South Coast Air Quality Management District
South Coast Air Quality Management District
BOARD MEETING DATE: July 12, 2002 AGENDA NO. 29
Legislative Committee
SYNOPSIS:
The Legislative Committee considered agenda items including the following legislation for which the Board will consider approving a position:
SB 1988 (Polanco) – Environmental Education
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve the legislative position recommended below.
Jane Carney, Vice Chair
Legislative Committee
Attendance
The Legislative Committee met on June 14, 2002. Present were Committee Vice-Chair Jane Carney, and Committee members Michael Antonovich and Roy Wilson (by videoconference). Pursuant to the Procedures for Standing Committees of the Governing Board, adopted March 8, 1996, Norma Glover, AQMD Chairman, was appointed as an ad hoc member of the Legislative Committee for the June 14, 2002, meeting only. Committee Chair Beatrice LaPisto-Kirtley and Committee Member Cynthia Verdugo-Peralta were unable to attend. [Attachment 1]
Federal Update [Attachment 2]
Lynn Jacquez, Federal Legislative Representative, reported that she monitored a hearing on the FreedomCar program, a new research and development partnership between the Department of Energy (DOE) and U.S. automakers aimed at developing fuel cell-powered passenger cars. Many of the witnesses before the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee urged that problems encountered with the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles (PNGV), the now-abandoned program aimed at developing highly fuel efficient cars, not be repeated. Witnesses also urged that there be a focus on infrastructure, which is consistent with AQMD’s Federal Funding proposals and Initiatives.
Conferees have been announced for the Conference Committee on the Energy Policy Act, but debate continues on who will chair the Committee. Ms. Jacquez added that it would be helpful for the AQMD to review the Energy Policy Act and forward any comments or concerns so they may be submitted for the record.
Dr. Wallerstein stated that he has reviewed the U.S. EPA’s recommendations on the New Source Review rules and has concerns. Staff will complete an analysis of the proposals for Board approval and submit to U.S. EPA thereafter.
Sacramento Update [Attachments 3 and 4]
Allan Lind, AQMD Sacramento Legislative Representative, reported that the state Budget is now being discussed in conference committee. Most notably for the AQMD is air district subvention and the proposal by the State Legislative Analyst that would raise stationary source fees collected by CARB to reduce the impact on the General Fund. It was concluded that the fee levels currently being collected by CARB would be limited to the Consumer Price Index (CPI), which is considered to be a reasonable approach. Subvention funding was maintained at the current level. However, because of the magnitude of the state budget problem, every item, even those thought to be resolved, is subject to reconsideration. Additionally, the Administration had proposed that the Proposition 40 funding for the Carl Moyer program be allocated at $9 million a year for five years. The budget subcommittees, however, concluded that funding should be $25 million for two years.
With respect to legislation, some bills the AQMD supports have stalled. AB 1058 (Pavley), which would direct CARB to develop recommendations on regulating greenhouse gas emissions, passed both the Assembly and Senate. The bill was then returned to the Assembly for concurrence with Senate amendments and is now short of the necessary votes to pass, which must be accomplished by August 30.
SB 1994 (Soto) and AB 2682 (Chu), identical bills that propose a 30-cent per barrel fee on crude oil that enters California refineries, have stalled in the respective Appropriation committees. SB 1994 was granted reconsideration, but due to legislative deadlines the bill may not receive another hearing. Revenues from the fee would be used to mitigate air and water pollution associated with petroleum.
AB 2718 (Oropeza), regarding reuse of flared natural gas, is with the Senate Environmental Quality Committee. Although there is no organized opposition, the California Public Utilities Commission and the Senate committee consultant believe that extending the existing incentive program for super clean distributed generation to the reuse of waste gas is an inappropriate use of the incentive program.
AB 2650 (Lowenthal), which seeks to mitigate truck congestion in the ports and reduce diesel exhaust, passed the Assembly and is now before Senate Transportation Committee. Dr. Wallerstein added that staff is reviewing recent amendments, which provide for a grant program similar to the Carl Moyer Program, but allows only one percent of the monies for administrative costs, which is much lower than mandated in the Carl Moyer Program. The program also focuses on particulate control with no reference to NOx and provides little or no funding to support AQMD enforcement of the bill’s provisions.
Additionally, SB 1647 (Perata) was recently rewritten and now contains provisions for a new bond measure to address infrastructure and homeland securities, but also includes $50 million for the Carl Moyer Program. To qualify for the November ballot, SB 1647 must pass the Legislature by June 27. Another measure, which has qualified for the November ballot, is the Planning and Conservation League’s Traffic Congestion Relief Initiative. This measure redirects a portion of the sales tax on gasoline to be used for transportation purposes and includes about $25 million per year for the Carl Moyer Program and about $65 million per year for school bus replacement.
Ms. Carney asked if staff plans to bring an analysis of the PCL Initiative to the Legislative Committee for consideration. Dr. Wallerstein responded that he understands that the Committee has reservations about recommending positions on such initiatives that devote a small fraction of the funding to clean air, yet list clean air in the title or seek to list air districts in support. In initial discussions with the sponsors, the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) aggressively attempted to secure a greater amount of funding for clean air programs and ensure that funding for school buses was allocated through CARB’s existing Lower-Emission School Bus Program. Both requests were denied. The sponsors have contacted CAPCOA for support, but for now, CAPCOA has decided not to take a position on the Initiative.
