Minutes Exhibit B
Port Commission Regular Meeting.
Inside EPA 's                           of September 25, 2018
Clean _/-_lir Report
and (1.5. air policy
An exclusive biweekly report on the Clean Aerct
Vol. VII, No. 19  September 19, 1996

7
WEIGHS RESTRUCTURING EFFORT
GRAND CANYON VISIBILITY COMMISSION
for western emission control strategies are given proper
In an effort to ensure that their recommendations
Commission (GCVTC) are exploring ways to
consideration by EPA, ofcials with the Grand Canyon Visibility Transport                                    in the
is considering expanding the number of states participating
restructure the organization. The GCVTC reportedly
them an equal vote.
commission and opening the doors to federal agencies, allowing                                                 that the
the legal authority to revamp the group, especially considering
But the commission must establish that it has
effort also promises to be
ofthe Clean Air Act. Frmding the restructuring
GCVTC was created under the federal auspices
a signicant hurdle (p3).

Suppressed report on FERC air impacts
"commitment
JOINT NOx            spurs IJC resignation
UTILITIES DECLINE EPA INVITATION 0N                            The top Canadian ofcial on the
STRATEGY                                         International Joint Commission resigned
embrace an invitation
Electric utility ofcials say they are not ready to                          last week, reportedly over efforts by
oxide (NOx) reduction                                               the
by EPA to cooperatively develop a nitrogen                                   supporters of President Clinton within
with deregulation and open
framework because they are being overwhelmed                             commission to shelve a controversial
Senate's harshest critics ofthe Clean Air Act    report on the effects of the Federal Energy
access issues (p5). Some ofthe
EPA release of a ne particulate matter         Regulatory Commission's open access rule
are questioning the logic behind
and ambient air dam (p6).        on air quality (p5).
standard amid lingering questions about health
that an ozone standard
And a recent American Lung Association report warns                        EPA spurns pleas for redesignation.
57 million Americans om
under consideration by EPA will fail to protect                                 NOx waiver moratorium
unhealthy air (p7).                                                                    EPA has rejected a request by
environmentalists that the agency discontinue
W   redesignation ofnonattainment areas and
ENGINE STANDARD
EPA POISED TO GIVE CLUES ON OFF-ROAD                   granting ofwaivers forNOx exceedances until
with California
EPA is slated to issue by Sept. 20 a document forged                     it addresses several outstanding questions
federal rulemaking to further   regarding pollution transport (p8).
regulators and engine manufacturers outlining a
Sources tracking the
slash NOx emissions from off-road engines (p4).
vehicle program         White House hones in on post-2000
contentious development ofthe national low emission                         carbon abatement strategy
predici the matter of states' rights to impose zero emission vehicle mandates           The Clinton administration is tightening
Federal Aviation
will be shelved until after the November elections (p11).                        its grip on a highly anticipated strategy to
at
Administration ofcials are delaying the progress of an expansion project       further slash carbon emissions after this decade.
that the proposal does not meet                                         before a
the Seattle-Tacoma Airport out of concern                                     Among the tenets likely to be proposed
conformity requirements (pl 1).                                                 committee ofthe internaonal Climate Change
emissions
treaty this December is a all for
reductions from developed countries, as well as
Enters-em
'CAM' PROVISION    a dramatically strengthened enforcement
INDUSTRY TARGETS INFLEXIBILITY IN KEY
make a clear distinction        backbone (p19).
Industry representatives insist EPA fails to
and egregious Title V
between slips in emissions monitoring practices                                      I  'V      Ni
monitoring
violations in a key element ofthe proposed compliance assurance                Sen. Craig Thomas pushes for
meanwhile, say they are on track to release the     heightened cost-benet analyses
program (p14). EPA ofcials,
end ofthe year (p15). House               Adding his voice to a growing
hotly debated credible evidence rule by the
determine why the        chorus ofEPA critics, US. Senator Craig
Republicans are pushing for congressional hearings to
more" in regards to enforcement of    Thomas (R-WY) is urging the agency not
Clinton administration is "doing less with                                                                        of
to lose sight of the regulatory cost
environmental regulations (p16).                                                tightening particulate matter and ozone
standards in the agency's high-prole
revisions (p26).

