HB 163-REGULATION OF SOLID FUEL BURNING DEVICES  1:06:40 PM CO-CHAIR FEIGE announced that the first order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 163, "An Act prohibiting a person from burning certain materials in a solid fuel burning device; relating to solid fuel burning device emission standards; and relating to prohibitions on the burning of solid fuels." 1:06:53 PM REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON, Alaska State Legislature, paraphrased from the following sponsor statement [original punctuation provided]: This bill would establish a new emission standard for solid fuel burning devices within the EPA designated 2.5 nonattainment areas by allowing only the cleanest burning devices to be sold at local retail stores. Those who have a solid fuel device currently installed are grandfathered under the new emission standard and would not need to convert their device. Currently, a PM 2.5 nonattainment area has been designated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency within the Fairbanks North Star Borough. During the winter months, air quality status can reach unhealthy levels for many of the people who reside within the nonattainment area. This was especially true this last winter when the average temperate between November and December was minus 40 degrees. This bill ensures the most efficient EPA certified appliances are installed as homeowners naturally upgrade their units, saving Alaskans money by reducing the cost of space heat. Additionally, by installing the best technology, air quality at a neighborhood and regional level will also improve. This is important for the overall health of the communities and for achieving federal attainment with EPA. Finally, HB 163 guarantees an individual's right to use a solid fuel burning device in accordance with their budget and local and state law. The consequences of not reaching EPA PM 2.5 attainment status stretch beyond health concerns. If attainment is not reached by 2014, the EPA could sanction the state of Alaska by withholding Federal highway funds within the non-attainment area, which ranges from the City of Fairbanks to the City of North Pole and the outlying areas. It is not the entire Fairbanks North Star Borough but is the populated area. It also would include Ft. Wainwright. This would prevent many of Alaska's roads and transportation infrastructure from being constructed or upgraded. This bill is a proactive bill and will hopefully prevent additional communities from becoming a PM 2.5 nonattainment area. 1:09:20 PM REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON indicated she originally considered making the bill apply statewide, however, since then she made several changes to the bill. Perhaps if the community had been more proactive it might not be in a non-attainment area now, she said. The EPA certified wood stoves are rated up to 7.5 grams per hour. Due to temperature inversion issues, the EPA and Fairbanks North Star Borough (FNSB) do not think the community can meet attainment without specifying cleaner burning stoves, such as ones that rated at 2.5 grams per hour. REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON explained that the interpretation of the EPA's standards related to British Thermal Units (BTUs) indicated none of the wood stoves would have qualified, which was not the intent of the bill. Additionally, the DEC will address by regulation any stoves over 200,000 BTUs, which are more the commercial size. She said the intent of this bill is to provide relief for her community. In fact, she hoped that a natural gas project will move forward, which will ultimately solve the air quality problem. 1:10:44 PM CO-CHAIR SADDLER moved to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 163, Version 28-LS0248\R, Nauman, 4/4/13, as the working document. There being no objection, Version R was adopted as the working document. CO-CHAIR SADDLER asked how much of the non-attainment issues were the result of tar emissions versus emissions from a wood stove or other stove. REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON indicated that over 50 percent of the air quality issue is attributed to burning solid fuel from wood stoves. 1:11:32 PM REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER asked whether the sponsor is comfortable with the standards on [page 2, lines 10-31, and page 3, lines 1- 2], subsection (c)]. He further asked whether the sponsor is comfortable that the department will have time to adopt the regulations. REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON answered yes; that at this point these standards will work the best for Fairbanks. She remarked that the coal burners within the FNSB are exempt. She emphasized that the community is not seeking a whole new test model. Instead, she would like regulations to be clearly set so companies bringing in any device not currently certified by the EPA will have the ability to have the device tested, submit the results, and receive approval or denial. 1:12:48 PM REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER remarked that she has hit on the key. He offered his belief the one of the areas that will be most impacted by the bill is the Fairbanks area. He said, "If you are comfortable with it, I'm comfortable with it." REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON clarified that another community, Juneau, "is on the edge." She stated that Juneau represents a smaller area and while it does not fall in the EPA's non- attainment area for air quality, it does fall in the next stage. She hoped one outcome will be that companies will manufacture cleaner-burning stoves. REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER said he appreciated her bringing the bill forward. 1:13:26 PM REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON understood the sponsor will be working with the DEC in the next several months and if necessary would bring additional changes forward next year. REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON agreed. She said that she will be working with the community, the DEC, and the dealers on the air quality issue. She stated that her overreaching goal and intent is not to do harm. 1:14:08 PM REPRESENTATIVE TARR suggested the sponsor could also work with the Department of Health and Social Services. She understood that high rates of asthma currently exist in Fairbanks due to particulate matter. She expressed concern that burning fuel and other materials such as plastics which emit toxic fumes is also related to asthma and other health conditions. REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON answered that the list of items not to burn is already addressed in regulation. She highlighted that the asthma problem in Fairbanks is more closely related to burning of "greener" wood, which doesn't combust to the fullest extent. In fact, the temperature inversion holds all particulates at the ground level. Further, at extreme low temperatures the problem has been exacerbated [since people burn more wood]. She anticipated one outcome of the bill is that people automatically will look for cleaner burning stoves. 1:16:11 PM CO-CHAIR SADDLER asked whether stoves already in stores' inventory that do not meet the standards will pose a problem for retailers. REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON answered that issue will be worked on with DEC [as part of the interim work on the bill]. She envisioned that a list will be sent to DEC so the department is informed on store inventories; however, she understood the stoves would be sold outside the non-attainment area. She acknowledged that one of her goals is to hold companies harmless. 