South Coast Air Quality Management District
South Coast Air Quality Management District
BOARD MEETING DATE: April 20, 2001 AGENDA NO. 31
Legislative Committee
SYNOPSIS:
The Legislative Committee considered agenda items including the following legislation for which the Board will consider approving positions:
AB 451 (Firebaugh) – Architectural Coatings
AB 621 (Corbett) – Interruptible Service Contracts
AB 1420 (Cardenas) – Diesel-powered School Bus Replacement
AB 1528 (Wyman) – Emission Reduction Credits
SB 702 (Escutia) – Environmental Health Surveillance System
SB 1068 (Speier) – School Bus Safety and Emission Reduction Bond Act
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve the legislative positions recommended below.
Beatrice J.S. LaPisto-Kirtley, Chair
Legislative Committee
Attendance
The Legislative Committee met on April 13, 2001. Present were Committee Chair Beatrice LaPisto-Kirtley, Vice-Chair Jane Carney, and Committee members Michael Antonovich, Cynthia Verdugo-Peralta and Roy Wilson (by videoconference). Pursuant to the Procedures for Standing Committees of the Governing Board, adopted March 8, 1996, Norma Glover, AQMD Vice-Chair, was appointed as an ad hoc member of the Legislative Committee for the April 13, 2001, meeting only. (Attachment 1)
Washington Update
Peter Robertson and Ed Newberry, AQMD Washington D.C. Legislative Representatives, reported that four draft funding projects have been submitted to staff for consideration. Once approved, the projects will be submitted to congressional members from the South Coast Air Basin for consideration. Congressional members have until May 1 to submit all funding requests. Mr. Robertson reported that federal legislation dealing with the California energy crisis has been introduced. Some bills may have provisions that will affect environmental laws and regulations. Those bills will be brought to the Legislative Committee as they develop. [Attachment 2]
In response to questions raised at the March Legislative Committee meeting regarding pollution standards for trucks entering the United States from Mexico under NAFTA, Mr. Robertson reported that the NAFTA Dispute Panel recently ruled that the United States must open its borders to trucks from Mexico. In most instances, the borders were closed to trucks from Mexico because the United States asserted that trucks from Mexico were not safe enough. In response to the ruling, the United States has proposed a plan to Mexico that would open the borders to trucks beginning in 2002. The Plan has provisions for safety regulations, but no provisions relating to the environment. Mr. Robertson is talking with U.S. EPA and others to learn whether environmental issues will be raised.
Chair LaPisto-Kirtley stated that safety and pollution are two very important issues and she would like to ensure that the AQMD pushes for air pollution control on these trucks. Mr. Robertson stated that he will first learn what the Administration plans to do on environmental issues, and then discuss with the Legislative Committee on how to proceed from there.
President Vicente Fox of Mexico stated during his recent visit to California that he is looking to build powerplants near the borders. Ms. Verdugo-Peralta asked how this might affect California and would we have a say in their pollution regulations. Mr. Robertson responded that pollution crossing the border from powerplants in Mexico has been an issue, especially in Texas. Mr. Robertson will consult with U.S. EPA's Office of International Activities on what the latest discussions with Mexico are regarding power generation in Mexico. Chair LaPisto-Kirtley also asked if there was any effort underway to assist Mexico in building the powerplants to California standards, with the possibility of using some of the electricity. Mr. Robertson said he was not aware of anything but would check into the issue, and added that Mexico has received funding and technical assistance for wastewater treatment along the border.
Dr. Barry Wallerstein, Executive Officer, stated that he learned from Imperial County APCD that a powerplant is being built across the border from El Centro. Sempra Energy will finance part of the plant and power will come back to the San Diego area, but he believes rigorous pollution controls are not planned for the plant.
Sacramento Update
Allan Lind, Francisco Leal and Olga Sanchez, AQMD Sacramento Legislative Representatives, were present at the meeting. [Attachments 3, 4, and 5] Mr. Lind reported that the electricity crisis continues to be the dominant issue in the State Capitol.
The Governor recently signed two important energy conservation bills, SBX1 5 (Sher) and ABXI 29 (Kehoe). The two bills went to the Governor with expenditures totaling about $1 billion; they left the Governor totaling about $800 million. The Governor exercised his line item veto authority to reduce a variety of programs. The money will be spent on energy efficiency, conservation and low-income assistance programs. Another bill, SBXI 28 (Sher), deals with powerplant siting and related environmental controls. The District has a Support position on the bill, but there are differences of opinion on the fate of the bill. Although the bill is still subject to a lot of amendments, the Legislature is anxious to pass the bill within the new few weeks.
