BOARD MEETING DATE: March 5, 2004
AGENDA NO. 5

Execute Contracts for AQIP Proposals Received During the First Three Quarters of 2003 and Issue RFP

SYNOPSIS:

Rule 2202 - On-Road Motor Vehicle Mitigation Options was adopted on December 8, 1995 and amended on February 6, 2004.  One of the compliance strategies under Rule 2202 allows employers to invest in the AQIP.  Monies received are placed in a restricted account to fund programs that result in equivalent emission reductions that would otherwise have been achieved by the participating employers.  Staff evaluated the proposals received during the first three quarters of 2003 and recommends projects for funding.  In addition, staff is recommending awarding contracts to conduct the Lawn Mower Exchange Program.  The amount available for this period is $3,292,021.  Lastly, staff is recommending that a new RFP be released to solicit projects to meet Rule 2202 emission reduction targets projected for Calendar Year 2004.

COMMITTEE:

Mobile Source, February 27, 2004, Recommended for Approval

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

1. Authorize the Chairman to execute the following contracts for a total amount not to exceed $2,267,978 from the AQIP Special Revenue Fund.

1. A contract with Nationwide Environmental Services to replace six diesel-powered street sweepers with Model Year 2004 CNG street sweepers in an amount not to exceed $360,000.
2. A contract with Clean Energy to deploy 100 CNG cargo vans and pickup trucks for commercial fleet application throughout the South Coast Air Basin in an amount not to exceed $300,000.
3. A contract with the City of Pasadena to repower 8 C-10, model year 2000, Cater-pillar Refuse Trucks from diesel to CNG in an amount not to exceed $210,666.
4. A contract with the City of Carson to replace one 1983 Crown bus with a new CNG-powered bus in an amount not to exceed $10,000.
5. A contract with McLaughlin Engineering and Mining to repower 2 dual engine scrapers and 2 single engine scrapers with Tier 2 engines in an amount not to exceed $387,312.
6. A contract with Pick Your Part Auto Wrecking to generate emission reductions by scrapping old vehicles under Regulation XVI in an amount not to exceed $1,000,000.

2. Authorize the Executive Officer to approve the purchase of up to 4,000 Neuton-brand electric powered lawn mowers from Country Home Products, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $850,000, to hold lawnmower exchange events for the residents of the South Coast Air Basin
    
3. Transfer funds equal to the amount expended to buy down electric mowers for people residing within the LADWP jurisdiction from the LADWP settlement fund to the Air Quality Investment Program Special Revenue Fund, after the completion of the lawnmower exchange events.
    
4. Transfer $150,000 from the AQIP Special Revenue Fund to Science & Technology’s FY 2003-04 Budget, Services and Supplies Major Object (Public Notice and Advertisement Account $90,000, Miscellaneous Expense Account $60,000) to so-licit outside business and organizational support to assist in implementing AQMD’s “Mow Down Air Pollution 2004” program, as outlined on page 3.
    
5. Issue new RFP to solicit projects to meet emissions reduction targets for Calendar Year 2004.

Barry R. Wallerstein, D.Env.
Executive Officer

Background

Rule 2202 Air Quality Investment Program (AQIP) allows subject employers to participate by electing to invest in an AQMD-administered restricted fund. Investment can be either $60 annually per employee reporting to the worksite during the 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. peak window, or $125 triennially per employee. The restricted monies are to be used by the AQMD to fund proposals that achieve mobile source emission reductions that would otherwise have been achieved by implementing a rideshare program. This Board letter contains a discussion regarding the disbursal of funds from the AQIP compliance option for the first three quarters of 2003.

Upon registering under this option and submitting the designated investment amount, an employer is considered to be in compliance with the Rule and there is no need for the employer to take further action to reduce mobile source emissions. The collected monies are used to fund alternative mobile source emission reduction strategies that reduce mobile source emissions at a more cost-effective rate which could potentially result in greater overall emission reductions.

The first three quarters of the 2003 participation period ended on September 30, 2003 with 146 employers participating in the AQIP program.  The total amount of AQIP funds received during this period was $2,198,035, which includes both annual and triennial participants.  In addition, $494,833 is being carried forward from the previous quarter and an amount of $336,099 is available from four withdrawn projects (Vulcan Materials for $188,000; Los Angeles Department of Water and Power for $40,720; Jagur Tractor for $39,792 and Bragg Crane for $67,587).  An additional amount of $263,054 is available from interest accrued in FY 2002-03.  Therefore, the total amount available for this quarter is $3,292,021 (see Attachment 1, Table 4).  Staff recommends that $3,267,978 be used to purchase emission reductions to satisfy the target for the three quarters.

