HomeMy WebLinkAboutAir Quality Advisory Board - Minutes - 08/15/2016MINUTES
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD
Date: Monday, August 15, 2016
Location: Community Room, 215 N. Mason Street
Time: 5:30–8:00pm
For Reference
Mark Houdashelt, Chair
Ross Cunniff, Council Liaison 970-420-7398
Cassie Archuleta, Staff Liaison 970-416-2648
Board Members Present Board Members Absent
Mark Houdashelt, Chair Jim Dennison
Rich Fisher Tom Griggs
John Shenot
Gregory Miller
Chris Wood
Vara Vissa
Robert Kirkpatrick (arrived 6:30)
Staff Present
Cassie Archuleta, Environmental Planner/Staff Liaison
Dianne Tjalkens, Admin/Board Support
Lucinda Smith, Environmental Services Director
Matt Zoccali, Environmental Regulations and Affairs Manager
Councilmembers Present
Ross Cunniff, District 5
Guests
Mike Prusnick, citizen
Call to order: 6:00pm
Agenda Review: No changes.
Public Comments: Mike Prusnick—controversy around climate change is in politics, driven by business.
Left hand giving great political story, but science shows spending money destroying the planet. If
sustainability is working, emissions should be going down. PRPA annual report shows businesses use 65%
of energy produced. Rates drive this. Residents pay bulk rate surcharges. Businesses get discounts and use
more than fair share. Bring business rates in line with residents. Wonder why energy has different costs at
all. Messaging should be around how harvesting, transporting and burning of fossil fuels is poisoning air,
water, etc. All know that running car in garage will kill you—how big of a garage do we need to keep the car
running? Biosphere model to the city—how long until certain death with the rate we are burning fossil fuels?
Apply solutions. Protecting planet for our children. Have carbon monoxide detectors in our homes—use this
type of model to eliminate controversy around climate change.
Council Comment: Ross Cunniff—his role is to be available for questions, observations, and concerns. Let
boards make decisions consistent with their charters and work plans.
Review and Approval of Minutes:
Page 1
Postponing approval of minutes to September meeting.
AGENDA ITEM 1: Ozone State Implementation Plan
Cassie Archuleta gave an overview of the current status regarding the Colorado State Implementation Plan
(SIP) for ozone. The board considered whether they would like to review the draft SIP and prepare
comments for the State in advance of consideration by the Colorado legislature.
Comments from the board on state regulatory issues can go to Council and be discussed in Council
Legislative Committee.
SIP planning for ozone. Fort Collins ozone measurements—have two sites that measure ozone. EPA
standards recently went from 75ppm to 70ppm. 3-year rolling average shows that Fort Collins is exceeding
the standards; therefore, we are in nonattainment. The whole Front Range and Denver metro have been in
nonattainment. In 2012 classified as marginal nonattainment. In 2016 reclassified as moderate nonattainment
since levels did not drop. This requires more pollution controls and revision of SIP. Draft SIP is with the
state, public hearings scheduled for October 20 and 21. Written comments requested by October 7. Goes to
Colorado legislative review, then to EPA for final approval. Main elements of draft include comprehensive
review, reasonably available control measures (RACM), sources of VOCs, NOX, etc. Propose new rules, do
a demonstration of attainment through monitoring, emissions and modelling. New attainment designation is
based on 2015-2017 data. Will start working on next SIP for new standard soon and attainment designation
will be based on 2018-2020 data.
Options: Review current draft SIP and make recommendation to Council, and/or keep informed regarding
continuing SIP planning process and advise the governor designated lead agency for air quality matters
pertaining to Fort Collins.
Comments/Q&A
• Staff intention to comment on this SIP?
o Staff is not planning on commenting. A lot of it is related to oil and gas reporting. Concentrated
on low hanging fruit that can get in place by 2017. Missing adoption of more stringent practices,
but presume this will be covered in next SIP.
o Comments wouldn’t be that relevant, if made just in regard to the city. Board might come to the
same conclusion, unless wanted to comment on larger issues than the City might be concerned
with. Do we need permission from Council to do that?
• Intro mentions requiring inspection/maintenance program for vehicles in northern Colorado.
o Was a state requirement, not federal.
o Including items already doing that weren’t taking credit for.
o Demonstration of attainment uses on-the-books items (already being done), and incremental
changes to get to 75ppm.
• New oil and gas regulations significantly decreased emissions. Included in modelling, not monitoring?
o Modelling done by EPA vs. RAQC group. Many maps show projections that around 2025 many
nonattainment areas will come into attainment, but list does not include Larimer County.
However, did not take new oil and gas regulations into account.
o There was high ozone this summer.
Had a few high days.
• Emissions from mobile sources dropped significantly.
o Taking credit for new fuel standards.
o Cash for clunkers program from the stimulus act.
• What has changed from 2006 that has increased ozone?
o Weather—more hot, dry days. Variability year to year. 2009 to 2011 there was a recession, fewer
people driving. Weather variability is a big factor. A few sites that represent the area,
representing the same air shed. All of Larimer, part of Weld out of attainment.
o What is being discussed regionally?
