PISMO BEACH COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

SUBJECT/TITLE: AUTHORIZE MAYOR TO SEND LETTER TO THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT REGARDING A FUGITIVE DUST RULE. RECOMMENDATION: By motion, authorize Mayor to send a letter to the Air Pollution Control District regarding a fugitive dust rule EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: At the October 18th City Council meeting, the Council directed that the City Manager agendize a discussion of the Air Pollution Control Districts (APCD) proposed fugitive dust rule. A proposed letter to the Chair of the APCD is attached. The letter requests that the Board of Directors take no action at this time on a fugitive dust rule that would regulate dust emissions at the Oceano Dunes State Vehicular Recreation Area. FISCAL IMPACT: None OPTIONS: 1. Council to authorize Mayor to sign and send letter. 2. Council to take no action. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft letter to San Luis Obispo APCD. Prepared by: Kevin M. Rice, City Manager Meeting Date: November 1, 2011

City Manager Approval:

Agenda Item: 8.E Page 1

From the Office of the Mayor Shelly Higginbotham 760 Mattie Road Pismo Beach, CA 93449 (805) 235-6604 shigginbotham@pismobeach.org November 1, 2011

San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District 3433 Roberto Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Dear Chairman Gibson: The City Council of the City of Pismo Beach requests that the Air Pollution Control District Board of Directors take no action on a fugitive dust rule to regulate fugitive dust emissions at the Oceano Dunes State Vehicular Recreation Area at this time. There are flaws in the Phase 2 Study which need to be addressed prior to such action. Some examples of problems with the Phase 2 Study are as follows: 1) Reliance on wind speeds measured at the CDF fire station The Study assumes that wind speeds measured at the CDF fire station are representative of wind speeds on the dunes and there is substantial evidence that wind speeds are much higher on the dunes. There are several rows of tall trees between the dunes and the CDF location which will reduce wind speeds yet there was no discussion in the Study about this problem. State Parks has been measuring wind speeds on the dunes for over a year and those speeds are 70% higher than those measured at CDF. The Desert Research Institute (DRI) measured wind speeds at two locations on the dunes, north of Oso Flaco Lake and near the Parks wind tower location, as part of their Pilot Project study. On page 22 of their report found, it states that wind speeds found at those two locations were similar to those at the Parks location, which means those wind speeds are also much higher. Thus there are now three locations on the dunes where wind speeds have been measured which are substantially higher than the CDF location. A comparison of wind speeds measured at CDF with those at the Studys control site, Oso (located on the dunes), shows that Oso speeds are also 70% higher which agrees with wind speeds at the Parks and DRI locations. It is clear that the CDF site is an outlier and does not represent dunes wind speeds. Even the Studys Mesa2 site, located much farther inland, had 40% higher wind speeds than CDF. Higher wind speeds will have a significant effect on some of the conclusions of the Study so it is imperative that the more recent data on wind speeds be used to reevaluate those conclusions.

Agenda Item: 8.E Page 2

November 1, 2011 Page 2 2) Influence of highway traffic on particulate matter (PM10) measurements The CDF site is located adjacent to Highway 1 and PM10 measurements were made at this location. It is well known that vehicle traffic causes higher levels of PM10 yet the Phase 2 Study did not address any possible contribution from this source. In fact, a comparison of PM10 measurements during the morning commute at 7 AM shows higher levels of PM10 on weekdays than weekends. Since there is more commute traffic on weekdays, this result is an indication that there is a contribution to measured PM10 from vehicle traffic. 3) Effect of more Off Highway Vehicle (OHV) traffic and PM10 The Phase 2 Study used a flawed method to show a correlation between higher levels of PM10 and OHV activity on the dunes. The Study compared three sites, CDF (riding area), Oso (control area, no riding) and Mesa2 (inland site, but downwind of the riding area), to try to determine if more OHV activity results in higher PM10. When comparing the three sites, however, data was used for the CDF and Mesa2 site starting March 2008 yet the Oso control site did not start operating until about April 26, 2008, almost two months later. In addition, the study period was supposed to be one year (April 1, 2008 to March 31, 2009) yet the Phase 2 Study used data for an additional month for the comparison. March and April are windy months which will results in higher PM10 so the selection of an additional March month will skew the results. Using this flawed approach, the Study found about 25% higher PM10 on the 50 highest use days compared to the lowest 50 days. This 25% value was used extensively in public presentations by APCD staff. A more appropriate method is to compare all three sites when all three are operating. This method results in 8% less PM10 rather than 25% more. Another way to compare vehicle use and PM10 is to examine weekend and weekday PM10 average values. This comparison shows that there is also less PM10 on the weekend when there is substantially more OHV activity. Recommendation In view of these flaws, the Phase 2 Study needs to be reevaluated prior to any rulemaking by the APCD Board. Sincerely,

Shelly Higginbotham Mayor

Cc: Board of Directors Mr. Allen, Air Pollution Control Officer State Parks

Agenda Item: 8.E Page 3