next time. I/M Alternatives Air Quality Advisory Board 12/16/2004 Page 4 of 15 Lucinda Smith is seeking input on the various alternatives from the board, which will be combined with the input of the Clean Air Team to formulate a recommendation that will be presented to Greg Byrnes and John Stokes. That will be used as a basis for finalizing part of the staffs workplan for next year and possibly the part of the recommendation that relates to the future of the emissions program. • Moore: ESP has finally woken up and wants to get on the bandwagon; they've realized the program is going away. • Smith: Just so everyone is on the same page, ESP is the contractor that provides the remote sensing and they do the emissions tests in Denver. • Moore: They came to me because I was affiliated with the North Front Range Emissions Task Force. I told them to get in touch with Brian Woodruff and you, Lucinda. • Smith: What is the name of the person? • Moore: It was the technician who was collecting the information. His boss is Rich. • Smith: Thanks for that information. • Moore (Re: Hydrocarbon Emissions, Smoking Vehicles and the Categorized Bar Chart): We were told that the typically the hydrocarbon that make up the smoke is not picked up in our machines. Because our machine's hydrocarbon detection is based on one hydrocarbon, hexane. So the smoke is a hydrocarbon, but it is not a hydrocarbon that the infrared reacts to. • Smith: This number, the average of 482, is from the emissions reading. Are you suggesting that it is only a part of it? • Moore: It might be that the smoking vehicle may be not firing properly, so it does have some gasoline still in it that would have the hydrocarbons higher. • Walters: And hydrocarbons can give off a blue smoke. That can be combining in that smoke you are seeing. • Smith: That might not be measured. • Moore: The engine oil is the blue smoke normally you see burning on a car. The hydrocarbons are not visible, but if it has black smoke that means too much fuel and you could have high hydrocarbons along with carbon monoxide in that. • Smith: OK, so if anything, there are more hydrocarbons that come from smoking vehicles than are measured by the Emissions Program. The other issue is the reactivity of the various hydrocarbons. Our greatest concern is the more reactive hydrocarbons. I don't know the chemistry of that, but I do think it is safe to say that smoking vehicles, if you can get those and repair those you will be reducing hydrocarbons. • Moore (Re: North Front Range Vehicles Higher than Pikes Peak): When did the Pikes Peak go off oxyfuels? • Smith: Two years, that sounds about right. • Moore: Chances are they didn't actually go off oxyfuels because it is still being delivered. With oxyfuels you have a higher vapor pressure and you could have higher hydrocarbon evaporation emissions. • Walters: Is that based on registration data? • Smith: This is based on vehicles that have gone through the initial emissions test. Thal is about 70% of all the vehicles because'/4 or more might be exempt. • Moore: We are probably more rural than that area. Our cars are older too. Air Quality Advisory Board 12/16/2004 Page 5 of 15 • Walters: The first_ thing that came to my mind was students; they are not necessarily going through emissions testing. • Smith: They should be. But they are not necessarily. There is no way to enforce that. That is a good point. • Walters: Students typically have older cars. • Smith: Another thing that is interesting is that in both places it jumps up in 2002. I haven't had a chance to ask why that is so. • Stanley (Re: Mandatory Remote Sensing High Emitter Program vs. Pilot Program): In terms of legislative approval, that means that the governor has to sign it too, right? • Smith: Yes, he always has to sign a bill. • Stanley: I can't imagine Owens signing this bill. • Smith: Really? I would think if the legislature passed, maybe he would. If we can demonstrate enough local support, and enough will for the region to do their own protection of air quality and the legislature was convinced, maybe he would sign it. I don't know. The governor has been so anxious to get rid of the emissions program. • Stanley: I guess that is why I brought it up. He has been so anxious to get rid of it. I can't imagine that he would sign a bill for it. • Smith: The difference is he could say the state has nothing to do with it other than being a vehicle for the enforcement, where we contract with the state and it is no longer a state program, if we the local or regional entities brought it forward. That might be the only way that he would possibly sign it. • Stanley: I don't think it is a reason to say no, but it is a cost to consider in terms of time and effort to do something like this. • Moore: I don't know what it costs for the City to do something like that, but for private group the beginning costs to have a bill go through legislature is $15,000 and goes up from there. • Stanley: That's democracy. Ha-ha! • Moore: You have to get a sponsor, both