1:16:53 PM CO-CHAIR SADDLER asked how much more expensive a high- performance, high-efficiency low-particulate emitting stove is as compared to one with a lesser emission standard. REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON responded that the cost ranges from $100 to $200 or more for high-efficiency stoves, which is not related to emissions as much as the stoves' appearance since features such as glass or curlicues cost more. In fact, most of the high-efficiency stoves contain a catalyst, which is the mechanism that makes the stoves cleaner burning, she said. 1:17:38 PM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON referred to background information in members' packets entitled, "EPA Certified Wood Stoves." He understood the EPA maintains a list of 1988 accredited laboratory tested stoves. He asked whether the 1988 standard has not been replaced by a new standard. He further asked whether the 2.5 grams per hour for each 200,000 BTUs of heat output represents a new "Alaska-only standard" or if the EPA has another designation. REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON responded that 1988 is the year in which certification of all stoves began, which ranges from .4 to 7.5 grams per hour. A few years ago Washington [state] had the same issue and instead of banning stoves, their agencies approached the issue by lowering the amount of emissions. She had hoped the EPA would impose the emissions standards, similar to how car emissions are regulated, by requiring catalytic convertors to reduce emissions. However, she did not want to wait for the EPA to act, so the aforementioned standard would only apply to the non-attainment area in Alaska. Additionally, as sponsor, she will consider adding a sunset provision so once attainment is reached the statutes would no longer apply. 1:19:18 PM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON understood the EPA performs the certification so the state will not need to do the testing; instead, it will be done by the EPA laboratory. He wondered if stickers or some type of plaque would be applied to stoves to indicate the particulate emissions. REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON responded that this would apply to wood stoves and qualified solid fuel burners, but coal burners will be exempt. The DEC would set up the equivalent standard related to the EPA, by regulation, for testing by certain laboratories. She stated that the FNSB currently will test any units not currently certified or not qualified by the EPA, at the owner's expense. 1:20:45 PM CO-CHAIR FEIGE understood that catalytic converters help burn the contents more completely and cuts down on the particulate emissions. He asked whether it is possible to retrofit older stoves with some type of in-stack catalytic converter. REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON stated that some testing is currently happening, especially for outdoor boilers. She stated, for example, that the Tok School has a [catalytic converter] in one of its bigger units. She highlighted that while it works best job when the stove is burning hot, it's a little harder to control with wood stoves as opposed to furnaces. Typically, people get the stove started then turn it down while they are at work. The catalytic converter will make the stoves burn cleaner and longer. She pointed out that most of the non-catalytic stoves emit 4.5 grams of particulates or higher. REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON compared the process as being similar to the Inspection and Maintenance (IM) program some communities had in place. What ultimately happened was that car manufacturers were forced to make their products cleaner and as older cars wore out and were replaced by newer ones [with catalytic converters], the carbon dioxide emission issue subsided. She offered her belief that it may take combined efforts from states to request EPA offer testing. Currently, the EPA tests units in a big warehouse with certain types of wood, but not under cold temperatures. She expressed doubt that the actual performance outcome would be the same in sub-zero temperatures. 1:23:15 PM REPRESENTATIVE TARR asked whether the committee previously considered a bill to provide loans for wood-burning stoves and if that aspect will also help private homeowners to meet the new standards. REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON asked whether she was referring to HB 35, which would allow people to change out any type of furnace to a more efficient type. She explained that under HB 35, a person could not exchange the home heating system for a manual wood stove, but a person could put in an automated system. 1:24:07 PM CO-CHAIR SADDLER asked whether this bill would bar other second class cities and municipalities from imposing either more rigorous or more lenient standards. He was uncertain of the impact the bill will have on emissions. He referred to [DCED Fiscal note 1 dated 3/22/13] which read, "It would limit all municipalities from adopting a particulate air contamination emission standard for solid fuel burning devices other than the standard adopted by regulation by the state." REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON stated the fiscal note he referred to is a fiscal note which refers to the original bill and will be updated to reflect the proposed committee substitute. She anticipated the updated fiscal note would be a zero fiscal note. She pointed out the original fiscal note was based on a statewide impact and required the DCED to perform the testing. 1:24:59 PM CO-CHAIR SADDLER asked whether this bill will assist in delaying the EPA's implementation of any sanctions or would result in any loss of highway funds. REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON answered that the state is required to have a state implementation plan and this will fit within the plan. The more ways in which the state can demonstrate to the EPA that the state is attempting to meet the standards can help the state receive an extension to meet the standards. She offered her belief that the EPA realizes it will take a different type of fuel, primarily gas, before the FNSB can meet the air quality standards. However, as long as the state is making progress in lowering the emissions, the EPA has been willing to work with the state. Additionally, the EPA's air quality standards will impact the military bases since the military must take into account the non-attainment area when considering transporting troops into the Fairbanks area. 1:26:20 PM CO-CHAIR FEIGE indicated Representative T. Wilson has another hearing to attend. He asked to hold HB 163 over. 1:26:34 PM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON referred to page 3, line 10, to subsection (e), which read, "A state or local authority may not adopt the particulate air containment emission standard for solid fuel burning devices other than the standard adopted by regulations under (c) of this section." He asked whether this statewide requirement is necessary in this bill since the program is limited to the non-attainment area. REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON understood that is already state law and is not something added. [HB 163 was held over.]