Statewide, the SIP is used to control ozone. Federal is driving this (EPA requirement).
State promotes voluntary things as well. Ex: lawn and garden equipment campaign to
Page 2
turn over gas powered equipment. City is doing no-idling campaign, lawnmower rebate
campaigns, and other programs. Biggest contributor to ozone is transportation—need to
get people out of single occupancy vehicles. A lot of ozone is transported, however, so
need to make gains regionally.
• Skeptical on ability to provide meaningful comments to state on this SIP revision. Board’s role is looking
forward—the City makes decisions that affect ozone precursor emissions through transportation, utilities,
etc. Emphasize that this has real impacts on people’s health and should be talked about in all decisions
around public transportation, energy efficiency programs, idling, voluntary programs, etc.
• Glean from modelling whether primarily NOX or VOC. Can prioritize actions we can take. Rather than
providing comments to the state, advise Council and staff on actions that would be more impactful.
• NOX and VOC modelled or monitored data?
o Using monitoring to model future, based on current emissions plus projections on growth. Have a
lot of NOX but also a lot of VOCs.
o This is basically a one-year SIP.
• New standard dates are enforcement? Or is there a deadline for having a new SIP for that period?
o Because of reclassification had to speed up current process. Have to demonstrate that making
progress.
o When bumped to moderate get more time to attain compliance?
Yes. Attainment demonstration deadline doesn’t look right, though.
Cassie will double check dates. 2017-18 will be used for next attainment designation.
o Proposed rule to realign dates with other air quality related plans. Not a lot to contribute to this
SIP.
• Has the City already contributed to the current process?
o Mayor Pro Tem is on the board.
o In the last year, three staff people have participated on one of the subcommittees. Cassie has
attended RAQC board meetings. Have participated in development of the SIP. Makes sense for
the City to consider deeper involvement in next SIP process.
• What happens when feds come in? What restrictions/penalties happen, or does the community just get
more time to plan? Will we see changes in our lifetime, or is this something on paper?
o Review of control technologies includes regulations that can be imposed. In this review, not
imposing a lot of new restrictions.
o If 75ppm was not attained, the prior plans didn’t work. 70ppm is even harder—a lot is going into
planning, but the reality is that emissions are increasing.
Won’t be easy to meet attainment.
Should be intention that these plans are taken seriously and that people know what the
alternatives are. What should the deadline be? Getting feeling of continuously shifting
deadline.
• Perhaps Cassie can give presentation on SIP in general. Need to understand background ozone as well.
o This board has to make sure decision makers throughout the city are aware of the problems and
difficulty of meeting the standards. Federal rules in Clean Air Act—every one of them is
litigated, often to Supreme Court. Show our leadership that this is important to citizens.
o Will only get harder to meet standards as they decrease ppm. Should tell City leadership to take a
stronger role in future SIPs.
o Propose the board write a recommendation to Council around forward-looking view to next SIP
and effect on ozone of routinely made decisions. Friendly reminder.
ACTION ITEM: Stay on top of next SIP process.
AGENDA ITEM 2: Board Recommendations
Mark Houdashelt led a discussion on possible submittal of recommendations to Council related to the
Community Recycling Ordinance.
Coming before Council September 6. Mark reviewed the current package and presented draft memo.
Preference that the ordinance is reasonable, but aggressive.
Page 3
Draft edited based on board input.
Comments/Q&A
• Hope board will recommend adoption of an ordinance. Suggest simplifying to asking that staff come
back with an ordinance in line with CAP and RZW goals. Want the City to stay on track related to air
quality impacts of waste management.
• Want to see us stay on target for reduction goals. Would like to hear more about the barriers. Ex: Why
can’t small businesses participate in organics collection? Is it insects, vermin, too many trucks on the
road, a scale issue? What are the behind the scenes conversations? This is happening in other places
around the world.
o That is what City staff is trying to determine. Could pick an option and mandate it, but instead
talking with haulers, Council, and community to see what the opportunities are. Different barriers
for different options.
• Like the June memo from NRAB, but at this stage the board needs to affirm general support for the
CRO.
• Suggest endorsing NRAB memo, or craft memo via email.
o Recommend earlier draft version of the ordinance, but support the adoption of a CRO.
o Complete revisions on draft recommendation.
• Eventually citizens will have to deal with top-down decisions. They want to understand rationale.
Greg moved to accept the recommendation as drafted. John seconded. Motion passed unanimously, 7-0-0.
AGENDA ITEM 3: BFO Offer Discussion
Mark Houdashelt led a discussion on possible submittal of recommendations to Council related to climate
and air quality BFO offers.
Lucinda gave a brief presentation on the BFO timeline. The City Manager’s recommended budget will be
presented to Council September 2. Will be three Work Sessions: September 13 for Environmental Health,
Economic Health, and High Performing Government; September 27 for Safe Community, Transportation,
Culture and Recreation; and October 11 for Neighborhood Livability and Social Health, general discussion
and final decision. Public hearings on September 20 and October 4. First reading November 1; second
reading November 15.
Board members provided prioritization of air quality and climate action related offers. Mark organized
rankings into a spreadsheet and requested input on how to present to Council.