in the house and in senate. And then you have to go through the committees, and then two votes on the floor, and then it goes to the governor and he can sit on it and do nothing, veto it or sign it. If he sits on it, in 30 days it becomes law, but that way he doesn't have to say he approves it. Anywhere along there it can be axed and that's it. • Walters: But that's the only way... • Smith: It is. I don't think that we, the City of Fort Collins, have much of mechanism to do enforcement unless we were to take on vehicle registration ourselves, or an additional vehicle registration. I suppose we could have a local program that required windshield stickers and you could be arrested or pulled over if there was no sticker, but how do you keep the stickers on the right vehicles. That is a huge issue. • Moore (Re: Additional $2.20 Paid At Registration for Repair Cost for High Emitters): Another group to talk to about that is the County Clerk and Recorders Association. • Smith: That's a good idea. The MPO, Vicky McLane, has been planning to talk to both the County Clerk in Larimer and Weld County, because they are going to be loosing a fair amount of revenue when this program is terminated. • Moore: They were interested in our bill and they actually testified at our hearings. • Smith: That affected them more directly, is that true? Air Quality Advisory Board 12/16/2004 Page 6 of 15 • Moore: Correct. The bill we had was because of collecting the fees; this could affect their budget too. • Smith: Right, I shouldn't say it affected them more directly; it also affected them directly. That should happen before this emissions hearing. • Stanley (Re: Denver RAC's Unsuccessful Voluntary High Emitter Program): Some people don't want to take their car in because they could be caught for other things. • Stanley (Grant application for pilot high emitter program): What would happen if they didn't come in to get the conformity test that is going to be required? Do they get a fine? • Smith: If they just blow it off. • Stanley: I know that there are these options over here under the mandatory smoking vehicle program; I don't know if that's... there was a fine of something? • Smith: That alternative was a little more flushed out. • Stanley: So that would be something that would have to be fleshed out with this program. • Smith: Right. • Stanley: I would imagine that would influence how the City Council would view such a program. • Smith: Are you thinking they would be more concerned if there was punishment or favorable to it if there were a mandatory action? • Stanley: I think it would depend upon the Council member. • Walters: It would make more sense if the fine went to fund the program it came from. The key is for it to be self-sustaining. • Long: I've had some experience with the Step Foundation. It is hit-and-miss. Certain rulings will make a bunch of money available and that's the time to get in. The rest of the time is slow. • Stanley: I like this option. • Walters: I think between the mandatory program, where we have to go through legislation, and the pilot program I like the pilot. • Stanley: It's just being able to do it. • Walters: Right, it seems there has been a lot of resistance to the first oprion. It will be a permanent project and everyone is still in denial about mobile source stuff. • Moore: The burden is still there as perceived by the legislature and administration. • Walters: They are also convinced about the Ozone Agreement. This is so low on list that they are not even receptive to that. The pilot program would be something that you could compare to Denver and show either it doesn't work or "look and see how much response it is getting, how much money we're making." That would be a stepping stone so in the future if there were some kind of mandatory program on the list; at least you have something to back it up. • Stanley: I think pilot program, if it worked well, could lead to other things. How would this be funded if it became permanent? • Smith: One way is with a voter -approved continuation, or reinstiturion of, the registration fee. Or some kind of registration fee. That is one way. That is how the air program is funded now, though that fee. It goes in to a fund and that covers administration of the program. Air Quality Advisory Board 12/16/2004 Page 7 of 15 • Walters: That is the other drawback to not doing mandatory. If you could continue that, without taking away — it is so hard to bring back. • Smith: It would still take a vote, of either the legislature or the people, to continue that. We couldn't do it without some action. There might be some resistance to that vote. • Stanley: I think the people of Fort Collins would be more likely to approve that than the legislature. Something that is very small and it says very clearly what it will be used for, the people of Fort Collins have been pretty open to paying extra taxes. • Moore: I keep getting a lot of people saying they'd like to see the safety inspection program come back. • Smith: I'm hearing