Proposal Evaluation

During the bidding process for the first three quarters of 2003, 27 proposals were received requesting funds ranging from $33,000 to $1,879,200. Attachment 2 gives a summary of emission reduction targets and the emission reduction credit balance. Attachment 3 gives a summary of each proposal received and funds requested.

According to the September 5, 2003 revision of the RFP the proposals were divided into six different categories as listed in Attachment 4. This attachment provides an overall summary of the proposals by category, listing the proposals received, funds requested, total proposal costs, and emission reductions expected from each proposal.

All proposals submitted were reviewed and scored based on the information in the proposal as submitted to the AQMD, and according to the selection criteria described in the RFP. The four-member evaluation panel comprised of one Transportation Programs Manager, one Technology Advancement Program Manager, one Air Quality Specialist and one external expert on mobile sources; two female and two male; one Asian/Pacific Islander, two Caucasian and one Latino . After the proposals were scored within their respective categories, all proposals were ranked by total score (as described in the RFP). Attachment 5 discusses the selection criteria and the overall ratings for each proposal.

Selection Criteria

Attachment 5 provides a summary of the proposal rankings. After all the proposals were scored and ranked, the evaluation panel proceeded to select projects from the highest scoring proposals with the specific goal of meeting the emission reduction targets for VOC, NOx, and CO. Staff selected a combination of projects that would meet the one-year targets for all three pollutants. As part of the selection process, the panel based its selection on the scoring criteria outlined in the RFP. Preference was given to the highest scores in each category. However, some of the higher ranking proposals are not recommended for funding due to their requested funding amounts compared to the amount of emission reductions achieved or the proposal is being recommended for funding under a different AQMD program such as the Carl Moyer Program. Reasons for recommendations made are provided at the end of each proposal summary in Attachment 3.

The proposals were ranked by score within each of the five categories and all proposals were ranked by total score as provided in the RFP. The evaluation panel was able to select projects from the highest ranking proposals from three of the five categories to meet the NOx, VOC and CO targets. As with prior proposal selections, the top proposals that gave the greatest amount of VOC reductions are chosen first followed by those proposals that provide the greatest amount of NOx reductions. Lastly, proposals that provided the greatest amount of CO reductions are selected. As such, four proposals from Pick Your Parts, Nationwide Environmental Services, Clean Energy, and Neuton (Country Home Products, Inc.) are recommended for award to meet the VOC emission reduction target. Two additional proposals, City of Pasadena and McLaughlin Engineering and Mining, are selected to meet the remaining NOx emissions reduction targets (after accounting for the concurrent NOx reductions associated with the four selected proposals meeting the VOC target). The selection of the six proposals provides sufficient CO emissions reductions to meet the CO target.

According to AQMD’s Procurement Policy and Paragraph E of Section VI of RFP #9596-23 the Executive Officer or the Governing Board may award contracts to proposers other than the proposer receiving the highest rating in the event the Executive Officer determines that another proposer from among those technically qualified would provide the best value to the AQMD considering cost and technical factors. The decisions in the following two paragraphs reflect this principle, and are needed to provide the best value.

No projects were chosen form Category 1 (Marine Vessels), as a large number of marine vessels are being recommended for funding under other programs such as Carl Moyer and NOX and PM₁₀ Mitigation. Projects with gasoline-powered outboards were not recommended due to the lack of set quantification protocols for the generation of emission reductions. In addition, the smaller outboards result in higher NOx emissions compared to existing engines. Projects submitted under Category 5 were either not cost effective or the resulting emission reductions did not meet the criteria of ‘real, surplus, quantifiable and enforceable.’

After the projects were selected to meet the required target, a remaining amount of about $35,000 would be available to fund additional projects. Staff is recommending that the City of Carson proposal be funded at $10,000. This project is recommended due to its low cost and the use of alternative fuel technology by a local city. In addition, the City of Carson proposal is the only proposal that could be funded without completely depleting the AQIP account.

The following proposals are recommended for approval (as detailed in Attachment 6):
 

