Group Says County Blurs Problem of Air Pollution

The way Ventura County encourages air polluters to clean up their act has come under fire, the result of an unusual challenge of a large oil company by local environmentalists.

At issue is the federally mandated policy of emission-reduction credits, a system that helps companies cutting pollution to gain approval for future projects that will also produce some pollution.

The 100-member Environmental Coalition contends that the credits permit too much future pollution and should be discontinued as long as the county is unable to meet the guidelines set by the federal Clean Air Act of 1970.

But Phillips Petroleum Co., whose La Conchita plant on Pacific Coast Highway is the target of the dispute, insists that the system is the only feasible inducement for firms to replace older, polluting machinery with cleaner, state-of-the-art equipment.

Recent Decision

The debate, which marks the first time that an environmental group has sought to override the county Air Pollution Control District, stems from a January decision to grant Phillips nearly 62 credits for replacing with electric motors three gasoline engines used to operate pumps.

On Monday, the five-member Air Pollution Control Hearing Board was to discuss the challenge by the Environmental Coalition, but was unable to convene for lack of a quorum. The meeting was rescheduled for April 11.

“These folks . . . don’t have any other grounds than that they just want clean air,” said Ken Stamper, a regulatory and environmental specialist at Phillips’ district office in Santa Barbara.

“That’s a worthy goal,” he said. “But as long as this is a capitalistic society . . . there have to be incentives to go out and spend money to reduce air emissions.”

Coalition members, however, say the procedure of “banking” the reduction credits--saving them as a way to gain approval for future sources of pollution--cannot be justified when the county is so far from attaining federal clean-air standards.

‘Still Struggling’

“I just can’t see these emissions coming back at us while we’re still struggling with the problem of attainment,” said Russ Baggerly, a Meiners Oaks shoemaker and a leader of the group. “Until such time . . . the people of Ventura County are in jeopardy.”

Although peak ozone levels have decreased dramatically over the last 15 years, last year’s levels still exceeded federal standards by more than 50%. Other pollutants also surpass EPA’s recommended levels, leaving county residents with the third-worst air in California.

The credits customarily allow firms to emit 80% of the pollutants previously produced. For instance, a company that reduces its pollution load by 100 tons is enabled to produce an additional 80 tons by applying its credits to a future project. Whereas air-pollution officials contend the credits lead to a net decrease in pollution, environmentalists argue that such benefits are minimal.

The Phillips dispute began last summer amid a separate but related controversy over just how many credits the company should receive for replacing the three 230-horsepower engines.

In a July report, the Air Pollution Control District made a preliminary announcement that it would give Phillips credits for reducing its annual pollution output of reactive organic compounds by 3.3 tons--the amount the engines had been permitted by the district to emit.

When district engineers went to the La Conchita plant last September, however, they discovered that the engines were pumping out 61.8 tons a year of the pollutants.

At first, the district decided to give Phillips credits only for the smaller number and, in November, wrote to the oil company explaining that it would be wrong to give them nearly 62 credits when the firm technically should be receiving only a bit more than 3.

But district engineers changed their minds. They concluded that the violation was merely procedural because Phillips would have received permission to operate their engines at the higher rate had the company applied for the proper permits.

Furthermore, they decided, by eliminating the gas-driven engines, the reduction in pollutants still amounted to 61.8 tons a year, regardless of the number cited on the permits.

“There was an actual and real emission reduction,” said Keith Duval, the engineer who recommended that the oil company receive 62 emission-reduction credits. “It was valid.”

The reversal was significant for Phillips. With those credits, the firm can install a valuable piece of machinery that would otherwise be rejected by the county for producing too many pollutants, Stamper said.

Or, if Phillips chooses, it can sell the credits to other companies at a price that can reach as high as $5,000 per credit, he said.

“Everyone wants clean air, but there has to be some incentive,” said Stamper. “This is the only mechanism in town.”

The reversal by the air pollution district also caused members of the Environmental Coalition to sit up and take notice. After the district announced its final decision in January, the coalition appealed the ruling Feb. 22, contending that the credits were illegal and should be denied.

“They want to reward a company for actually emitting more pollutants than their permit allows them to,” Baggerly said. “We don’t see the equity in this at all.”

Challenging the System

Beyond attacking Phillips’ credits, however, the coalition decided to take aim at the entire 9-year-old incentive system and is asking the hearing board to rule on the validity of all emission-reduction credits.

“On the face of things, what Phillips has done is commendable,” Baggerly said. “The problem is that those tons are going to come back on us.”

But Richard H. Baldwin, top officer for the Air Pollution Control District, defended the district’s decision as legal and appropriate.

“The rule says you go through these hoops, and if you do, you get these credits,” Baldwin said. “They met the tests and therefore they qualify for these credits. My job is to see that they comply with the rule and that’s what we’ve done.”