Comment Log Display

Please see attachment for complete document.

June 13, 2007


Chairman Bob Sawyer
California Air Resources Board
1001 “I” Street
Sacramento, CA 95814 

Re:	Air Resources Board Should Direct Staff to Develop Amendments
to the Proposed San Joaquin Valley Air Quality Management Plan for
Ozone

Dear Chairman Sawyer:

	On behalf of the undersigned organizations, we write to you to
seek your support in addressing the San Joaquin Valley’s air
pollution crisis quickly, effectively, and without delay.  We have
come a long way over the last few years together, but we can – and
should – do much more to reduce air pollution.  In 2003, then
candidate for Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger promised the people
of California he would cut pollution in half by 2010.
Unfortunately, Governor Schwarzenegger won’t be able to deliver on
that promise unless his administration’s Air Resources Board
changes course and stands up to the state’s polluters in
protection of Californians’ health. The Draft March 2007 Ozone
Plan (“the Plan”) for the San Joaquin Valley, one of the two most
polluted regions of the state, falls far short of meeting the
Governor’s promise. 
	
	We respectfully ask you to refrain from adopting the Plan at your
June 14, 2007 Board meeting, and instead set the Valley on a course
to attain the standard in a manner commensurate to the challenge by
directing your staff to amend and strengthen the plan.   

In recent years, the San Joaquin Valley has made strides in
improving air quality.  Between 1998 and 2006, the District, the
Air Resources Board, Valley residents, industry, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, the California Legislature, and
public-interest air quality advocates have all taken actions that
have collectively decreased the number of days that the Valley
violates the health-based National Ambient Air Quality Standard
for ozone by 26%.   However, we still have a long way to go.

At this rate of improvement, it would take another 23 years to
meet the standard.  Today, the Valley and the South Coast Air
Basin share the distinction of the most ozone-polluted regions in
the nation.  Furthermore, in the eight years since 1998, the
Valley had more violations than the South Coast air basin in seven
of those years.   

THE VALLEY HAS A PUBLIC HEALTH CRISIS

Valley residents know that we have a problem and want to do
something about it.  A 2006 survey by the Public Policy Institute
and the Great Valley Center reported that 43% of northern San
Joaquin Valley respondents and 60% of southern San Joaquin Valley
respondents called air pollution a “big problem.”  In addition,
33% of northern San Joaquin Valley respondents and 48% of southern
San Joaquin Valley respondents called air pollution a “very serious
threat” to them or their immediate family. 

An aggressive plan to address ozone pollution will also reduce
harmful fine particulate matter (PM2.5) pollution.  Oxides of
nitrogen (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOC) react in the
presence of heat and sunlight to form ozone.  NOx also reacts with
other pollutants to form particulate matter with an aerodynamic
diameter of 2.5 microns or less (PM2.5).  Besides violating the
ozone standard, the Valley also violates both the health-based
24-hour and annual average PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality
Standards.  

The costs that the public bears demand that the Board adopt an
accelerated attainment strategy and not defer attainment until
2024.  San Joaquin Valley residents would save $3.2 billion
annually in health related costs if the Valley met the
health-based ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality
Standards.   This annual $1,000 per person “pollution tax” does
not include unquantifiable costs, such as permanent damage to lung
capacity or the inability of asthmatic children to play outdoors on
bad air days. 

WE CAN DO BETTER

Valley residents overwhelmingly support more aggressive actions to
improve air quality.  In a 2005 Air District survey, 71% of the
respondents disagreed with the statement that economic growth and
prosperity are more important than environmental issues, 70%
disagreed that government standards for pollution are generally
too strict, and 67% disagreed that the Air District has been too
aggressive in enforcing air pollution regulations on businesses.  
 
	
On April 30th, over 100 valley residents took time out of their
busy schedules to tell the San Joaquin Valley Air District
Governing Board that they believe that more can be done.  Despite
the overwhelming testimony, the Governing Board approved the Plan,
which delays attainment of the health-based air quality standards
for ozone by 11 years.  Arvin and Northwest Fresno would be the
last communities to come into compliance with the 8-hour ozone
standard in 2024.  For more than a year now, Air District staff
members have told you and the public that it is not possible to
meet the ozone standard any earlier.

However, independent experts with the International Sustainable
Systems Research Center  (ISSRC) have identified many additional
control strategies within the Air District’s authority that will
substantially accelerate attainment of the health-based ozone
standards.   These experts have years of experience addressing
complex air pollution problems and providing workable solutions. 
Dr. James Lents, ISSRC’s president, is internationally recognized
as a leader in air pollution control science  and the former Air
Pollution Control Officer at the South Coast Air Quality
Management District.  