1.	Nationwide Environmental Services Nationwide Environmental Services proposes to generate emission reductions by replacing six pre-1987 diesel street sweepers with new CNG street sweepers. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $1.87 per pound over 15 years. (Ranked 1st under Category 2, recommended for funding.)	$360,000
2.	Clean Energy Clean Energy proposes to generate emission reductions by deploying a hundred CNG vans and pickup trucks in commercial fleet applications at a cost-effectiveness of $3.85 per pound. (Ranked 3rd under Category 2, recommended for funding. Staff is recommending that the requested funds be set aside within the AQIP account and disbursed as end users purchasing the vehicles are identified for a period of up to 6 months.)	$300,000
3.	City of Pasadena City of Pasadena proposes to generate emission reductions by repowering ten diesel refuse trucks with CNG engines. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $4.81 per pound. (Ranked 2nd under Category 2, recommended repowering of eight trucks for funding.)	$210,666
4.	City of Carson City of Carson proposes to generate emission reductions over 20 years by replacing a 1983 Crown bus with a CNG bus at a cost-effectiveness of $6.34 per pound. (Recommended due to its lower cost compared to other projects, use of alternative fuel technology, and the resulting long term benefits.)	$10,000
5.	McLaughlin Engineering and Mining Option 2 McLaughlin Engineering and Mining proposes to generate emission reductions by repowering two diesel powered dual engine scrapers under Option 1and in addition two single engine scrapers under Opion-2. The cost-effectiveness’ of these two proposal are $0.84 and $0.94 per pound. (Ranked 1st under Category 3, Option 2 recommended for funding.)	$387,312
6.	Pick Your Part Auto Wrecking Option 2 Pick Your Part Auto Wrecking proposes to generate emission reductions by scrapping old vehicles under Regulation XVI. The cost-effectiveness of these proposals is $2.77 per pound. (This was the only proposal in its category. Option 2 is being recommended as this project generates emission reductions to meet the targets for all three pollutants.)	$1,000,000

Lawn Mower Exchange

In the spring of 2003, AQMD conducted four lawn mower exchange events where residents exchanged their operable gasoline-powered lawn mowers with zero emission cordless electric lawn mowers. A total of 3,500 mowers were exchanged. The program was funded by Rule 2202 AQIP. This exchange has helped mitigate a substantial amount of pollutants. Due to the success of this program, the staff is proposing to hold four lawn mower exchange events in the four-county region in the spring of 2004. In the prior events, individuals exchanging their lawn mowers paid the participating retailer $150, inclusive of sales tax. AQMD paid the difference minus the rebate offered by the manufacturer.

The Governing Board at its October 3, 2003 meeting approved the release of a Program Announcement (PA 2004-02) to solicit competitive proposals from qualified manufacturers for the production and supply of cordless electric lawn mowers to be used in this year’s lawn mower exchange program in the South Coast Air Basin. The goal of this program announcement was to identify potential manufacturers/suppliers and products for AQMD’s lawn mower exchange program at the lowest possible price. Three bids were received from (ranked by price):
 

Bid #3 was eliminated due to its high cost. Staff conducted a thorough evaluation of mowers from Neuton (pronounced "Newton") and Black & Decker. As Neuton is a lesser known brand name, staff called several service centers enquiring their durability. Meetings were held with both manufacturers. Both manufacturers provided mowers for evaluation. They were sent out to a commercial landscaper for two weeks of performance evaluation. The following table provides a summary of staff evaluation.
 

	Neuton	Black & Decker
Name Recognition
Quality
Price Advantage	$312.50	$399.00
MSRP	$399.00	$449.00
Retail Sales	Direct Marketing + Lawn & Garden Stores	In Home Depot
Cutting width	14"	19"
Weight	48 lbs.	75 lbs.
Spare Battery Availability		NO
Service Center Preference
Power & Cutting Performance
Ease of storing
Ease of cleaning
Area it can cut
Landscape Contractor’s personal preference
Event Assistance

Past AQMD mower exchange events were held using the Black & Decker model. After evaluation of both products, staff believes that the only concern with the Neuton is its name recognition and direct marketing approach. While Black & Decker has been recognized in the market, over 25,000 Neuton units are sold annually. Staff surveys of seven major lawn equipment service centers in the area indicate that there have not been any major operational problems with these units. Based on the evaluation of both products and because of its higher cost-effectiveness, staff recommends the Neuton brand for the exchange events in 2004. Due to a price difference of $86.50 per unit between the two manufacturers, staff recommends sharing the cost savings with customers by reducing their share to $100. This will still reduce AQMD’s cost by $36 per unit.

After the completion of the lawn mower exchange events, the amount of funds expended to buy down mowers for people residing within the LADWP jurisdiction will be calculated. This amount will then be transferred from the LADWP settlement fund to the Rule 2202 AQIP Special Revenue Fund. The amount of AQIP funds available up as a result of this transfer will be used to fund other AQIP projects in the next round of awards.

Release of new RFP

Staff recommends the release of a new RFP (see Attachment 7) to solicit proposals to achieve emissions reduction targets for Calendar Year 2004. This RFP provides additional clarification for projects being proposed for AQIP funding. Preference will be given to on-road projects and to projects that use AQMD approved protocols and meet the requirements of applicable AQMD Rules.