NONA77AINMENT

ozone standard.
A district survey also uncovered that one in ve companies already uses low- and zero-level VOC water
based solvents that are currently on the market.
SCAQMD face sti' opposition 'om the trucking community, because industry ofcials insist water-based
solvents will be useless in maintaining heavy-duty trucks. This concern prompted district ofcials to agree to a oneyear
study to address the concerns ofthe trucking industry.

Mobile Sources

F ' P i  I  I
STATES RATIFY NLEV AGREEMENT, ZEV ISSUE APPEARS HEADED FOR SHELF
In the wake of the recent ratication by state air managers oftheir memorandum of understanding (MOU)
over EPA's 49-state national low emission vehicle (NLEV) rule, the issue ofwhether states can implement man-
dates that require automakers to sell zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) appears "headed for the shelf' until after this
November's elections, sources close to the issue say.
Though the states' unanimous ratication of their MOU represents a bold show of unity directed at both
automakers and EPA, states nonetheless appear content to let EPA address that issue outside the context of the
voluntary NLEV rule. EPA sources indicate this is the agency's preferred route.
On Sept. 5, members ofthe Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) - comprised of 12 northeastern states and
the District of Columbia - voted 24 to 0 to endorse their MOU submitted to EPA in dra form in late August.
OTC's version ofthe MOU on a voluntary NLEV program was only a preliminary document initialed by members,
an OTC source explains, and it required approval from the entire 24-member OTC for nal ratication.
Automakers had submitted their own MOU Aug. 23, with the two MOUs diverging on the matter ofthe rights of
individual states to move forward with their own programs for ZEVs. OTC supports such a provision, while automakers are
seeking a delay in the forced marketing ofelectric vehicles in any agreed-upon 49-state LEV program.
The MOUs seemingly marked an unsuccessful conclusion to a two-year effort by the groups to develop a
voluntary NLEV program that EPA could use to supplant a rule that the states agreed to in 1994. In September
1995, EPA had proposed to require industry to begin introducing gasoline-powered model LEVs in the Northeast
by 1997 and to phase in an increasingly stringent NLEV program throughout the country in order to meet a national
emission standard in 2001.

The unity displayed by OTC represents a "pretty powerful response to automakers and a strong state-
ment to EPA," one source close to the debate says. States' "unequivocal support" of OTC's MOU "ows directly
with
from automakers' behavior," the source explains, claiming "[automakers] pushed too far" and "got too cocky"
their MOU. "It's rare to see that kind ofunity," the source continues, but "it is understandable" considering the
automakers' position and the looming deadline for state implementation plans that makes forward movement by the
administration on a voluntary NLEV rule especially critical.
OTC's MOU ratication "evens the playing eld" between states and automakers in the NLEV debate, another
on paper that "states
source says, by "showing in writing that their positions are unied across the board" It further puts
won't challenge EPA on theNLEV rule," giving the ag-cy assmance to move forward with a rulemaking.
EPA sources indicate that the agency plans to build upon the principles in the two MOUs, and possibly issue a
nal rule by early next month.

I ' I nrll
AIR-RELATED CONCERNS SLOW FAA DECISION ON SEATTLE AIRPORT EXPANSION
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), reportedly concerned that an expansion project at the Seattle-
Tacoma Airport (SeaTac) remains out of compliance with the Clean Air Act's "conformity" provision, has post-
poned its Record ofDecision (ROD) that allows the project to move forward. Projects must receive an approved
ROD pursuant to the National Environmental Protection Act.
The delay comes following months ofnegotiations between local, state and federal air quality ofcials
seeking an agreement with the FAA and SeaTac operator the Port of Seattle that would guarantee no further
deterioration ofthe region's air quality from the pr0posed SeaTac expansion.
The groups have been-working on a memorandum ofimderstanding (MOU) which som'ces say will establish an
approach for a monitoring program and agreed-upon carbon dioxide (C02) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) standards for the area,
and potentially pave the way for a smooth ROD approval. But repeated concerns 'orn EPA, state air agencies and civic

CLEAN AIR REPORT - September 19, 1996                                              11

MOBILE SOURCES

slowed the project's momentum.
groups over the possible air impacts 'om an expansion now seem to have
The SeaTac Airport is located in King County, WA, within a designated nonattainment area for C02 and
into attainment
ozone. The state Department ofEcology is currently working with EPA to redesignate the area
status based upon the recent history ofmonitoring, control strategies and maintenance plans.

