Burbank Worried Over Effect of Smog Rules

Officials of the city of Burbank, which has some of the worst air pollution in the state, said Tuesday that they are worried about the economic and technical impacts of proposed regulations designed to reduce pollution.

Ronald V. Stassi, general manager of the city’s Public Service Department, said that if the South Coast Air Quality Management District orders Burbank to modify power plants by Dec. 31, 1996--as is being considered--the city’s utilities would be severely strained.

He added that electric rates would go up by as much as 15% to cover the cost of modifying the city’s plants, which could be as high as $70 million. In addition, Stassi said the reliability of the electrical system could be jeopardized if energy generating units are taken out of service for periods of up to 18 months for modification.

However, Stassi said the city must comply with the regulations if they are adopted by the district, which is meeting next month to consider rules to reduce pollution from industries throughout the Los Angeles Basin.

Committed to Cleanup

“We’re concerned, but we’re committed to cleaning the air,” Stassi said. “We’re just trying to find the most effective ways to do it.”

A report by the board last year named the Burbank area--which included Glendale and North Hollywood--as an air pollution “hot spot.” Hot spots are areas that show significantly higher concentrations of toxic air contaminants.

Concentrations in the Burbank area pose a cancer risk that, although low, is twice as high as in other areas of Los Angeles, the report said. The increased risk means that the amount of contaminants could cause cancer in 100 of 100,000 people exposed to the present levels for at least 70 years, the report said.

The cities of Burbank, Glendale and Pasadena have already been asked by state agencies to voluntarily reduce their present emissions of toxic pollutants 90% by 1996.

83% Reduction

Stassi said Burbank has already reduced its emissions 83% from 1,200 pounds per year in 1978 to less than 200 pounds in 1986. Because 75% of the city’s power comes from outside sources, Stassi said it would be very difficult for Burbank to further reduce its emissions by modifying power plants.

The rules under consideration include requiring industries to put catalytic reduction equipment or the equivalent on gas and steam turbine generating units. Stassi said that installing the equipment would require that large amounts of hazardous ammonia--needed for the pollution control equipment--be transported through the city and stored at the power plants on a regular basis.

If the rules are adopted by the air board, the city would ask the agency for a three-year extension to modify its power plants, Stassi said.

He added that he did not think that residents would mind the rate increase. “I think most residents feel that if the air is cleaner, that will be enough value for their investment,” he said.