Outreach

In accordance with the AQMD’s consulting and contracting policies, a public notice advertising the RFP and inviting bids was published in the following publications:
 

1.	Antelope Valley Press	10.	Korea Central Daily	19.	Precinct Reporter
2.	Black Voice News	11.	La Opinion	20.	Press Enterprise
3.	Chinese Daily News	12.	La Prensa Hispana	21.	Rafu Shimpo
4.	Desert Sun	13.	La Voz Publications	22.	San Bernardino Sun
5.	Eastern Group Publications	14.	Los Angeles Daily News	23.	State of California Contracts
6.	El Chicano	15.	Los Angeles Sentinel		Register
7.	El Informador	16.	Los Angeles Times	24.	The Excelsior
8.	Inland Empire Hispanic News	17.	Orange County Register	25.	The Signal
9.	Inland Valley Daily Bulletin	18.	Philippine News	26.	Wave Community Newspapers

Additionally, potential bidders were identified from the Los Angeles County MTA and Caltrans Directories of Certified Minority, Women, Disadvantaged and Disabled Veterans Business Enterprises; the Inland Area Opportunity Pages Ethnic/Women Business & Professional Directory; the AQMD’s own electronic listing of certified minority vendors; and AQMD Purchasing’s mailing list. Notice of the RFP was mailed to the Black and Latino Legislative Caucuses and various minority chambers of commerce and business associations; and placed on the Internet at AQMD’s Web site [http://www.aqmd.gov, "Business and Job Opportunities" icon] and AQMD’s 24-hour telephone message line for bidders (909) 396-2724.

A Bidders’ Conference was convened at the AQMD on December 12, 2002 to highlight the requirements of the proposals and to answer questions from the prospective bidders in attendance.

Resource Impact

Total cost of expenditure for the proposed projects shall not exceed $3,267,978 from the Rule 2202 Air Quality Investment Program Special Revenue Fund.

Attachments

1. AQIP Funding and Participation
2. Summary of Emission Reduction Targets and Credit Balances
3. Summary of AQIP Proposals Received
4. Summary of Proposals by Type
5. Summary of Proposal Ratings
6. Recommendation for Funding
7. RFP
    

ATTACHMENT 1

AQIP – 1^st, 2^nd & 3^rd Quarters 2003

TABLE 1

Funds Received (as of September 30, 2003)

TABLE 2

Annual Participation

TABLE 3

Triennial Participation

 
ATTACHMENT 1

(Continued)

TABLE 4

Total Available Funding
 

 
ATTACHMENT 2

TABLE 1

Emission Reduction Targets (Pounds)

TABLE 2

Emission Reduction Credit Balances (through CY 2013) (Pounds)
 

1 Cumulative
2 Cumulative

ATTACHMENT 3

Summary
Air Quality Investment Program
Proposals Received

The following proposals were received in response to the AQIP Request for Proposals (RFP) on or before November 7, 2003. The proposals are listed alphabetically, not by classification or rank.
 

