ORCAA Board of Directors
OLYMPIC REGION CLEAN AIR AGENCY
2940 B Limited Lane NW
Olympia, Washington 98502
MEETING
February 14, 2007
Members present:
Bob Beerbower, Grays Harbor County (Chair)
Ann Burgman, City of Lacey
Mike Doherty, Clallam County
Clay Harwood, Pacific County
Grant Munro, City of Port Angeles (Vice Chair) (via phone)
Lynda Ring Erickson, Mason County
Phil Johnson, Jefferson County
Bob Macleod, Thurston County (late)
Members absent:
Jeff Kingsbury, City of Olympia
Legal Counsel: Fred Gentry, Bean & Gentry
Staff Present: Richard Stedman, Executive Director, Robert Moody, Compliance Supervisor; Mark Goodin, Professional Engineer; Lynn Harding, Administrative Services Manager; and Debbie Moody, Recorder
The meeting was called to order at 10:06 am.
Beerbower, noting the newest member, asked that everyone introduce themselves. The Board welcomed Harwood.
There were no additions or omissions to the Agenda. Burgman moved approval of the Agenda. Munro seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Burgman moved approval of the Consent Agenda. Munro seconded the motion and it carried unanimously.
FINANCE COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENT
Finance Committee Assignments
Beerbower noted the Finance Committee Assignments as follows: Munro – Committee Chair; Ring-Erickson; Burgman; and Beerbower.
DIRECTOR’S REPORT
Compliance Update
Robert Moody, Compliance Supervisor explained they are gearing up for a hearing in March related to the Rich Road land clearing burn permit that we had revoked. Moody stated our new land clearing permit fee, of $75 per acre, has gone into effect. We did have a unique enforcement situation during the burn ban, Moody explained. We received a complaint regarding the burning of a house. Upon arrival, it was noted that a gentleman wearing an Olympia Fire Department t-shirt was pulling his house down and burning it. The violations include, burning during a burn ban, burning prohibited materials, demolition of a structure with out a permit and without an asbestos survey and/or removal. We have also been working with Soil Key regarding their composting facility. We have some open enforcement with them currently. As part of their mitigation, we have asked that they hire a consultant, which they have done—and they have received several suggestions. However we still do not have a written commitment from Soil Key to make the suggested improvements. Stedman added they have been taking in sludge and doesn’t appear to know what he is doing and the neighbors are upset. He has volunteered to take in stumps and storm debris. If people can get it to him, he’ll take it for free. We would like to see him take some in as he could really use the woody debris.
ORCAA Permit Actions
Mark Goodin, Professional Engineer stated we have finalized three permits in the last month; Simpson Timber, Raymond 101 Quickstop, and Westport Shipyard. We are currently working on quite a few permits. Goodin noted Grays Harbor Paper has an application to propose modifying an existing permit to gain approval to burn urban wood waste. Basically, there are contractors out there that reclaim urban wood waste; they sort it, pull out all prohibitives including asbestos products and painted or treated wood, they grind it up and sale it as fuel. GHP would like to take advantage of this resource so we are reviewing their application. Another permit we are working on is for Ocean Protein. They have sent in an application to beef up their RTO. They are pretty sure this will make a huge difference.
Burgman noted Nutriom has been on the list for quite some time. Goodin stated the last action with them was a request for data. We have not received anything from them. Goodin stated we do have the option to close it out. After some discussion it was decided a letter would be mailed to them to let them know that their permit application is no longer valid.
Johnson asked what the Indian Island permit was for. Goodin explained they are proposing to put in 3 generators to be used for shore power when the subs come into dock.
Munro wanted to know if Interfor is adding a new boiler. Goodin stated that is their proposal, along with additional kilns. Stedman stated this addition could push them into Title V program. R.Moody noted they are currently Synthetic Minor.
Munro asked if Nippon is doing ok burning the urban wood waste in their facility. R.Moody stated we have not had any issues to date.
School Bus Retrofit Update
The Department of Ecology has a contract for the crank case ventilation devices. The devices limit the amount of fumes that get into the cab of vehicles. We are currently working on a list of buses we can put these devices on.
Air Quality Summary
Stedman pointed out the Air Quality Summary sheet, noting the high days were in Port Angeles, Shelton and Lacey.