Air District staff previously, and very publicly, claimed that
ISSRC’s independent plan was wrong.  District staff now
acknowledge that there are no double-counting errors based on
publicly available information.  Staff now also admits that when
the independent plan adjusts for previously unavailable
information, only 3-4 percent of ISSRC’s reductions were already
accounted for.  Nevertheless, the District’s APCO, Seyed Sadredin,
continues to unfairly and publicly criticize the report for, among
other things, substantial double counting errors that his own
staff admit do not exist. 

	The Plan prepared by District staff relies primarily on delaying
attainment to 2024 to take advantage of so-called “fleet
turnover.”  In other words, District staff wants to wait as long
as possible to allow owners of vehicles to buy newer, cleaner
vehicles that emit less NOx.  District staff also hopes that the
District can obtain billions of dollars in incentive funding to
accelerate fleet turnover, but have not secured that funding.  As
a result, staff wants you to approve a reclassification to
“extreme nonattinment” and allocate 52% of all of the needed NOx
reductions to the “Black Box,” a special loophole in the Clean Air
Act designed to allow for future technological breakthroughs.  The
way staff proposes to use the “Black Box” will not meet Clean Air
Act requirements:  the Black Box is designed for future
technological innovations, not incentive financing shortfalls.  

Resorting to an extreme reclassification admits defeat in the
battle to clean the air. Reclassification sends a signal to the
general public that the state and district have given up.  It also
reduces pressure on residents, industry, and lawmakers to actively
find ways to provide the billions of dollars in incentive funds
that will help Valley residents and businesses reduce emissions. 
Without a near-term deadline, reclassification allows
policy-makers to delay much-needed incentive funding.

	Moreover, EPA scientists agree that the current 8-hour standard
is not as health-protective as may be needed, and the agency may
soon propose a tighter, more health-protective 8-hour ozone
standard.  Without proactive and aggressive action now, the new
standard will only be more difficult to meet and Valley residents
may never enjoy truly healthy air.  

We can do much better. For instance, CLEARING THE AIR recommends
that the District strengthen stationary and area source rules to
achieve more reductions than proposed by staff.  In addition, the
District and the Air Resources Board should do much more to
address NOx emissions from mobile diesel equipment.  In 2005, the
largest sources of NOx are (1) diesel trucks (254.4 tons/day); (2)
mobile off-road equipment (70.5 tons/day); (3) mobile off-road
agricultural equipment (64 tons/day); (4) light trucks and SUVs
(28.9 tons/day); and (5) cars (21.8 tons/day).   

For mobile sources, we ask that the Air Resources Board strengthen
and accelerate rules addressing the top three categories.  Right
now, ARB has not proposed a strong rule to reduce NOx emissions
from off-road equipment (like construction equipment).  In 2014,
the proposed off-road rule will produce a mere 8.3 percent 
reduction (3.7 tons per day from a 44.5 tons per day 2014
inventory).  Currently, ARB has not proposed any rule to reduce
emissions from in-use mobile agricultural equipment.

We need the Air Resources Board to come to the aid of Valley
residents whose local health agency has abandoned them.  Their
approach forces Valley residents to continue to breathe dangerous,
polluted air until owners of these highly-polluting diesel engines
voluntarily buy new equipment, ideally with some incentive funding
to prod them along.

Instead, we advocate that you amend the District’s proposed plan
to include a Clean Air Days rule.  This rule is best described as
a carrot and stick approach.  The Valley could clean up dirty
diesel engines much faster by phasing in operational limits on the
oldest and most polluting diesel equipment.  This process could be
coupled with financial incentives to operators to replace this
out-dated equipment or to use cost-effective retrofit technologies
to reduce their emissions.  After five years, a Clean Air Days rule
would require reasonable guidelines on extreme diesel polluters who
choose not to develop a cleaner fleet.  Ultimately, after being
given several years and, possibly, financial assistance,
businesses that want to continue to use dirty diesel equipment
would not be allowed to use that equipment on days when District
scientists forecast that air quality will be poor.  By 2013, when
Clean Air Days would be implemented, experts estimate only  thirty
days a year would be subject to Clean Air Days.