Comments/Q&A
• Work Sessions decide what is above and below the line?
o No. Have general discussion, answer questions, and give feedback to staff.
o More funds being requested than available. In the past had retreat to look at final list, and suggest
doing it again. $250M general fund budget.
o September 2 citizens will have access to CMO recommended budget
• Include narrative that shows rationale in memo to Council. Helps Council when having discussions about
what to fund.
• Board chose preliminary funding recommendation to be top 15 ranked offers.
• Mark will send out Board’s rankings—board members can add rationale in bullets next to offers.
• Keep the recommendation simple so Council has information they can act on.
• Externalities are often not monetized. What is real value added? Add to qualitative comments.
• Looked at offers line-by-line. All the offers were good and necessary, but next will separate into
categories: solar power, bike programs, parking, roads, etc. Ex: Why would you need more parking
garages if trying to shift transportation modes away from single occupancy vehicles?
• GHG reduction projects supplied by Lindsay Ex included dollar/ton reduction numbers – suggest
ignoring these numbers as methodology for their calculation is not known.
Page 4
ACTION ITEM: Mark will send spreadsheet to board. Members will provide input on why each of top 15
offers should or should not be funded and why any others (not in top 15) should be funded.
AGENDA ITEM 4: 2017 Work Plan
Mark Houdashelt led a discussion on preparation of a draft 2017 work plan. Final work plan is due
September 30.
Mark presented initial edits to the 2015 work plan based on prior board discussions.
Comments/Q&A
• Council likes work plans to have strong ties to the City’s Strategic Plan.
• Fugitive dust has been successfully completed. Does not need additional monitoring.
o Bullet includes woodsmoke, wildfire, and other activities. May be continuing comments on
enforcement of fugitive dust.
o Staff will be looking at citizen complaints regarding wood burning stoves.
• Suggest members provide input on issues that are current/relevant to them. Determine a handful of items
to highlight.
o Don’t want to limit scope by being too narrow.
o Ex: Diesel smoke from trucks. Don’t have solution, but kind of thing that deters cycling. What
have other communities done? Ex: City codes regarding solar power production. California is
requiring all new construction to be solar-ready.
• Suggested topics:
o CAP is huge for this board, and don’t want to lose momentum around indoor air quality.
o Asbestos, indoor air quality, rolling coal (What more can the City do?).
Current state law—Police Services doesn’t feel productive to issue tickets because of low
likelihood of conviction. If legislation around penalties passes, City can take more
action/implement enforcement.
• Rolling coal: intentional modification of a vehicle to temporarily subvert
emissions controls for increased vehicle power.
o Updates to projects in progress. Would like to see metrics on transportation manual. CAP is
central way to make connections. What does the board need to keep track of, keep accountable?
Transportation in general is a topic to be apprised of. Connection to PSD, idling at schools,
simple changes/education programs for behavior changes, composting/organics, radon education,
recycling/landfilling, education gaps for behavior change.
o City Plan update, development and land use trends, in-commuting issues, ensure working with
other boards on transportation and other issues impacting air quality.
o Revising the Air Quality Plan, complete Transportation Impacts Manual, indoor air quality.
o Emissions created at drive-thru businesses, wood burning stoves/outdoor fire pits (gas or wood),
manual on how to calculate GHG reductions (solar, bus route changes, transportation projects,
etc.)
Not calculations that are difficult, but assumptions that go into calculations. Ex: If build
out bike network, need to estimate how many cars it will take off the road.
Is gas total consumption monitored? Some straightforward way to collect the data?
• Use VMT. Municipal inventory, track how much gas the municipality uses.
• Standard emissions calculations for personal use vehicles on EPA website.
• Estimates, but not ground up from community gas use.
o Won’t need to comment on BFO offers in 2017, with exception of off-cycle offers.
ACTION ITEMS: Mark will edit and email questions to board.
AGENDA ITEM 5: Other Business
Board Member Announcements
• Transportation Air Quality Impacts Manual—Will get presentation in October. Staff can take minor
suggestions at that time. Might want presentation earlier.
Page 5
o Staff may not be ready for an earlier presentation.
o Not board’s role to approve the manual. Expect they will have sufficient draft.
o Pieces of draft have been provided to staff for review. Can bring these to board next month. Intro
sheet on how to approach a project, with additional files to show how to calculate emissions.
Presentation will include opportunity for feedback.
• Volunteer Appreciation event on Thursday.
• Would like update on issues raised around Martin Marietta asphalt plant.
Council Six-Month Agenda Planning Calendar
• CRO—Sept 6
• West Elizabeth Travel Corridor—Oct 18
• BFO offers
• Managing Traffic Congestion—August 30
• CAP progress/positioning/community outreach—August 30
• CAP Roadmap—February
Agenda Items for September
• 2017 Work Plan
• Radon
• Air Quality Survey
• Downtown Plan (tentative)
• Martin Marietta plant update
• Timberline Recycling Center (Cassie can set up a tour for board members)
• Revisit BFO Offers
Meeting Adjourned: 8:07pm
Next Meeting: September 19
Page 6