Mr. Lind also reported on a bill by Senator Sheila Kuehl, SB 1111, which would require CalEPA to identify state environmental laws that may be in conflict with international trade agreements. Senator Kuehl has cited as an example the State of California's desire to phase-out MTBE because of ground water complications. A Canadian company is now suing the federal government under NAFTA arguing that NAFTA should preempt California's laws regarding MTBE because they wish to continue to sell MTBE in California. This is one example of a foreign-based company feeling that the international trade agreements they operate under are being constrained by state laws and now want those international agreements to preempt certain state environmental laws. Senator Kuehl’s bill points out that as trade agreements are drafted, rarely are there instances where states participated in the drafting of the agreements. Certain manufacturers in foreign countries may feel that they have been put at an economic disadvantage when competing for American markets if they are going to be required to be held to the same standards that are being imposed on American-based companies, and so they seek relaxation of those constraints.
Recommended Positions on Legislation
Staff provided analyses and recommendations on six bills and provided a brief description of each bill. [Attachment 6] Another bill, AB 986, was discussed in Committee. However, staff asked that a position recommendation be deferred to the May meeting due to additional staff concerns with the bill. The Committee concurred with staff’s recommendation and took no action on AB 986. The bill will be brought back to the Committee for consideration in May.
|
Bill/Title |
Recommended Position |
|
AB 451 (Firebaugh) – Architectural Coatings |
OPPOSE unless AMENDED |
|
AB 621 (Corbett) – Interruptible Service Contracts |
SUPPORT |
|
AB 1420 (Cardenas) – Diesel-Powered School Buses |
SUPPORT IN CONCEPT |
|
AB 1528 (Wyman) – Emission Reduction Credits |
OPPOSE |
|
SB 702 (Escutia) – Environmental Health Surveillance System |
SUPPORT |
|
SB 1068 (Speier) – School Bus Safety and Emission |
SUPPORT IN CONCEPT with |
AB 451, Firebaugh, would allow the ARB to recommend for adoption by air districts any suggested control measure for any consumer product or commercial product, including architectural coatings, if the ARB makes specified determinations. Dr. Wallerstein stated that AB 451 is sponsored by the architectural coatings industry. Staff had been fearful that the bill was intended to undermine District efforts and Board authority in moving forward with local district requirements for architectural coatings. A meeting facilitated by Allan Lind and Francisco Leal was held with Assemblyman Firebaugh and concerns were discussed. After a month of negotiations through Mr. Leal’s office and the Assemblyman’s office, a tentative agreement has been reached and proposed amendments will be offered during a hearing in Assembly Natural Resources on April 16. Staff recommended a Support position for AB 451 if the bill is amended consistent with proposed amendments. The Legislative Committee concurred with staff’s recommendation to Support AB 451 if proposed amendments are included in the bill. (See attached analysis on AB 451 for proposed amendments.)
AB 621, Corbett, would require the Independent Service Operator (ISO) and electrical corporations to notify the local air district of all electrical customers with whom they either have an interruptible service contract with or with whom they plan to enter into an interruptible service contract. Oscar Abarca, Assistant Deputy Executive Officer/Public Affairs and Transportation Programs, stated that before the bill was amended on April 5, the bill required that the ISO and electrical corporations verify that customers or potential customers for interruptible service contracts had current permits with the local air district. Dr. Wallerstein added that the bill is sponsored by the Bay Area AQMD because customers signed up for interruptible power service could be operating their diesel generators in excess, and air districts do not necessarily know where all the diesel generators are. This bill helps to locate those customers so air districts can work with them to ensure compliance with air regulations. Staff recommends Support.
Chair LaPisto-Kirtley asked whether the public would also have access to the information. Dr. Wallerstein responded that the same statutes that apply to other confidential materials the District receives would apply to this. So, if it is confidential material, it would not be released. The information would have to meet the legal test. The Legislative Committee concurred with staff’s recommendation to Support AB 621.
AB 986, Firebaugh, would exempt any exposure from on-road heavy-duty truck and bus engines from Proposition 65 warning requirements, if the ARB or U.S. EPA has certified emission standards for the engines, and if a statewide warning is published annually for the emissions. It also exempts from the Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Act facilities that would be subject to the Act as a result of diesel emissions if the notice required by this bill has been given. Also creates a Carl Moyer Program aimed at reducing particulate matter.