Burn Ban Update
Stedman stated we called a Stage I Burn Ban, one of the first in over 10 years (last burn ban was in 1994). We shut down all outdoor burning and required those people that have other means of heat to forego using solid fuel burning devices. R.Moody noted the compliance team issued multiple violation notices for outdoor burning. No violations were written for woodstoves. Stedman stated we were able to get the word out and it did help that PSCAA also called a burn ban. The unfortunate thing that did happen, though, was PSCAA lifted their burn ban a few days before we did. There was a lot of confusion but the staff handled it quite well.
Legislative Update
Stedman explained our companion bill, HB1258, has moved out of the House and is going to the floor for vote. Stedman noted Honeyford tried to get an amendment to appoint a financial officer. However, during the hearing Stedman was able to explain that it would counter the whole idea of saving money for locals if we have to go out and hire a financial officer, independent of the Executive Director. Our Senate Bill 5142 has also cleared and is moving to the floor. Stedman noted he also testified on Senate Bill 5075, which is sponsored by Honeyford. This bill would extend, for small communities, the new burn ban. Basically it would allow a lot of the areas that have just come under the new burn law (January 1), to burn. There is another bill working its way through (SB5045) that states a city with a population of fewer than 1000, they would be allowed to burn.
Stedman stated he ran across SJM8000. This bill urges the President to continue funding the CPO site that we operate. We didn’t know DOE had submitted this bill. The bill notes DOE wants the President to use other funds besides 105 grant funds to fund the CPO site. There seems to be some misinformation on DOE’s part, Stedman explained. The money for CPO is not coming from the 105 grants for Washington State. The money is separate and distinct from the allocated funds for Washington State. We have contacted the state of Oregon regarding funding for CPO, Stedman added. DOE will not be happy about this. They have supported us but have made it very difficult for us. They feel we are getting money they deserve. Oregon had their contract open with EPA and we approached them. Oregon understands the importance of the CPO site and they were happy to add us in to their budget request.
Ring-Erickson stated if Stedman wanted to draft a letter explaining the issue with regards to SJM8000, she would be happy to bring it to the attention of their legislators. Ring-Erickson thought it should also be shared with Norm Dicks. If we could tactfully explain the misunderstanding it would be helpful. Burgman felt each Board member could sign a copy. The Board agreed.
CTRIP Update
Stedman noted the Commute Trip Reduction Incentive Program has been successful. We were hoping to compute the amount of pounds of air pollution reduced, but since the program is in its infancy, we will do that at the next quarter. We have six staff members participating. We have reduced approximately 75 miles per day in travel over approximately 154 days. Ring-Erickson stated we (the Board) should probably think about carpooling as well.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
Draft Fee Revisions –Registration/NSR
Stedman stated we requested, and the Board directed us, to get our fees in line with the costs associated with implementing the programs. R.Moody and Goodin have been working on the Registration and NSR fees. Stedman noted we are not trying for 100% recovery at this point, but we did want to gain some ground. The plan is to incrementally increase the fees over the next few years.
Stedman stated the NSR fees are a bit different as they are not annual fees. They are permit fees and the proposed fee schedule includes hourly costs for those permits that go beyond what we believe an appropriate timeline would be. We are currently operating at about 50% for both the NSR and Registration programs. Stedman noted we are hoping to move this along so we get the Registration portion approved in time for our budget process and our billing cycle. The NSR portion could be implemented immediately upon approval, as there is no billing cycle for that program.
R.Moody gave a brief description of the Registration fee proposal. Currently, he noted, we bring in about $100,000 a year in (non-AOP) Registration fees. R.Moody went over the actual fees, noting the largest percent of increase went to larger sources rather than small sources. The group with the largest hit was our RC9 sources, which are odor sources and would include composting facilities. The reasoning behind this increase is due to workload. Other larger sources received a bigger percentage increase, and they too create more workload. R.Moody did note we have not increased fees since 1993. The increases should bring us in an additional $36,000. Ring-Erickson suggested a scheduled date to come back and look at fees. Perhaps, she continued, a cost inflator could be added to it. Stedman stated that we are actually looking at redoing our fee schedule to a more simplistic system and perhaps at that time we can build in some sort of inflator. We will commit to review the fees annually. Beerbower stated adding an inflator can be a problem as well. He noted they had an issue where the fees went too high, so it is good to have that yearly check.
Munro moved approval of the proposed Registration fees and to allow staff to proceed with the hearing. Ring-Erickson seconded the motion and it carried unanimously.