The District currently requires the general public to refrain from
using wood-burning fireplaces on high pollution days in the winter.
 The general public is also required to submit their automobiles to
smog check and bring their vehicles up to a tailpipe emissions
standard.  It is fair and consistent to require that owners of
dirty diesel engines curtail their pollution on bad air days.  If
those engine owners choose not to avail themselves of publicly
provided incentive funds to retrofit or replace dirty engines,
then they should have no right to continue to pollute the air that
we all share

WHAT CAN THE AIR RESOURCES BOARD DO?

The Valley's bad air is a public health, public relations, and
economic disaster.  The region cannot expect to attract
high-paying jobs that retain an educated workforce if people
around the country know the Valley’s air is among the most
polluted in America. The Board has an opportunity to set the
Valley on a course for clean air by requiring ARB staff to amend
the plan and present the Board with a real roadmap to clean air by
2017.    
	
The California Air Resources Board should not adopt the proposed
2007 Ozone Plan at the hearing on June 14, 2007.  The June 15,
2007 deadline to submit the Plan to EPA is a paperwork deadline. 
Assuming EPA takes any action at all, if ARB does not submit an
attainment plan by June 15th, EPA could make a finding of failure
to submit, which gives ARB 18 months to submit a plan before any
sanctions would take effect.   A decision to tell staff to develop
a better plan carries no negative consequences. 

Therefore, the Air Resources Board should:

1.	Direct ARB staff to amend the current plan to a “severe” plan
that meets Clean Air Act requirements, controls both mobile and
stationary/area-wide sources to the fullest extent possible, and
attains the 8-hour ozone standard by 2018, at the latest.

2.	Eliminate the use of the “black box”. It’s been a box full of
empty promises that has failed Californians for 20 years. 

3.	Among other controls that ARB staff should consider and adopt
is a Clean Air Days rule for mobile diesel sources of NOx
emissions. Clean Air Days will rely on operational limits and
could be coupled with incentive funding to clean up dirty mobile
diesel equipment.  After several years, owners of dirty diesel
engines who choose to not replace that equipment will be
prohibited from operating on Clean Air Days.	

4.	Air Resource Board should commit to specific measures to
strengthen and accelerate rules addressing in-use mobile
agricultural equipment.  Currently, ARB has not proposed any rule
to reduce emissions from in-use mobile agricultural equipment in
their proposed State Implementation Plan.



CONCLUSION

	We can and must do better.  This is an important opportunity for
all of us to work together to deliver that which Valley residents
want and need:  cleaner air as quickly as possible.  We need ARB
to step in and step up to ensure the Governor is able to deliver
on his promise to the people of California and to ensure the
people of the Valley that they will breathe cleaner air before
2024.  Thank you for your time, dedication, and service on the
California Air Resources Board.

Sincerely,

Candice Adam-Medefind
Mom’s Clean Air Network (Mom’s CAN)

Diane Bailey
Natural Resources Defense Council

Michelle Garcia
Program Director
American Lung Association of California

Kevin Hall, Air Quality Chair
Sierra Club –Tehipite Chapter

Kevin Hamilton and David R. Pepper, MD, MS
Medical Advocates for Healthy Air 

Linda McKay
Tri-County Watchdogs

Mary-Michal Rawling
Merced/Mariposa County Asthma Coalition

Betsy Reifsnider
Environmental Justice Project
Catholic Diocese of Stockton

Sarah Sharpe
Coalition For Clean Air

Kyle Stockard and Marilynne Pereira
Merced Stop Wal-Mart Action Team

Central Valley Air Quality (CVAQ) Coalition Steering Committee:
 
Jose Carmona 
Center for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technology
 
Teresa De Anda 
Comité para el Bienestar de Earlimart
 
Caroline Farrell 
Center on Race Poverty and the Environment
 
Susan Frank
Kirsch Foundation 
 
Tom Frantz
Association of Irritated Residents
 
Sarah Jackson
Earthjustice
 
Rey León
Latino Issues Forum
 
Rosenda Mataka 
Grayson Neighborhood Center 
 
Erin Rogers
Union of Concerned Scientists
 
Carolina Simunovic
Fresno Metro Ministries 
 
Arthur Unger 
Sierra Club


cc:  	California Air Resources Board Members
Catherine Witherspoon, Executive Officer, Air Resources Board
Seyed Sadredin, Air Pollution Control Officer, San Joaquin Valley
Unified APCD
Senator Dean Florez, Chair, Senate Select Committee on Air Quality
in the San      
Joaquin Valley
	Member Juan Arambula, California Assembly