1.	ArrowTek	Option A Option B	$651,905 $329,643 County: All
	ArrowTek proposes to generate emission reductions over 5 years by re-powering off-road diesel engines (Front & Rear) used in up to five wheel type scrapers under Option 1 and front engines in up to 5 wheel type scrapers under Option 2. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $2.46 and $1.86 per pound respectively. (Not recommended for funding due to low ranking compared to other projects.)
2.	Athens Services		$100,000 County: LA
	Athens Services of City of Industry proposes to generate emission reductions by replacing two pre-1987 diesel street sweepers with new lower-emission propane sweepers. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $2.72 per pound over 12 years. (Not recommended for funding due to lower emission reductions compared to other projects.)
3.	City of Carson		$10,000 County: Los Angeles
	City of Carson proposes to generate emission reductions over 20 years by replacing a 1983 Crown bus with a CNG bus at a cost-effectiveness of $6.34 per pound. (Recommended due to its lower cost compared to other projects, use of alternative fuel technology, and the resulting long term benefits. After the required Emission Reduction Target was met, this was the only project that could be funded with the remaining available funds.)
4.	Clean Energy		$300,000 County: Los Angeles
	Clean Energy proposes to generate emission reductions by deploying hundred CNG vans and pickup trucks in commercial fleet applications at a cost-effectiveness of $3.85 per pound. (Ranked 3rd under Category 2, recommended for funding. Staff is proposing that should this project be approved by the Board, that the recommended funding be set aside and disbursed as vehicles are purchased by the end user.)
5.	Clean Street		$300,000 County: Los Angeles
	Clean Street of Gardena proposes to generate emission reductions by repowering eight diesel street sweepers with new lower-emission propane sweepers. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $6.63 per pound. (Not recommended for funding due to low ranking compared to other projects.)
6.	CVAG		$500,000 County: Riverside
	CVAG proposes to generate emission reductions by continuing the operation of fifteen CNG street sweepers and six other CNG vehicles. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $22.15 per pound. (Not recommended for funding as no new vehicles are being introduced.)
7.	Coreslab Structures		$35,088 County: All
	Coreslab Structures proposes to generate emission reductions by repowering two diesel sidewinders. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $0.86 per pound. (Not recommended for funding due to low ranking compared to other projects.)
8.	Herigstad Equipment Rental		$374,460 County: All
	Herigstad Equipment Rental proposes to generate emission reductions by repowering three diesel powered dual engine scrapers. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $1.18 per pound. (Not recommended for funding due to low ranking compared to other projects.)
9.	Jagur Tractor	Option A Option B Option C	$499,293 $499,293 $313,506 County: All
	Jagur Tractor proposes to generate emission reductions by repowering three diesel powered dual engine scrapers under Option A and 3 diesel powered dual engine scrapers under Option B, and two more under Option C. The cost-effectiveness’ of the three options are $1.16, $1.23 and $1.28 per pound respectively. (Not recommended for funding due to low ranking compared to other projects.)
10.	County of San Bernardino, Law & Justice Group		$267,115 County: All
	County of San Bernardino, Law & Justice Group proposes to generate emission reductions by implementing a Video Conferencing system as an alternative process to reduce emissions and vehicle trips. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $22.47 per pound. (Not recommended for funding due to low ranking compared to other projects.)
11.	Los Angeles City College		$1,463,500 County: Los Angeles
	Los Angeles City College proposes to generate emission reductions by issuing Public Transit passes to students at its campus. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $74.52 per pound. (Not recommended for funding due to is high cost-effectiveness compared to other projects and the difficulty of compliance verification.)
12.	McLaughlin Engineering and Mining	Option 1 Option 2	$249,640 $387,312 County: All
	McLaughlin Engineering and Mining proposes to generate emission reductions by repowering two diesel powered dual engine scrapers under Option 1 and in addition two single engine scrapers under Opion-2. The cost-effectiveness’ of these two proposal are $0.84 and $0.94 per pound. (Ranked 1st under Category 3, Option 2 recommended for funding.)
13.	Metropolitan Transit Authority		$1,879,200 County: Los Angeles
	Metropolitan Transit Authority in partnership with California Department of Transportation (District 7) and CHP proposes to generate emission reductions by implementing a Freeway Service Patrol type B Big rig demonstration along the I-710. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $13.01 per pound. (Not recommended for funding due to low ranking compared to other projects.)
14.	Nationwide Environmental Services		$360,000 County: LA
	Nationwide Environmental Services proposes to generate emission reductions by replacing six pre-1987 diesel street sweepers with new CNG street sweepers. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $1.87 per pound over 15 years. (Ranked 1st under Category 2, recommended for funding.)
15.	Networkcar		$1,250,000 County: LA
	Networkcar proposes to generate emission reductions by deploying in-Vehicle Telematics System in thousand diesel school buses managed by Laidlaw. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $4.25 per pound over 3 years. (Not recommended for funding due to low ranking compared to other projects.)
16.	OceanAir Environmental	Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 Option 5	$800,000 $115,000 $210,000 $550,000 $277,000 County: All
