BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2042
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 2042 (Lowenthal)
As Amended May 3, 2004
Majority vote
TRANSPORTATION 8-6 APPROPRIATIONS 15-3
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Oropeza, Chan, Kehoe, |Ayes:|Chu, Berg, Calderon, |
| |Liu, Longville, Pavley, | |Corbett, Firebaugh, |
| |Salinas, Simitian | |Goldberg, Leno, Nation, |
| | | |Negrete-McLeod, Oropeza, |
| | | |Pavley, Ridley-Thomas, |
| | | |Wesson, Wiggins, Yee |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Houston, Bates, Benoit, |Nays:|Runner, Bates, Keene |
| |La Suer, Mountjoy, Parra | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Prohibits growth at the Ports of Long Beach and Los
Angeles (Ports) from increasing air pollution. Specifically,
this bill :
1)Makes legislative findings and declarations regarding the
health risks attributable to diesel engine exhaust and the
federal requirement that certain regions with high levels of
air pollution must demonstrate that construction of new
highways will not worsen air pollution.
2)Requires the South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD) to establish a baseline for air quality in the Port
of Long Beach based on that port's 2002 emission inventory.
3)Requires SCAQMD to establish a baseline for air quality at the
Port of Los Angeles based on that port's 2001 emission
inventory.
4)Requires those baselines to only cover the following
contaminant emissions from vessels and harbor craft, cargo
handling equipment, locomotives, and commercial vehicles:
a) Oxides on nitrogen;
b) Particulate matter;
AB 2042
Page 2
c) Sulfur dioxide; and,
d) Total hydrocarbons.
5)Requires the Cities of Long Beach and Los Angeles to require
growth and operations at their respective ports to be limited
or controlled so that air pollution does not exceed the
baselines established under this bill.
6)Requires both cities, every March 1 beginning in 2006, to
report to SCAQMD regarding their compliance with this
pollution restriction.
7)Allows SCAQMD to impose a fee on each city in an amount that
does not exceed its costs in administering this bill's
requirements.
8)Authorizes the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach to
establish an emission reduction credit trading program or an
emission offset program from the sources identified in this
measure, if the program is approved by SCAQMD or the Air
Resources Board (ARB).
9)Clarifies that this bill is intended to only grant oversight
authority to SCAQMD with respect to the baselines established
by the two ports based on their respective emissions
inventory.
EXISTING LAW vests responsibility for developing and enforcing
air pollution control measures with the Air Resources Board
(ARB) and various regional air quality management districts and
air pollution control districts.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee analysis, one-time costs of less than $50,000 in
fiscal year (FY) 2004-05 to SCAQMD to establish the Ports' air
quality baselines; these costs are potentially covered by fees
SCAQMD is authorized to impose on the Cities of Long Beach and
Los Angeles. There will also be costs, probably less than an
aggregate of $100,000 annually starting in FY 2005-06, to the
Cities of Long Beach and Los Angeles to report to SCAQMD on
their compliance with this bill's air quality baseline
requirements; these costs are reimbursable from the state.
AB 2042
Page 3
COMMENTS : The author asserts that the Long Beach Freeway in the
vicinity of the Ports is overwhelmed by truck traffic, which is
projected to more than double, to 83,000 vehicles per day, in
the next 20 years. Most of these trucks are diesel-powered and
diesel particulate matter (PM) emissions have been identified as
a toxic air contaminant by air quality officials. These
officials believe the Ports are the largest single source of air
pollution in the four-county Los Angeles region and that trucks
and ships are the primary sources of port-related pollution.
Supporters lament the fact that in the vicinity of the Ports,
the lifetime excess cancer risk is 1,400 per million people
exposed, far above the one-in-a-million level the federal
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) deems to be acceptable.
They also point out that the Ports are "virtually next door" to
residential neighborhoods, schools, and playgrounds.
The Pacific Merchant Shipping Association (Association), in
opposing this bill, counters that more than 1,000
container-moving equipment at the Ports have been, or soon will
be, fitted with particulate traps or diesel oxidation catalysts,
while hundreds of pieces of cargo-handling equipment are using
clean-burning emulsified fuel. Various other initiatives are
underway to reduce emissions as well. The Association contends
that this bill conflicts with state and federal law and policies
and "erects a vague and potentially prohibitive obstacle to
future growth (that would) send a negative message to the
international trade community." The Association particularly
cautions against assigning mobile source emission regulation to
a regional agency, a prospect that could create "islands of
divergent authority for sources that travel between air
districts (and other state and federal jurisdictions." For this
reason, they believe authority should remain with the ARB and
federal EPA.
Analysis Prepared by : Howard Posner / TRANS. / (916) 319-2093
FN: 0005102