Goodin gave a brief description of the NSR fee proposal. Our current fees for NSR are per service fees. Most of the fees are a set fee, meaning depending on the type of business, the fee is pre-set, such as a spray coating operation (auto body). We have been tracking our time and cost for several years and we have been noticing the discrepancy between the incoming fees from NSR and the time spent. We did complete a fee survey prior to proposing any changes. We began by making a determination regarding the average time it takes to complete the different types of permits. After we determined the hours, we increased the base fees by 25% to cover more of our costs. In addition to that, we added language that will allow cost recovery for those permits that take longer than they should. Essentially, if the cost exceeds the base fee that we have charged, we will charge an hourly fee—$80 per hour—based on the number of hours we go over that base fee amount. Those are the key components for the proposed fee change.
Ring-Erickson asked when the programs fall short of cost recovery, where do we get the additional funds come from? Stedman stated we do receive funding from the state and federal government as well as the annual per capita assessments we receive from the counties and cities. We have been using our surplus monies for the past several year, but we can’t do that forever. To top that off, Stedman stated, the state and federal money is decreasing as well.
Burgman noted she understands the need to raise the fees, but 25% seems high. Stedman explained most sources are not going to notice the increase as these are not annual set fees. Burgman stated she understood, but would prefer a 20% increase rather than 25%. Munro agreed as well. He felt the sources would prefer to know up front what the cost of their permit is going to be. We need a good mechanism to explain it to them and be able to track the hours and let them know when they are close to using up their base fee.
Burgman moved approval of the NRS fee increase at 20%, and to have staff review the fees on an annual basis. Munro seconded the motion. The motion carried by a majority of the Board (6 to 1).
Doherty wanted to note he would have left it at 25%, stating if the sources are paying for the programs, our assessments may be able to go down at some point.
Letter to Congressman Norm Dicks
Stedman stated the Board had requested a letter be sent to Congressman Norm Dicks regarding funding. A copy of that letter is in your packet.
Hoquiam Grant Letter
Stedman noted at the last meeting the Board had requested Gentry send a letter to city of Hoquiam regarding the $75,000 grant monies from the Ocean Protein fine. A copy of that letter is also in the packet. The letter was sent, but we have not yet heard back from the city.
Satellite Office
Stedman stated we have been looking at a couple of different locations for a satellite office for Pacific or Grays Harbor counties. One space is located in the city of Raymond and the second one is located in the South Shore mall in Aberdeen. Harwood noted he feels the Raymond office would be a good location, in that the people in Pacific county like to have local contact. If we are located in the community it would be good for this agency.
Burgman motioned to allow staff to sign a lease for the most appropriate office. Johnson seconded the motion and it carried unanimously.
Doherty did ask if there is a recognized need for a person to be in Pacific County. He noted we have had a need for a presence in Clallam County for decades—was this a similar issue. Stedman noted Pacific county hasn’t ever really been very aware of our presence until we hired an employee who actually lives there. Our plan for this satellite office is to have it manned approximately two days a week.
NEW BUSINESS
Cheeka Peak Grant for FY2008
Stedman noted we have managed to secure almost $70,000 from EPA for CPO, through DEQ in Oregon. We are anticipating some comments from DOE regarding this. We will be accepting this money from Oregon, via a transfer, and we would like the Board give the agency authority to accept these funds.
Doherty motioned to authorize the Director to receive the grant funds. Munro seconded the motion and it carried unanimously.
Parking Lot Paving
Stedman explained he has been trying to work with the city of Olympia, which has not been an easy task. Our parking lot requires a lot of maintenance and we were hoping to move forward with paving. It will cost approximately $12,000 to pave the parking lot, which would also increase the value of the building. However, Stedman continued, trying to find out what it takes to get a permit from the city is cumbersome. Stedman stated he would continue looking into this and update the Board in the future. Burgman suggested pervious asphalt. Stedman stated he had spoken with Mayor Foutch who suggested we hire someone to deal with the city. Burgman stated we should meet directly with Kingsbury and the city manager to solve the issue. There was no action required of the Board.
Stedman noted he spoke with Foutch regarding recognition for him. Foutch requested we wait, as he is still listed as alternate.
Doherty stated there is a biomass workshop that will be held after the session is over and he is hoping Stedman will participate with them and bring a clean air aspect to it. Stedman stated he has spoken with them and we may be a co-sponsor. Stedman noted a biomass energy conference is to be held in Portland in the next couple of weeks. Stedman stated he sent an email to the Board members.
The meeting adjourned at 11:51 am.
PRESENTED BY
Richard A. Stedman, Executive Director
APPROVED BY:
The Majority of the Board
APPROVED and SIGNED this 14th day of March 2007