	OceanAir Environmental offers five options to generate emission reductions. Option 1 consists of repowering Barge Pumping engines at a cost-effectiveness of $1.16 per pound; Option 2 consists of repowering of Barge Generator engines at a cost-effectiveness of $0.1.66 per pound; Option 3 consists of repowering of Marine Aux Generators at a cost-effectiveness of $1.33 per pound; Option 4 consists of Marine engines at a cost-effectiveness of 1.47 per pound and Option 5 consists of repowering different Marine engines at a cost-effectiveness of $1.66 per pound. (Option 1 ranked high enough but was not recommended due to the high funding request relative to the associated emission reductions.)
17.	The Partnership		$615,738 County: All
	The Partnership proposes to generate emission reductions by providing cash incentives to worksites for the implementation of elements of Rideshare Program. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $2.62 per pound. (Not recommended for funding due to low ranking compared to other projects.)
18.	City of Pasadena		$263,332 County: Los Angeles
	City of Pasadena proposes to generate emission reductions by repowering ten diesel refuse trucks with CNG engines. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $4.81 per pound. (Ranked 2nd under Category 2, recommended repowering of eight trucks for funding.)
19.	Peterson-Chase		$29,998 County: All
	Peterson-Chase proposes to generate emission reductions over 10 years by re-powering one truck crane. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $0.36 per pound. (Not recommended for funding due to low ranking compared to other projects.)
21.	Pick Your Part Auto Wrecking	Option 1 Option 2 Option 3	$863,500 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 County: All
	Pick Your Part Auto Wrecking proposes to generate emission reductions by scrapping old vehicles under Regulation XVI. The cost-effectiveness of these proposals is $2.77 per pound. (This was the only proposal in its category. Option 2 is being recommended as this project generates emission reductions to meet the targets for all three pollutants.)
21.	Prime Time Shuttle		$500,000 County: Orange
	Prime Time Shuttle proposes to generate emission reductions by purchasing fifty CNG Vans to be used in service to and from the major airports in the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s region. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $11.22 per pound. (Not recommended for funding due to high cost-effectiveness and low ranking compared to other projects.)
22.	Reliable Wholesale Lumber		$379,425 County: All
	Reliable Wholesale Lumber proposes to generate emission reductions over a period of 7 years by re-powering fifteen self-propelled Lumber Loaders at a cost-effectiveness of $1.07 per pound. (Not recommended for funding due to high cost-effectiveness and low ranking compared to other projects.)
23/ 24.	Seaboard Marine	M/V Intrepid M/V Mona Lisa M/V Gracie G M/V Barbara H M/V Great Escape M/V Filibustero M/V Mr. C M/V Newport Princess M/V (3 Gas+1 Diesel))	$76,000 $59,000 $122,000 $121,000 $135,000 $33,000 $77,000 $77,000 $205,000 County: All
	Seaboard Marine proposes to generate emission reductions by re-powering Marine Vessels as listed above at cost-effectiveness’ ranging from $0.60 per pound to $$1.64 per pound. (Not recommended for funding as marine vessels Intrepid and Gracie G are being recommended for funding under other AQMD programs. Remainder of the vessels ranked low compared to other projects)
25.	Specialty Environmental Services (Proposal 1)	Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Option 8	$75,000 $63,000 $365,000 $154,000 $283,000 $55,000 $195,000 $164,000 County: Los Angeles
	Specialty Environmental Services proposes to generate emission reductions by re-powering outboard power boats operating on gasoline using 4-stroke engines. All the options are for a period of 5 years. Option 1 is to re-power 3 movie industry support boats at a cost-effectiveness of $0.38 per pound; Option 2 is to re-power 3 Cal State Northridge outboards at a cost-effectiveness of $0.34 per pound; Option 3 is to re-power 8 oil spill response outboards at a cost-effectiveness of $0.35 per pound; Option 4 is to re-power 17 fishing and sight-seeing boats at a cost-effectiveness of $0.32 per pound; Option 5 is to re-power 12 harbor services outboards at a cost-effectiveness of $0.29 per pound; Option 6 is to re-power 3 Southern California Marine Institute Research boats at a cost-effectiveness of $0.49 per pound; Option 7 is to re-power 6 Newport Beach Pier Commercial Dory Fleet fishing boats at a cost-effectiveness of $0.30 per pound; Option 8 is to re-power 7 marina & dock construction, wharf demolition and dive boats at a cost-effectiveness of $0.28 per pound; . (In spite of its low cost-effectiveness these projects are not being recommended as there are no set quantification protocols for the generation of emission reductions from outboards.)
26.	Tidewater Marine Western		$401,932 County: Orange
	Tidewater Marine Western proposes to generate emission reductions by re-powering three main and two auxiliary engines in M/V Price Tide. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $0.56 per pound. (Not recommended for funding due to low ranking compared to other projects.)
27.	Venco Western, Inc.		$120,000 County: LA
	Venco Western, Inc. proposes to generate emission reductions by replacing three pre-1987 diesel street sweepers with new LPG street sweepers. The cost-effectiveness of this proposal is $1.83 per pound over 12 years. (Not recommended for funding due to lower emissions reductions needed compared to other projects.)
28.	VPSI		$220,000 County: All
	VPSI proposes to generate emission reductions by scrapping old vehicles under Regulation XVI and by offering vanpool subsidies. The cost-effectiveness of these proposals is $38.54 per pound. (Not recommended for funding due to high cost-effectiveness and low ranking compared to other projects.)