that more and more too. • York: Especially with vehicles that the wheels fall off. My question is how will people from out of town be handled? • Smith: People who are not registered in some defined program area will not be in the program. That is how it is now. There is a clause where if they are coming into the area 90 days or more a year they are supposed to do the test, but that is not enforced. Otherwise, people who drive in from out of town and pollute a lot are currently not in the system. • York: My other question is who controls when you register your car, the registration fee you pay, who determines that registration fee? It's an insignificant amount of money, in my opinion. • Smith: It depends. Mine is not. • Moore: That's the Department of Revenue, and probably done by the legislature. It has to do with year, the initial cost and the weight of the vehicle. The newer it is the higher it is. It's nothing for it to be $1000 for some of these people. After about a four- year period it goes down. If it hits 7 years old it gets towards the minimum. If you look on your registration they have ownership tags and all those types of things. • York: I was wondering about that as a source of revenue. • Smith: That whole vehicle registration as a source of revenue is very relevant also as a price mechanism for VMT reduction. Registration fee as a function of the miles you drive... • Stanley: When Ken and I were on that (Blue Ribbon Panel) committee that was one of the things we talked about. I just remember us talking about exploring that option. They talked about how to get the authority to do that and that it would take legislative actions. • Walters: The US Congress is talking about pay -as -you -drive insurance. • Smith: And five states have it already! • Stanley: Insurance or registration? • Smith: I think it is insurance. • York: Ever since the City Council refuses to add in improvements to intersections with the street oversizing — it's clearly not paying its way and hasn't been for a long time. • Smith: Your right; through vehicle registration is one of the better ways to possibly fund some kind of emissions program. • York: I really like the pay -as -you -drive. • Moore: That's the gasoline tax. • Stanley: Yes, but would that require legislation right? Can we do that locally? Air Quality Advisory Board 12/16/2004 Page 8 of 15 • Moore: I don't know. You could put a City tax on the gasoline, but it would have to be voted by the citizens or Council. • York: I don't know that you could or not, but we should explore it. • Stanley: People have always said they will just drive to the county, but that is an insignificant amount. • Smith: For some reason, I thought that it wasn't possible but I will ask Brian. • Stanley: You know, it just occurred to me, when we were talking about registration fees - it was on the City Manager's Transportation Funding committee. • Smith: Really? That Blue ribbon panel that was about five years ago? • Stanley: I can look in my stuff to see what we found out about that. Because we did find out about the possibility of putting something together to help pay for transportation improvements, but on a pay -as -you -drive mechanism. • Smith: Really, OK. • York: Maybe we can get the legislature to look at the insurance. • Walters: In the paper, I'd like to see more details. • Smith: You're thinking that even in the paper it would be good to flush it out more? I think that is possible. More work still would have to be done for the actual application. • Moore: It would take more than one pass too. • Smith: Maybe. Next year is a prime year though, only because we will have the emissions program still running. I would like to have that transition where we are trying something else so that we could move forward without there being a big gap. • Moore: I guess I was saying the program they did in Denver, they did just one pass and sent out letter. I'd like to see two valid readings before a letter. • Smith: Oh, yes! Absolutely. • Stanley: Oh, you mean how often people drive by; to get two tests. • Moore: That will cut down a lot on the false failures. • Stanley: How good are the chances that people will drive by these twice? • Moore: The idea in Denver was to hit 85% of the fleet for the remote sensing program (RSD). • Smith: Right, for the actual program, not the pilot test, the Clean Screen program. It is actually in their contract. • Moore: They pick places that are ideal for the test situation and if people have the same habits... • Smith: That would be an issue and part of the program design, is fleet coverage. It would be important to stipulate that at least 50% of the fleet be covered by this. They are even coming out with unmanned remote sensing devices, where you could have a bunch of boxes set up and one device and just move it around into the boxes. That is a lot less costly. That is in the future though. • Walters: One way to get a captive audience is there are many places where there is only one entrance to neighborhood or