STATE OF CALIFORNIA, NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN JR., GOVERNOR

D E P A R T M E N T O F C O N S E R V A T I O N

CALIFORNIA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 801 K STREET MS 12-30 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95814

PHONE 916 / 445-1825 FAX 916 / 445-5718 TDD 916 / 324-2555 WEBSITE conservation.ca.gov

June 30, 2015

To: Chris Conlin, Deputy Director California State Parks Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation Division 1725 23rd Street, Suite 200 Sacramento, CA 95816

From: Will J. Harris California Geological Survey 801 K Street, Suite 1324

Sacramento, CA 95814

Subject: Practical Concerns Regarding the Implementation of Rule 1001

Below are two aerial images depicting the same area of coastal sand dunes in south San Luis Obispo County, California. One image depicts the dunes in the 1930’s, and one shows the dunes in 2014, more or less the present day. Also shown on both images is the line trace marking the southern portion of California State Parks (State Parks) property, which is the dune and Oso Flaco Lake Preserve area found in the southern portion of the Oceano Dunes State Vehicular Recreation Area (Oceano Dunes). A glance at the two images reveals a difference. The image from the 1930’s shows there was once much more open sand than there is now. The present day image reveals that much of what had been open sand dunes is now covered over with vegetation.

I bring this up because the Air Pollution Control Officer (APCO) for the San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD) submitted a document to the SLOAPCD Board for its June 17, 2015 meeting which states, “the intent and design of the Rule [1001] is to reduce dust emissions caused by vehicle activity at the ODSVRA [Oceano Dunes] to natural background levels...” (SLOAPCD, 2015).

June 30, 2015 Page 2 of 4

As you know, Rule 1001 is a regulation SLOAPCD has imposed on State Parks that seeks to limit the amount of saltation-derived dust emanating from the OHV riding area of Oceano Dunes. Saltation is the geologic, dune-building process in which strong prevailing winds push sand shoreward and cause sand grains to creep and bounce along dune surfaces. Larger grains bounced by the saltation process can release finer grains, including dust particles, which are then blown inland. Dune vegetation not overwhelmed by blowing sand will hamper the saltation process: Where there is more dune-covering vegetation there is that much less dust produced from saltation. The “natural background” distinction is of concern because the southern portion of Oceano Dunes depicted in above images is considered a “control” location per Rule 1001. An air monitoring station (approximate location shown on the 2014 aerial image) has been placed downwind of this area. Per the APCO’s document, and subsequently reiterated by SLOAPCD staff in the press (Lompoc Record, 2015), dust readings from this monitor will be considered “natural background levels” to be compared to readings downwind of the riding area of Oceano Dunes. Higher readings from the riding area of the dunes will be considered “violations,” and State Parks will be subjected to fines per the Rule. There are two things wrong with this. I have alluded to one of them—dune vegetation. When State Parks took over management of Oceano Dunes in 1982, it began planting native vegetation in the dunes. Today, within the boundaries of the park, there are 650 more acres of dunes now covered with vegetation than in the 1930’s (CGS, 2011), a time that predates OHV recreation in the dunes. Putting this conversely, in the 1930’s, there were 650 more acres of open sand subjected to dust-producing dune saltation. By this measure, State Parks has already reduced saltation-derived dust below “natural background levels.” More to the point, the air monitoring station downwind of the “control” area cannot measure ‘natural background levels” of saltation-derived dust because the lesser amount of open sand in the area is not representative of natural conditions. Secondly, Rule 1001 makes no mention of determining “natural background levels” of dust—the terminology is not present within the text of the Rule. This is only the latest migration from the actual language of Rule 1001. In previous emails to you, and in several meetings we have had in recent months, I have pointed out that the Rule allows Parks to choose locations to place air monitors downwind of the OHV riding area and downwind of a “control” location where no riding occurs. Despite this appearance of choice, the de-facto riding area monitor has become the SLOAPCD’s air monitoring station at 2391 Willow Road, which is a California Department of Forestry (CDF) fire station in Arroyo Grande. The CDF station is well away from Oceano Dunes, does not accurately record the strength or direction of regional prevailing winds due to near-station influences, and is influenced by other dust sources that lie between it and the park (CGS 2010). The SLOAPCD air monitor at the CDF station was never formally chosen by State Parks or its technical team as a riding area monitor per Rule 1001, nor was the location formally approved by the APCO, as is required by the Rule. Similarly, no formal choice was made for the control monitor location. Its location was determined by SLOAPCD staff who squeezed it into the easternmost point of State Parks property. (Additionally, the

June 30, 2015 Page 3 of 4

control monitor location does not align with upwind open sand along the prevailing wind direction line, a misstep that will likely cause lower dust readings at the control monitor. This in turn will skew greater differences with the riding area monitor, triggering more “violations” per the Rule.) Due to litigation related to Rule 1001 that has continued to the California Court of Appeal, State Parks and SLOAPCD entered into a Consent Decree brokered by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) so that compliance with Rule 1001 could continue without opposition from State Parks. But the Consent Decree was not approved by the court, presumably because the plaintiff, Friends of Oceano Dunes (Friends), was “specifically excluded” from consent/settlement discussions (New Times SLO, 2014). More recently of course, the Court of Appeal ruled in favor of Friends (California 2nd Appellate District Decision, 2015), effectively invalidating Rule 1001 and the Consent Decree, and the SLOAPCD Board seems intent on not appealing this ruling to the State Supreme Court. From a lay perspective, it would seem State Parks is no longer required to comply with Rule 1001. From my technical, professional perspective, given the concerns I detailed above, actual compliance with Rule 1001 is simply not possible. Should you have any questions, please feel free to call. Respectfully submitted, Original signed by: Will J. Harris, PG 5679, CEG 2222, CHg 750 Senior Engineering Geologist California Geological Survey cc: Brent Marshall, District Superintendent, Oceano Dunes SVRA References Cited California Geological Survey, 2010. Evaluation of the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District report, “South County Phase 2 Particulate Study.” March 18, 2010. California Geological Survey, 2011. In consideration of Draft Rule 1001 proposed by the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District: An analysis of Wind, Soils, and Open Sand Sheet and Vegetation Acreage in the Active Dunes of the Callender Dune Sheet, San Luis Obispo County, California. November 1, 2011. California 2nd Appellate District Decision, 2015. California Court of Appeals, Second Appellate District, Case Number B248814, decision issued on April 6, 2015. Published decision available at: http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions-slip.htm?Courts=B

June 30, 2015 Page 4 of 4

Lompoc Record, 2015. “No Changes to Dune Dust Rule.” Lompocrecord.com news article by Mike Hodgson, June 19, 2015. New Times SLO, 2014. “Oceano Dunes Agreement Thrown into Doubt.” Newtimesslo.com news article by Rhys Heyden, August 6, 2014. SLOAPCD, 2015. Staff Report by Mr. Larry Allen, APCO. “Continued Hearing on Rule 1001 and Discussion of Potential Options for Board.” Presented to the SLOAPCD Board for the June 17, 2015 Board Agenda Item C-3. Staff Report dated June 17, 2015.