 
ATTACHMENT 4

Proposal Summary by Type
 

MARINE VESSELS	AQIP Funding Request	Total Project Cost	AQIP Program Period (Years)	Emission Reduction Commitments (lbs./year)
				VOC	NOx	CO
OceanAir Env. (Proj 1)	$800,000	N/A	6	6,140	110,680	74,400
OceanAir Env. (Proj 2)	$115,000	N/A	6	880	11,380	3,960
OceanAir Env. (Proj 3)	$210,000	N/A	6	720	24,360	27,960
OceanAir Env. (Proj 4)	$550,000	N/A	10	0	43,780	0
OceanAir Env. (Proj 5)	$277,000	N/A	6	1,140	25,000	33,280
Seaboard Marine (3 Outboards + 1 Diesel)	$205,000	N/A	5	54,494	12,529	56,462
Seaboard Marine (Diesel - Barbara H)	$121,000	$124,600	7	2,237	14,199	6,118
Seaboard Marine (Diesel - Filibustero)	$33,000	$35,400	7	328	3,471	1,001
Seaboard Marine (Diesel - Gracie G)	$122,000	$131,600	7	1,466	15,419	4,018
Seaboard Marine (Diesel - Great Escape)	$135,000	$144,600	7	1,502	15,804	4,116
Seaboard Marine (Diesel - Intrepid)	$76,000	$80,800	7	1,258	13,312	3,829
Seaboard Marine (Diesel - Mona Lisa)	$59,000	$61,400	7	629	8,944	1,820
Seaboard Marine (Diesel - Mr. C)	$77,000	$81,800	7	572	7,801	1,652
Seaboard Marine (Diesel - Newport Princess)	$77,000	$81,800	7	500	6,823	1,449
Specialty Marine (Opt 1)	$75,000	$90,000	5	35,938	-628	56,462
Specialty Marine (Opt 2)	$63,000	$71,000	5	26,730	-633	97,888
Specialty Marine (Opt 3)	$365,000	$402,000	5	189,956	-5,972	305,648
Specialty Marine (Opt 4)	$154,000	$168,000	5	90,405	-1,743	106,862
Specialty Marine (Opt 5)	$283,000	$298,000	5	180,319	-6,216	270,158
Specialty Marine (Opt 6)	$55,000	$72,000	5	21,396	-638	24,570
Specialty Marine (Opt 7)	$195,000	$205,000	5	118,144	-3,918	196,616
Specialty Marine (Opt 8)	$164,000	$178,000	5	105,908	-585	144,795
Tidewater Marine Western	$401,932	$422,932	16	-1,160	47,860	72,660

 
ATTACHMENT 4
(Continued)
 

On-road Alternative Fuel Projects	AQIP Funding Request	Total Project Cost	AQIP Program Period (Years)	Emission Reduction Commitments (lbs./year)
				VOC	NOx	CO
Athens Services	$100,000	N/A	12	1,374	393	13,446
Carson, City of	$10,000	$153,448	20	0	106	0
City of Pasadena	$263,332	N/A	8	0	7,800	0
Clean Energy	$300,000	$2,255,100	10	4,409	1,322	23,789
Clean Street	$300,000	$388,000	15	0	3,791	0
CVAG	$500,000	$5,226,000	3	1	7,979	14
Nationwide Env. Services	$360,000	$1,150,646	15	4,812	4,531	47,316
Prime Time Shuttle	$500,000	N/A	5	3,830	1,652	29,736
Venco Western, Inc.	$120,000	$568,662	12	2,061	1,629	20,199

ATTACHMENT 4
(Continued)
 

Old-Vehicle Scrapping	AQIP Funding Request	Total Project Cost	AQIP Program Period (Years)	Emission Reduction Commitments (lbs./year)
				VOC	NOx	CO
Pick Your Part (opt 1)	$863,500	$863,500	3	41,867	23,550	314,000
Pick Your Part (opt 2)	$1,000,000	$1,000,000	3	48,480	27,270	363,600
Pick Your Part (opt 3)	$1,500,000	$1,500,000	3	72,693	40,891	545,200