shopping center. That people will be going in and out of several times a week. Grocery stores... it seems like that would be a good place to do it. • Moore: The problem is to hit the specifications of the test. It has to be uphill a certain percentage grade and there has to bean acceleration through the lane and it has to be one lane road. That's why you see them on Spears and Boulevard. Air Quality Advisory Board 12/16/2004 Page 9 of 15 • Smith: I don't think this next version would have that level of detail, but it could specify more of a structure of a program. We already have some of that, that was put together in the I/M Feasibility Study. • Moore (Re: Mandatory smoking vehicle program): And then, where in the emissions testing cycle that you look at is most beneficial for not being smoking. Initially we were told that from the time we get in the car, start it up and do the test, if we see it smoke any time during that test it fails the smoke. Well then, they got real specific and there is a certain time in the procedure that you say "Visual smoke, pass or fail". That is the time you are supposed to have looked at it and see if it smoking while it is idling with no load. If you can see the smoke on that, they are smoking badly in other acceleration/deceleration modes. You'll get cars that smoke on startup that won't show up because of what is failing in the engine. I could see where the visual tests we are doing right now may not necessarily catch every one of the smokers. • Smith: I see. That is interesting. • Moore (Re: Repair Assistance Program): Unfortunately the smoking -vehicle repairs are very expensive. It could be $4000. They could have to replace the engine. • Smith: That makes this one more challenging. • Stanley: They are breaking the law and endangering everyone's health. • Moore: Most are economically hampered. • Smith: So you see that? • Moore: Oh yes. What I would see in a smoke program like this is that law enforcement officers or volunteers — I think what would be required is they attend smoking school. The smoking school has a smoke generator that they teach visually opacity. If anyone decided to challenge the reading in court, they've been certified by the state. And they give you a test. That would be an expense that the City would have, but I think you almost have to have certified smoke inspectors. • Stanley: Are any of the law enforcement folks certified? • Smith: We have only one person in the City who is certified and she is in code enforcement. She is certified to read chimney opacity. This is not an opacity thing; it is either presence or absence. But you're point is it might stand up better in court? • Moore: Yes. If somebody decides to challenge it. • Walters: There is a method where you don't have to be certified. EPA's Method 22 is strictly presence or absence, and you time it from start and record how long it continues. Method 22 requires a two hour measurement. • Smith: That might be good compromise. • Stanley: But a two hour minimum? • Walters: The problem is that Method 22 was developed for stationary objects. • Smith: Oh well that wouldn't work. • Walters: Even Method 9 would be too difficult to get a reading from a moving car. • Smith: None of existing programs in Boulder or Denver have mandatory certification. It is not like diesel where you have to distinguish between 35% or 40%; it is presence or absence. The real trick would be helping people distinguish between what's water vapor when it's cold, and what is actually smoke. You don't want to be turning in diesels or water smoke. • Moore: I think you can turn diesels in too, depending on whether the smoke is black for 5 seconds or longer. Air Quality Advisory Board 12/16/2004 Page 10 of 15 • Smith: There is a state law. • Moore: The smoking deal had to deal with, on acceleration you would get smoke, but it shouldn't last longer than 5 seconds. • Smith: That is in the state statute and our local City code doesn't address diesel. We only have a law prohibiting visible smoke from non -diesel vehicles. • Walters: That's probably because there is a state program. • Smith: And it requires the certification to actually make the call on smoke. • Walters: If there was an issue of someone seeing a diesel smoking, that's something that can be referred. The main concern should be automobiles, but give them the number to call if they see diesels. • Moore: I've had customers come in the shop with a letter saying somebody saw them smoking. • Smith: Really? This is proof that it works! • Moore: This is ten years ago though. • Smith: Oh. • Moore: I haven't seen one for a while. The trucks that came in with that letter were smoking. We tell them what it would take to fix it, and usually they would disappear. • Stanley: I wonder if there is any grant program or something to help. • Smith: We could try to get a CMAQ (Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality) grant on that again. We did get one to run a pilot smoking vehicle program and we ran it in a voluntary