California Air Board Chastised Over Weak Approach on Clean Air by Schwarzenegger and Garamendi; Mixed Reviews on Implementing Global Warming Requirements of AB 32

Remarks of Lieutenant Governor John Garamendi

Good morning members of the California Air Resources Board:

You have awesome responsibilities, paired with commensurate authority. Your responsibilities are to protect and improve air quality in the State of California, and reduce greenhouse gases. Your authority permits you to do so, with haste.

Previous actions by this board have led to significant improvements in California’s air quality; however, other actions by this board are responsible for blocking the production of zero emission vehicles (automobiles) and your delay of the air quality standards in the Central Valley will result in more asthma and other health problems.

Today you face a choice: significantly strengthen air quality standards and reduce greenhouse gases or delay the strong action our public and global health demand.

I urge you to take strong and immediate action to deal with the air quality and greenhouse gas issues the State of California faces.

Yesterday, as required by AB 32, you discussed the immediate actions necessary to reduce greenhouse gases and it appears to me you failed to achieve much. It would be a serious problem for public health and global health if today’s results are also so meager.

These issues are of utmost importance to every person living in the State of California, and indeed on the globe. Our position as a major emitter of greenhouse gases, as well as other elements that cause deterioration of air quality in our state and neighboring areas, must be dealt with -- I urge you to take strong and decisive action to address these problems today, not tomorrow.

Specifically, today you are dealing with the issue of air quality for the State of California. You have before you today, two plans: one presented by the South Coast Air Quality Management District, and another, your own plan for the State.

It is my opinion, that you should immediately adopt the South Coast District’s Plan in total. This plan would position the air basins of Southern California to meet the federal EPA standards and save as many as 5,000 lives per year that might otherwise be lost prematurely from the effects of fine particles in the air.

The South Coast Plan, not only provides for a larger reduction in particulates, it also provides you with the flexibility that you will need in the days and months ahead.

As implementation proceeds, you will have the ability to fine tune the proposal to meet reductions in particulate matter for trucks, locomotives, ships and off-road vehicles that create some 80 percent of the particulate problem in the South Coast Basin.

So you have a chance, should you adopt the AQMD proposal, to adopt a higher standard with greater reductions in particles and still have flexibility necessary to fine tune the total system.

If you adopt the Statewide Plan, rather than the South Coast Plan, you will be unlikely to meet the federal EPA standards and would further delay implementing measures which can save lives now. This delay would allow continuing increases in particulate matter in the air and a corresponding increase in numbers and suffering of children with asthma and other health problems.

Therefore, it is my recommendation that you do two things -- adopt the South Coast Plan immediately and work aggressively to strengthen the Statewide Plan.

Now, if adoption today is impossible, an acceptable alternative would be a delay of no more than 60 days for the purpose of combining the South Coast Plan with the State Plan.

A 60-day delay is tolerable, but not achieving the goal of cleaning up the air and making our state healthier, as soon as possible, would be intolerable for our health and the economic future of our state.

I also want to point out that your efforts to meet the AB 32 requirements would be advanced by adopting the South Coast Plan as well as by strengthening the Statewide Plan….

With this approach, two critical problems: particulates and greenhouse gases can be addressed simultaneously – if you adopt a solid, responsible and strict plan that moves us aggressively towards reducing both particulates and greenhouse gases.

Finally, with regard to off-road construction equipment, I know there has been much discussion about the impossibility of meeting the Statewide Plan by 2020. That may be true, but I think you can achieve most of the particulate reduction by very carefully calibrating the goals and metrics to achieve the maximum implementation with tier one, two and three, leaving the final step until a later date.

In the future, when the new engines are available, tier four should be implemented as quickly as is feasible, as the construction and agricultural fleets turn over. This strategy may achieve the maximum benefit in the early stages with the least disruption and greatest mitigation of costs.

Finally, if you adopt the South Coast Plan now, and work aggressively to strengthen the Statewide Plan, you leave yourself the flexibility you will need in the months ahead to fine tune these proposals and best meet the health, environmental and economic needs of our state.

Most importantly, you will continue California’s leadership in addressing two extremely critical problems: climate change and air quality.

Thank you very much for this opportunity to speak to you and I urge you to act accordingly.

Statement of Arnold Schwarzenegger


I am extremely pleased that the California Air Resources Board included the world's first Low Carbon Fuel Standard to limit greenhouse gas emissions from transportation fuels in its list of Early Action measures. This groundbreaking standard has the potential to lead a world-wide effort to reduce dependence on oil and spark tens of billions of dollars in investment toward development of alternative transportation fuels. I am very proud of the work produced by experts from the University of California contributing to the development of the Low Carbon Fuel Standard and I am very excited about working with other states and other nations to build upon this effort.

The Low Carbon Fuel Standard alone has the potential to reduce carbon emissions from the transportation sector by 10 - 20 million metric tons by 2020. The Standard combined with the other early actions by the Air Resources Board and other state agencies represents up to one quarter of the overall emission-reduction goals called for in the Global Warming Solutions Act.

I believe the Air Resources Board should continue to identify regulatory measures that are technologically feasible and economically sound to begin reducing greenhouse gas emissions as early as possible. For example, regulations governing the specifications for cement manufacturing to allow the use of concrete blends containing 5% or more interground limestone would reduce carbon emissions by at least 2 million metric tons per year with little cost to taxpayers or developers.

Other regulatory actions that require more time for analysis or development of regulations, may not be able to meet the aggressive timeline for early action pursuant to the Global Warming Solutions Act, but can and should be considered for inclusion in the Scoping Plan that will be released in 2008. I look forward to a Scoping Plan that has a balanced approach, using all emission-reduction tools, including incentives, regulations, and market mechanisms, to meet our climate targets in the most cost-effective manner possible.

I was deeply disappointed, however, that the California Air Resources Board voted last week to seek an 11-year delay in enforcement of federal air quality standards in the San Joaquin Valley. Regardless of whether the US EPA's failure to grant California the authority to implement aggressive emissions standards is partly to blame for our inability to meet federal standards, the Air Board let the federal government off the hook by seeking delay.

There are few environmental issues facing Californians that are more important to our children's health, our quality of life, and our economic security than air quality. When one out of six residents in the San Joaquin Valley has been diagnosed with asthma and one in five children carry an inhaler to school, it is a call to action.

I am pleased that the Air Resources Board agreed to work closely with the South Coast Air Quality Management District to further reduce emissions in the district. With over 5,000 deaths every year attributable to air quality, it is essential that we work together to ensure maximum emission reductions in order to protect our most vulnerable citizens. I also encourage the Board to revisit its decision and work with the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District to strengthen the clean air plan within the next month. The Air Resources Board must keep California on the path of cleaner air, particularly in areas with significant air quality issues such as the San Joaquin Valley, the South Coast, and areas around our ports. I intend to work closely with the Air Resources Board to push for more aggressive action on these fronts.