 
ATTACHMENT 5

Proposal Evaluation/Contractor Selection

				1st year VOC	1st year NOx	1st year CO
1 Year Target =				72,789	66,613	602,600
Cat.	Ref.	Proposal Name	Amount	VOC (lbs/year)	NOx (lbs/year)	CO (lbs/year)	Total Score
4	20 - 2	Pick Your Part (opt 2)	$1,000,000	48,480	27,270	363,600	365
4	20 - 1	Pick Your Part (opt 1)	$863,500	41,867	23,550	314,000	362
4	20 - 3	Pick Your Part (opt 3)	$1,500,000	72,693	40,891	545,200	362
2	14	Nationwide Env. Services	$360,000	4,812	4,531	47,316	360
2	18	City of Pasadena	$263,332	0	7,800	0	303
1	23 - 1	Seaboard Marine (Diesel - Intrepid)	$76,000	1,258	13,312	3,829	299
2	4	Clean Energy	$300,000	4,409	1,322	23,789	297
2	2	Athens Services	$100,000	1,374	393	13,446	293
2	27	Venco Western, Inc.	$120,000	2,061	1,629	20,199	285
1	16 - 1	OceanAir Env. (Proj 1)	$800,000	6,140	110,680	74,400	269
3	12 - 2	McLaughlin Engineering. & Mining	$387,312	1,000	55,320	70,840	263
2	21	Prime Time Shuttle	$500,000	3,830	1,652	29,736	259
3	12 - 1	McLaughlin Engineering. & Mining	$249,640	720	39,800	50,960	259
7	29	Neuton (Country Home Products)	$850,000	32,000	200	102,000	259
3	19	Peterson - Chase	$29,998	1,040	8,600	700	252
1	23 - 2	Seaboard Marine (Diesel - Mona Lisa)	$59,000	629	8,944	1,820	247
1	16 - 3	OceanAir Env. (Proj 3)	$210,000	720	24,360	27,960	246
2	5	Clean Street	$300,000	0	3,791	0	245
1	16 - 5	OceanAir Env. (Proj 5)	$277,000	1,140	25,000	33,280	239
3	7	Coreslab Structures	$35,088	640	3,920	1,400	238
3	22	Reliable Wholesale Lumber	$379,425	3,300	52,200	10,500	237
1	26	Tidewater Marine Western	$401,932	-1,160	47,860	72,660	235
3	8	Herigstad Equipment Rental	$374,460	840	48,660	8,940	230
1	23 - 3	Seaboard Marine (Diesel - Gracie G)	$122,000	1,466	15,419	4,018	225
1	23 - 4	Seaboard Marine (Diesel - Barbara H)	$121,000	2,237	14,199	6,118	225

 
ATTACHMENT 5
(Continued)

Cat.	Ref.	Proposal Name	Amount	VOC (lbs/year)	NOx (lbs/year)	CO (lbs/year)	Total Score
3	1 - B	ArrowTek (Opt B)	$329,643	3,347	33,379	14,487	223
1	16 - 2	OceanAir Env. (Proj 2)	$115,000	880	11,380	3,960	223
3	9 - A	Jagur Tractor (Opt A)	$499,293	5,280	52,320	25,500	220
1	23 - 5	Seaboard Marine (Diesel - Great Escape)	$135,000	1,502	15,804	4,116	217
2	3	Carson, City of	$10,000	0	106	0	214
3	9 - B	Jagur Tractor (Opt B)	$499,293	4,980	49,260	24,000	212
1	23 - 6	Seaboard Marine (Diesel - Filibustero)	$33,000	328	3,471	1,001	208
5	11	Los Angeles City College	$1,463,500	6,487	5,094	60,527	205
1	23 - 7	Seaboard Marine (Diesel - Mr. C)	$77,000	572	7,801	1,652	201
3	9 - C	Jagur Tractor (Opt C)	$313,506	3,000	29,840	14,560	200
1	23 - 8	Seaboard Marine (Diesel - Newport Princess)	$77,000	500	6,823	1,449	190
3	1 - A	ArrowTek (Opt A)	$651,905	5,013	49,691	22,619	184
1	16 - 4	OceanAir Env. (Proj 4)	$550,000	0	43,780	0	161
5	17	The Partnership	$615,738	40,332	35,851	48,014	160
7	30	Black & Decker	$996,000	32,000	200	102,000	157
5	15	Networkcar	$1,250,000	13,640	88,440	13,891	147
5	13	MTA	$1,879,200	27,760	7,140	284,140	146
1	25 - 8	Specialty Marine (Opt 8)	$164,000	105,908	-585	144,795	140
1	25 - 5	Specialty Marine (Opt 5)	$283,000	180,319	-6,216	270,158	140
1	25 - 7	Specialty Marine (Opt 7)	$195,000	118,144	-3,918	196,616	140
1	25 - 4	Specialty Marine (Opt 4)	$154,000	90,405	-1,743	106,862	138
1	25 - 2	Specialty Marine (Opt 2)	$63,000	26,730	-633	97,888	137
1	25 - 3	Specialty Marine (Opt 3)	$365,000	189,956	-5,972	305,648	137
1	25 - 1	Specialty Marine (Opt 1)	$75,000	35,938	-628	56,462	136
5	28	VPSI	$220,000	1,881	1,324	18,725	136
1	25 - 6	Specialty Marine (Opt 6)	$55,000	21,396	-638	24,570	131
1	24	Seaboard Marine (3 Outboards + 1 Diesel)	$205,000	54,494	12,529	56,462	127
2	6	CVAG	$500,000	1	7,979	14	101
5	10	Law & Justice Group, County of San Bernardino	$267,115	661	698	5,845	43

Please note: Recommended items are shaded

ATTACHMENT 6

TABLE 1

Proposals Recommended for Funding
Anticipated Emission Reductions
(Pounds/Year)
 

 
TABLE 2

Proposals Recommended for Funding
Funding Request
 

/ / /