mode. We did get a little bit of success, but overall, the final recommendation was that we should do a mandatory program or not do a program. It might be possible to try CMAQ for this. • Stanley: That probably wouldn't help defray the costs of repair. • Smith: No, they won't. • Stanley: I wonder if there is some other grant program. • Smith: Or, even working with Project Self Sufficiency. To get some repair assistance or price cuts on parts. • Stanley: Or donations from local mechanics. • Smith: That's an idea. • Walters: It seems like the way to do that is: you have to get your car fixed in a certain period of time and if you don't you get fined. • Moore: Fixed, or somebody to certify that it isn't smoking. • Walters: Right; some kind of fine enforcement structure. That could fund some repairs. • Smith: The repair costs really are high for smoking vehicles; it would take a lot of fines. • Stanley: Let's suppose you could do something with registration; that's another way to possibly help fund the cost of repairs. • Smith: That would just require an act of the legislature. So that takes it away from our local ability to just "go with if'. • Long: That's County too? • Smith: Yes. The County would be the vehicle to do it, but it would be the legislature that would have to authorize the County to do it. • Smith: Are there any thoughts about Council amenability to the two types of possible mandatory programs? • York: I know there are three votes against it. Air Quality Advisory Board 12/16/2004 Page 11 of 15 • Smith: Maybe what I should ask is, if we were only going to do one, which one would you be inclined to support? • Walters: Definitely the pilot project. • York: The voluntary smoking vehicle thing, why wasn't it successful? • Smith: Well, you send someone a letter and say you "must or should" come in and prove it is not smoking or get it repaired or provide proof that you have sold it and there is no backup to it. Nothing makes them do it. There is no summons, no citation; it just says "because of air quality you should do it". We had very few people respond. • Walters: Seems like that's the problem: it is so open ended. People who have those vehicles probably could give a crap or they can't afford it. • Moore: We talk about too, the degree of smoke — if they are really smoking, chances are the car will die soon. • Walters (Stage 1 vapor): Seems like you could just call a police officer or Poudre Fire Authority. • Stanley: I didn't understand this: in the second paragraph that talks about Poudre Fire Authority requiring it; does this mean that it is likely being done in Fort Collins? • Smith: It is being done in Fort Collins. The thing that mandates it in Fort Collins is Poudre Fire Authority's Uniform Fire Code for Safety. It's not required here for air quality reasons by the Commission. It is enforced by the State Oil inspectors group. • Walters: The Oil and Gas Commission? • Smith: Yes. • Stanley: When you say you want to deal with enforcement — it sounds like there may not be that much of an enforcement problem? Is that right? • Smith: It sounds like there are enough controls in place that you'd logically think they are not going to circumvent the system. I've heard different things about who is responsible for enforcing it that don't quite match. It is just a matter of resolving that. Poudre Fire said it is the State and the State said it is Poudre Fire Authority. • Stanley: So it's just matter of clarifying that those folks are responsible? • Smith: Yes. • Walters: Most likely, companies are saying "if you don't come back with a tank full of vapor we will charge you for it" because that is product for them. They can recover it and use it. • Smith: That's a good point. They are looking on the other end too. There are a couple of checks and balances. • Moore: The Fire Department would catch problem too, because if you have those vapors you'll have an explosion and fire. • Smith: So you're right, it is not something that will reduce VOCs, it is just important to clarify responsibility of enforcement. • Walter (Gas Cap Replacement Program): Another thing good is the gas exchange program. That is where people drive up and you test the cap. • Smith: The advantage there is you get to talk to the people and it is an education opportunity. • Walters: It also gets people who don't work in the area. • Smith: We could do a combination of both. • Stanley: The gas can program has more appeal because you are actually getting something. People may not understand the gas cap problem. Air Quality Advisory Board 12/16/2004 Page 12 of 15 • Walters: I£ it were at the mall, that would be a good place to get people, educate them and get some visibility. • Stanley: I wonder if at CSU you could get folks to be advocates. There are a lot of things that come over called "E-comment" and it has a lot of different pieces and you can click on them to get more information. That is one way that they do that. • Smith: Those are good suggestions. That maybe just sort of the impersonal