Dr. Wallerstein stated that the California Trucking Association (CTA) sponsors AB 986. The bill proposes a Carl Moyer-type program whereby truckers would assess a $50 fee on themselves, and a prorated fee on interstate trucks, and then rebate those monies back to themselves through the local air district to reduce diesel emissions. A support position on these provisions would be consistent with past positions the Board has taken. However, the bill has other provisions that staff has some concerns with. Specifically, the bill seeks to relieve the individual trucking companies of Proposition 65 noticing by requiring the ARB to do one notice a year. From staff's perspective, depending upon the frequency of notices and content of notice, that might be acceptable. In addition, staff wants to ensure that particulate matter continues to be considered in risk assessments and reduction plans as required under the Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Assessment, even if the State provides the Proposition 65 notice.
Pursuant to the Committee's direction last month, Dr. Wallerstein spoke with several local environmental groups regarding the bill to see if a compromise could be reached that would allow the environmental groups to support. Conversations were also held with CTA, who was appreciative of an approach to try to mediate discussions between CTA and the environmental groups. At this time, staff recommends no action on AB 986, and suggests that staff continue talks with CTA and the environmental community to see if a consensus can be reached.
Ms. Carney asked if the current proposal would relieve trucking facilities of posting Proposition 65 notices whether or not they are taking advantage of the funds to retrofit their vehicles. Dr. Wallerstein responded that this is his understanding and added that the responsibility shifts to the ARB for noticing. Ms. Carney added that this could weaken Proposition 65 for people who want to encourage facilities with many trucks to reduce their emissions because then there is the threat of a lawsuit. Dr. Wallerstein responded that there is concern of the threat of a lawsuit, but staff believes that, depending upon the frequency and content of the notice that might be issued by the ARB, there might be reasonable public notice about the risks that a trucking facility would pose. There really should be more discussion about the frequency of the notice. The Committee concurred with staff’s recommendation and took no action on AB 986. The bill will be brought back to the Committee for consideration in May.
AB 1420, Cardenas, would appropriate an unspecified amount from the General Fund to the ARB to retrofit diesel-powered schoolbuses with air pollution control technologies, and to fund the replacement of diesel-powered schoolbuses. The bill is consistent with Proposal #1 under the 2001 Legislative Agenda that includes support for legislation that increases or expands funding sources for implementation of the District’s fleet rules. Staff recommends Support in Concept on AB 1420 and suggests working with the author on the details of the bill, including encouraging alternative fuel vehicles when replacing diesel school buses. The Legislative Committee concurred with staff’s recommendation to Support in Concept AB 1420 and work with the author on amendments to the bill.
AB 1528, Wyman, would eliminate the requirement for Governing Board approval of Emission Reduction Credit (ERC) transfers between air districts. The bill is authored by Assemblyman Wyman who represents Inyo County and parts of Kern and San Bernardino counties. The provisions of AB 1528 would eliminate the Board’s authority to approve transfers and offer no alternative approval process.
Dr. Wallerstein stated that under existing law if ERCs are to be transferred from the South Coast District to the Antelope Valley or Mojave Desert air districts, the transfer requires the approval of both the receiving air district board and the air district board supplying the credits. When our Board has received ERC transfer requests, they have been granted, but recently the Board approved a temporary hold on ERC transfers to sort out issues related to the energy crisis. AB 1528 was introduced so that our Board no longer has a statutory role in deciding whether the ERCs can leave this basin. This could be a significant economic development issue for Southern California if other air districts can simply have ERCs flow out of this district. On the April Board agenda, there is an action to increase the number of Particulate ERCs simply because we do not have enough. NOx ERCs are also in short supply. Staff believes that the other air districts probably have some opportunities in their own air basin to generate ERCs. The District should continue to be neighborly with the other air districts, and work together on projects that benefit Southern California and the state of California, but the Board should retain the independent authority and discretion to transfer ERCs out of this basin. Ms. Carney suggested that the District ask the Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce to help us on this issue.
Dr. Wallerstein commented that since the District has approximately 42 percent of the state's population and the largest legislative delegation, the District should work with the delegation to retain local decisionmaking authority for the Board and for economic development purposes. Staff recommends Oppose. The Legislative Committee concurred with staff’s recommendation to Oppose AB 1528. Supervisors Roy Wilson and Michael Antonovich abstained.