Dr. Wallerstein added that staff can bring further analysis of this Initiative to the Committee, but at this time staff would recommend remaining Neutral. Ms. Carney stated that the Initiative does solve one Committee objection in that it is not a bond measure where a little money is received for one or two years but paid back over 30 years. This funding instead is generated from sales tax. Dr. Wallerstein added that if staff brings a report back to the Committee, the funding mechanism should be discussed, as well as the other projects proposed to be funded. The Legislative Committee concurred with staff’s recommendation to remain Neutral on the PCL Initiative.
Mr. Lind reported that Chevron is going into partnership with Lubrizol, the maker of PuriNOx, which is a blend of diesel fuel, water and an additive that binds the fuel to the water. PuriNOx would generally be used for trucks and diesel engines. The emissions data appears sufficient for this product and Chevron Oil Company is standing behind the product.
Prioritization of Sacramento Funding Requests
As the Budget Conference Committee works to reach a compromise on the state budget, funding issues that affect the AQMD may resurface. So far, air districts have fared well. Subvention is expected to remain constant and the CARB Stationary Source Fee proposal would be held to Consumer Price Index (CPI) levels. However, should discussion on these issues resume, staff is seeking Board direction. The proposed CARB stationary source fee proposal would have a negative impact on stationary sources in this basin and could jeopardize the long-term funding of the AQMD. The Legislative Committee concurred with staff’s recommendation to oppose increases in the CARB stationary source fee above CPI limits.
Discussion on Motion by Mobile Source Committee Regarding Projects Funded through the AB 2766 Subvention Fund Program [Attachment 5]
Mr. Abarca provided the Committee with a summary of the projects funded through the AB 2766 Subvention Fund Program for FY 2000-01. The final report will be before the Board in July. When this item was discussed at the Mobile Source Committee meeting in May, it was suggested that legislation be explored to mandate that local governments spend their funds only on projects where emission reduction benefits could be quantified. This issue was then forwarded to the Legislative Committee for discussion.
Dr. Wallerstein stated that staff has discussed this issue with CARB, and CARB believes they have flexibility to amend their AB 2766 guidance document to place a greater emphasis on cities and counties spending their monies on quantifiable projects. Staff recommends that the AQMD continue to provide local jurisdictions with technical support on how they can use their AB 2766 subvention funds and work with CARB on addressing this issue through their guidance document.
Chair Glover stated that it would be appropriate to share the annual figures outlined in the handout (see Attachment 5) with the Mobile Source Committee before further discussion on possible legislation.
Ms. Carney asked about the ability to get State Implementation Plan (SIP) credit for the emission reductions. Dr. Wallerstein responded that to the degree the emission reductions are real, quantifiable, and surplus, they can be credited to the SIP. Ms. Carney stated that how fees are subvened to cities was raised at a Local Government and Small Business Committee meeting and that often those at the local government policymaking level are not aware when AB 2766 monies are received. Dr. Wallerstein stated that AQMD Public Affairs staff can work with cities on this issue and this may also be a task that can be incorporated into the pending Council of Governments Memorandum of Understanding (COG MOU) before the Board for consideration in July. The Legislative Committee agreed to return this item to the Mobile Source Committee along with additional information from staff.
Recommended Position on Legislation
Staff provided analyses and position recommendations on two bills and provided a brief description of each bill. [Attachment 6]
|
Bill/Title |
Recommended Position |
|
SB 1988 (Polanco) – Environmental Education |
SUPPORT |
|
AB 2677 (Nation) – Preferential Parking |
SUPPORT |
SB 1988 (Polanco) seeks to increase funding for environmental education in California by providing that monies from voluntary contributions or from settlements of a state or federal court action from an environmental suit could be deposited into a separate environmental education fund and dispersed under the state’s existing Environmental Education Program guidelines. Of the funding, 60 percent shall be used for environmental education programs; 40 percent shall be allocated to educate attorneys on enforcement of environmental laws.
Ms. Carney asked if the provisions of SB 1988 would allow violators of environmental laws to voluntarily choose to contribute to a state environmental education fund rather than paying a fine. Mr. Abarca responded that the program is very similar to the AQMD’s creative settlement program. When there is a lawsuit filed in state or federal court, in addition to requiring violators to fix the problem, they often enter into settlement discussions. The intent of SB 1988 is to create a funding account so settlement monies may be reserved for environmental education. The Legislative Committee adopted a Support position on SB 1988.
AB 2677 (Nation) would require the CEC to develop model ordinances intended to give local governments clear authority and more options to establish ordinances to provide preferential parking for all types of cleaner vehicles. Currently, several cities provide financial parking incentives for electric vehicles, including free parking at metered spaces and in municipal parking lots, but believe they do not have implicit authority to extend the incentives to other advanced technology, lower-emission vehicles, such as hybrids. Use of the model ordinances is strictly voluntary.
Board Chair Glover asked if these parking incentives apply to public streets. Mr. Abarca responded that it would include metered and preferential parking. Mr. Abarca added that it is Assemblyman Nation’s belief that AB 2677 would help incentivize the sale and use of cleaner vehicles. AB 2677 was discussed by the Committee but no action was taken. Therefore, no position is recommended on AB 2677.
Other Business/Public Comment
John Billheimer, on behalf of small businesses, thanked the Legislative Committee for its efforts to oppose AB 2221 (Keeley) regarding civil actions by citizens against permittees.
/ / /