remote employee approach may work. • Stanley: Or just get some folks to go around and talk to people so they sign up for it. Or send an email. • York: Well what are we going to say is — is this true "the simple fact is that a faulty gas cap can cause a vehicle to loose up to one gallon of gasoline for every 15 days"? • Smith: I could hardly believe that, but yes it is true. • Long: That is supposed to be cap not can? • Smith: Yes. I'm sure. • Walters: Well as your gas tank empties, there is more space for the gas to vaporize. If your cap is leaking it is making more room for vapor. • Long: It's hard to believe it adds up to that much. • Moore: On a 1996 or later model, a leaky gas cap will turn on the check engine light. The vehicles prior to that had no way to test if it is leaking. • Walters: That prior to 1996 thing may be somewhere where we would get a bigger response from students. In some cases they are not driving newer car. Or they see the check engine light and don't do anything about it. • York: I think that is a great program. • Smith: We will definitely do that next year. • Moore: You can do educational stuff just like we had on the Car Care at the mall. • Walters: You might want to partner that with the Home & Garden Show when there is lots of people there. • Stanley (Re: Solvent Utilization): Can you guys do an article in the newspaper for the residential side of things? • Walters: A lot of people have their thinners sitting in their garage. People don't know a lot about the household hazardous waste program. • Smith: That could be another partnership. We could partner with them to get the word out, both at their facility and an article out too. • Stanley: You could partner with Miles Blumhardt. He does the Saturday Home section. I think a lot of people read that. • Long: Or have a weekly columnist do something to help with the education, and the public events too. • Walters: It could be as simple as if he mentions painting, put an educational note at the end. • Long: Or tell them to look for paint without VOCS. • Smith: Another idea that we could partner with the RACQ (Denver's Regional Air Quality Council) on is aisle posters in the home improvement stores. The whole ozone non -attainment area could partner on that. • York: I wish we could do that around pesticides and insecticides. • Stanley: One place where they could make recommendations is the Water Board, because of runoff. They could make that one of their action items. Air Quality Advisory Board 12/16/2004 Page 13 of 15 • York: I think we have to do that semi -clandestine. I think about writing a letter every spring. • Stanley: Residential application of pesticides is significantly more than agriculture. People just don't understand how to use it. • Smith: By law, they are supposed to follow the directions. I don't think people do that. • Stanley: People think more is better. • Walters (RE: Lawn & Garden Equipment & Commercial Sources): I would still like the City to get a list from the EPA that says which is the best equipment for emissions. It could be good guidance and a resource. • Moore: What is Zilch? • Long: Zero Interest Loan for Conservation Health. • Stanley: I was wondering if you could have a workshop on this topic. • Smith: That is a great idea. • Long: It could be part of the environmental business series. • Stanley: You could do a residential one at the Senior Center and the commercial one at the Business Series. • York: Was the City business one successful? • Smith: I think it was. We had enough response to do it again. I'll suggest this as a program. • Long: For lawn and garden, Zilch it not really needed. A lawn mower only costs a couple hundred dollars. • Smith: The rebate program is for the citizens. Were you thinking for commercial? • Walters: For the commercial people, their equipment is huge. • Long: I was thinking for residential. Zilch is for residential only. • Smith: We can propose changes that don't have to go to Council; they only have to be approved by the City Manager. • Stanley: You could expand the residential rebate maybe to commercial too? It might have to be a bigger rebate. • Smith: Yes. We have to start out with finding out what equipment is available and how much does it cost. And then what kind of debt would a Zilch loan versus a little rebate make in their decisions. At the very least we can commit to working with the businesses through the environmental business series. • Walters: Seems like the target audience would be small home and garden companies. Even if it is a couple hundred dollars; anything that would reduce the cost helps. • Smith: Are there any other comments on the whole VOC reducing alternatives? • Stanley: The exciting thing is we're talking about doing these soon. • Walters: Most are reasonable and doable. • Smith: Just a note on the upcoming emissions hearing: It is on February 19 and the City is going to request party status, and the State is proposing to terminate the program December 31, 2005. Right now, the City is planning