AQMD Puts Limits on Toxic Industrial Emissions

Declaring that toxics in the air are threatening public health, the South Coast Air Quality Management District on Friday approved controversial new limits on industrial emissions of 11 cancer-causing air contaminants.

The new rule, which takes effect immediately, requires all new and existing businesses that expand or relocate within the region to comply with the new limits or be denied a permit to operate equipment that produces the pollution. The AQMD estimates about 250 businesses a year would be affected.

The rule is evidence that the district, which once focused only on fighting smog, is beginning to move more forcefully into new areas to improve air quality. In the past, many air toxics that may have posed a health threat were not regulated because they did not contribute to the formation of smog.

Under the new standard, the risk to the community of developing cancer from any of the 11 targeted contaminants must not exceed 10 in 1 million. The health risk is based on constant exposure over a 70-year lifetime. Businesses would have to show their ability to comply before any new pollution producing equipment is used. Denials would be based on computer projections of anticipated emissions.

The types of businesses most likely to be affected by the new rule include gasoline stations, hospitals, dry cleaners and metal-treating and plating firms.

Of the 10 targeted contaminants, benzene--an ingredient in gasoline--is the most prevalent. The second is hexavalent chromium, a microscopic particle produced in chrome plating and other metal treating operations.

But in approving the rule on an 11-to-1 vote, the board gave companies five years to comply if needed emission control equipment has not been developed or is unobtainable. During the grace period, the allowable health risk from these businesses could be as high as 100 in a million--10 times greater than the new standard.

The time extension was approved over the protests of board member Sabrina Schiller, who cast the only dissenting vote.

“This is a significant weakening of an already weak regulation,” said Schiller, who had argued for a much tighter health standard of 1 in 1 million. “It seems to go against everything the state and our federal government has attempted to do.”

Jan Chatten-Brown, president of the Coalition for Clean Air, complained that even with the new rule, regulation of air toxics remains “the one gaping hole in the program to protect the public health from air pollution.

“Our air basin is checkered with toxic hot spots,” she said. “The district’s failure to take appropriate action is a complete capitulation to industry and an abdication of their duty to the public.”

But board member Larry Berg, who proposed the five-year grace period after business representatives complained that a stricter time frame would discourage new businesses from locating here, rejected the criticism.

“Eight years ago I was treated for cancer (of the vocal chords) and three of my friends have lung cancer. I’m sensitive to this issue,” Berg said. “I do not think (the extension) substantially weakens this rule. . . . It is painfully evident to me that we needed to do something or we won’t pass (it).”

AQMD Executive Officer James M. Lents told the board most companies would be able to comply with the stricter standard. He predicted that only two to three firms a year would apply for the grace period.

“This is a pressure-relief valve,” Lents said of the grace period. “Only a few sources fall into this category. . . . We think (they) would not represent an overwhelming public exposure.”

For the past six years, the AQMD has attempted to limit air toxics, but had no regulation to back up enforcement efforts and had little success. Most businesses, even when challenged by AQMD, were able to conduct business as usual.

Los Angeles attorney Robert Wyman, who represents an industry coalition, applauded the regulation, noting that the five-year grace period satisfied their concerns.

“We’re really not talking about significant risk (differences),” he said.

When the regulation was first discussed at a meeting two weeks ago, business interests and some board members worried that the proposed health risk of 10 in 1 million was overly strict, would reduce cancer risks only slightly, and would impose unnecessary hardships on businesses.

In addition to benzene and hexavalent chromium, other contaminants covered by the rule are asbestos, cadmium, carbon tetrachloride, chlorinated dioxins, dibenzofurans, ethylene dibromide, ethylene dichloride, ethylene oxide and methylene chloride.