SB 702, Escutia, would require the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment and the State Department of Health Services, in cooperation with the University of California, to establish an Environmental Health Surveillance System for ongoing surveillance of environmental exposures and diseases. The overall objective of SB 702 is to examine the link between chronic diseases and the environment and establish a statewide database to assess the impact of environmental contaminants on the human body. This database would be very useful to public health agencies, air districts and individuals throughout the state. Such a system has been recommended at the federal level, with data input from similar state programs. The provisions of this bill will establish such a state system. Staff recommends Support. The Legislative Committee concurred with staff’s recommendation to Support SB 702.
SB 1068, Speier, would enact the School Bus Safety and Emission Reduction Bond Act and would authorize $200 million in bonds to finance a school bus safety and emission reduction program. Authorizes the Superintendent of Public Instruction to make awards from the funds to school districts for the purchase of new school buses and related fueling infrastructure that both comply with state and federal restraint standards and ARB emission standards as of January 1, 2003.
Mr. Lind reported that Senator Speier introduced this bill in recognition of state law that will require all new school buses at the beginning of 2003 to be equipped with safety belts and also the desire to ensure that all new buses are as clean as possible. Funds from the bond measure will be disbursed to school districts based on school enrollment and would require a ten-percent local match. Staff recommends working with the author to ensure that the standards used for the replacement of school buses be consistent with ARB’s School Bus Replacement Program and the District’s Rule 1195. Specifically, if the provisions of the bill go into effect before October 1, 2002, the recommended NOx standard would be 2.5 g/bhp-hr. After this date, it would be a NOx plus hydrocarbon standard of 1.8 g/bhp-hr. The Particulate standard would be 0.03 g/bhp-hr.
Ms. Carney asked why the funds would be administered through the state Superintendent of Public Instruction and not the ARB, which has experience in administering such a program. Mr. Lind responded that Senator Speier is addressing this issue strictly from the school standpoint, that the schools are going to be compelled to acquire new buses that have safety belts. Her thought was that the Superintendent of Public Instruction should be administrating this program. Ms. Carney noted that while there is already one agency with experience in doing this type of program, $200 million is given to another entity with no experience. Mr. Lind stated that the Superintendent of Public Instruction has experience in the distribution of education dollars for all schools and the bill is relying on a formula much like that used for the usual funding for schools. The mechanism that the Senator has in mind is uniformed distribution of these dollars to all school districts in the State of California.
Chair LaPisto-Kirtley commented that Los Angeles Unified School District has 720,000 students and some other districts may only have 200 students and may not even have a bus. But, if they do have a bus, the amount they receive based on enrollment will not likely be enough to replace the bus or even buy a particulate trap. This issue needs to be addressed to ensure that the minimum amount a school district receives will either pay for a particulate trap or the differential to purchase an alternative school bus.
Supervisor Antonovich asked if this was also creating another bureaucracy. It would be better to have the ARB administer the program, rather than having two bureaucracies administering similar programs and then having less money for schools and more money in administrative costs. Supervisor Antonovich recommended working with the author to see if she would put this program under the ARB. Mr. Lind commented that the bill has a split personality. The author is trying to address the issue of safety belts in school buses and at the same time clean air. The ARB does not have any expertise for safety belts. Supervisor Antonovich then suggested putting the issues in two separate bills. Chair LaPisto-Kirtley reiterated that the District should ensure that monies are not used for staff, and only for the purchase of buses, traps or seat belts.
Mr. Lind stated that the bill seems to need some work. One may argue that the funds should be disbursed based on the need as opposed to enrollment. And, if a needs test is used, then one would want to invest the dollars in the most air polluted areas or in the districts with the fewest seat belts. But again, the author has two orientations. Mr. Lind asked if the Committee would like to consider a Support in Concept position on the bill and seek amendments to clarify whether or not a needs test is more appropriate and to ensure that the funds are going for the hardware and not staff time. Dr. Wallerstein stated that the issue of who is going to administer the program should also be addressed.
Staff recommended a Support in Concept position on the bill and will seek amendments to clarify whether a needs test is more appropriate, ensure that the funds are going for the hardware and not staff time, consideration of the ARB as the administering agency, and ensure emission standards used are consistent with ARB’s School Bus Replacement Program and the District’s Proposed Rule 1195. The Legislative Committee concurred with staff’s recommendation to take a Support in Concept position on SB 1068 and seek amendments outlined above.
Other Business/Public Comment
Mr. Abarca stated that the next Legislative Committee will be held on May 18 and not May 11 as noted in the Committee agenda.
Ethnic Community Advisory Group
Attached for information are the Ethnic Community Advisory Group minutes for the January 10, 2001, and February 14, 2001, meetings. [Attachments 7 and 8]
/ / /