to support that recommendation. If we get information back from the Citizen Air Quality Survey that is overwhelmingly strong that we should keep the program longer, that may help us. The Pikes Peak area is going to ask the Commission to extend it through the end of 2006. Our MPO is in support of asking it to be retained for 2005. I won't be able to run the position statement by you because it is due January 19 and the meeting in January 20 and I wanted to wait until we get the citizen survey results in. Do you have any feedback on Air Quality Advisory Board 12/16/2004 Page 14 of 15 that? The Reporter Herald has picked up on this story and they did an article and in today's paper they are asking people if it should be ended. Last time I looked a majority said it should go away. • Stanley: If your pilot program were to be implemented, the remote sensing one, and found to be effective, could it rival the effectiveness of the current program. • Smith: My opinion is it would not bring about as much air quality benefit, but it would bring some and cost much less. • Moore: With the newer cars, the program is not as effective in finding problems. It is still finding cars that are failing and false failures are down. The one benefit the I/M program has currently is the visual inspection on the emission equipment that would not be caught on other programs. You could have an air pump disconnect and still pass a drive by gross emitter and not be as clean as it should be. • Stanley: Do you want to send it out to us on email? • Smith: Yes. • Stanley: People can send comments as they so choose. Enforcement of City Air Pollution -related Ordinances Lucinda Smith handed out a memo in response to the "assure air quality related municipal codes are adequately enforced" item on the workplan. • Stanley (Re: Wood smoke): Could you do a nighttime opacity reading? • Smith: We are starting to re -look in to that. There is actually less support for it now. • Walters: There is less confidence with it, and it is more complicated. • Moore: We had an opacity meter for diesel tests. Do they have one on a pole? Ours measured how much of the green light is blocked. • Walters: That's how they measure extinction in research situations. • Smith: I'll look in to it. • Walters: Do they use a Transmisometer or a nephalometer? • Moore: I'm not sure. At the Clean Air Conference there are manufacturers there. Now they are using lasers to get smaller particles. • Smith: It might be possible. • Long: It might be harder to identify the homes or have staffing issues. • Walters: Accessibility would be the other issue. • Smith: You would have to have a ladder. • York: I'm wondering if we should the train firemen? I call the fire department when I see smoke. • Smith: I think that having a robust measurement method for nighttime opacity is the starting place. • Stanley: I'm surprised there have only been a few visits. Do you think it is because people don't know about it? • Smith: We tell them about it if they enter the wood smoke hotline. They know about the City's nuisance complaint line. • Stanley: Do you think they understand that it is a nuisance? My neighbors said "it is their right to do that." • Walters: People don't realize there is a problem. • Smith: Last year Zoe had a column in the code enforcement section. It sounds like we need to do more wood smoke outreach. Air Quality Advisory Board 12/16/2004 Page 15 of 15 • York: And the Fort Collins Forum. Denny LaRue has a column and Dann (Atteberry, City Manager) has one. • Smith: It's hard to get approval to get in a column space. We could have ad, or write a letter to the editor. • York: What I meant is to get Dann or somebody to write it in their column. There should be a public health column in papers. There are lots of public health issues. • Long: It is a good way to educate people. • Smith: I will pass this information to Melissa Moran who will be doing the outreach campaign for the different issues. We did succeed in getting four air quality articles in the paper. this year. Next year it will be more methodical. • York: I think a follow-up in the "Thumbs Up" section "to citizens and staff for the gas cap program..." Updates • Stanley: The weekly did an article on our recommendation for the Public Health Board. It was all based upon discussion that had taken place in Council emails and our memo. I do think that is something we should talk about in the coming months. There are some Council members and other boards who have shown interest in it. • Moore: I just wonder if the cost or budget had anything to do with Council members' reactions. • Stanley: Maybe we should try to provide them with some cost estimates. Let's put it on for February. Agenda Planning • Annual Report of Activities (January) • Public Health Board (February) • Air Quality Summary Survey • Introduction to new board members Building on Basics has been postponed until the November general election Meeting adjourned 7.48 PM Submitted by Liz Skelton Administrative Secretary I