The FAA proposed last February to expand SeaTac by adding a third runway, and released an Emu-on-
mental Impact Statement (EIS) evaluating the potential environmental impacts ofthe third runway and other
improvements at the airport. As required by the Clean Air Act, the FAA made a preliminary determination tha: the
proposed expansion would not impede or delay Washington's efforts to bring the Seattle metropolitan area into
compliance with federal air quality standards for C02 and ozone.
In response to the EIS, EPA and the state Department of Ecology led formal comments stating that the air
quality modeling analysis presented in the EIS did not demonstrate "conformity" to the state clean air plan as
required by the Clean Air Act. Federal law prohibits the FAA 'om approving or funding the proposed expansion
unless the agency determines that the air quality analysis demonstrates that the project would not prevent or impede
Seattle's effort to attain national air quality standards.
Furthermore, EPA and the Department ofEcology each expressed concern that the project would result in
and
additional violations ofC02 standards at key roadway intersections near the airport as a result of additional car
truck trafc. The air quality agencies were also concerned that the FAA had not committed in writing to "binding
and enforceable measures" that would reduce pollution caused by congestion at the roadway intersections. Both
agencies recommended a comprehensive program to monitor air quality around the airport.
The project has already been delayed by local civic groups contending that it did not do enough to reduce noise
in srurormding neighborhoods. The Port of Seattle addressed those concerns by vowing to beefup noise reduction e'orts,
the Port,
thus reviving the plan. Since then, measures to reduce air pollution have dominated the discussions, with the FAA,
10ml EPA ofcials and Department ofEcology representatives meeting over the past few months in an effort to craft an
environmental concerns.
agreement on how to move the project forward while satisfying the outstanding
The postponement ofthe ROD "means the Port of Seattle can't move forward until they receive federal
approval from FAA," one source close to the issue says. While FAA originally supported the project, the source
all
points out, the federal agency is feeling pressure from EPA and other groups to ensure that the expansion mee:s
necessary environmental requirements.
FAA ofcials could not be reached for comment.

Permits
I   i '                                             Tr                                                   r       7
v
3M PULLS OUT OF PROJECT XL, PROGRAM COMES UNDER ECOS SCRUTINY
in the agency's
In the wake of a caustic debate between EPA and Minnesota over the state's involvement
Minnesota's Project
Project XL regulatory reform program, the 3M Corporation's Hutchinson plant - the model for
channels.
XL proposal  has opted to seek permits for its facility through more traditional regulatory
has prompted state
The move by 3M signals the death knell for Minnesota's participation in Project XL and
debates
environmental ofcials to create a task force to develop a dispute resolution mechanism for addressing
between state agencies and EPA on a host ofregulatory exibility-related issues.
launched
Minnesota was the rst state delegated by EPA to nm Project XL - the administration's initiative
rms with
late last year to reshape the relationship between companies and government regulators by allowing
and 3M's
stellar environmental records more 'eedom to develop their own pollution-prevention procedures 
that
proposal was the state's rst attempt to implement the program. 3M was seeking a Title V operating permit
would place a plant-wide emissions cap over all ofthe Hutchinson facility's air toxics sources.
the facility must provide
But Minnesota could not forge an agreement with EPA on what level of guarantees
regarding environmental improvement, and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) subsequently
between MPCA
informed EPA of its intention to suspend work on the Hutchinson project. A primary sticking point
environmental
and EPA in crafting an agreement was the issue of whether or not 3M had to guarantee superior
should be
performance "up front." State oicials argued that because XL is an experimental project, the company
granted some exibility to test approaches even ifthey did not ultimately achieve environmental improvement.
the way that the
EPA maintained that the state needed to implement a detailed test that ensured at every step along
results than would have been required under otherwise applicabre
program was achieving better environmental
rules. On this point, no compromise was possible, both sides contend (see Sept 5 issue, p3).

12                                              CLEAN AIR REPORT - September 19, 1996