SR-510-004
+.<
.
.5/CJ-tO~c;/
.
~-L
MO'J 1 lS?~
C/ED:CPD:DKW:bz
COUNCIL MEETING: November 1, 1988
Santa Monica, California
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: city staff
SUBJECT: Recommendation to Adopt Resolution Supporting the
Proposed Air Quality Management Plan
INTRODUCTION
On September 8, 1988, the Governing Board of the South Coast Air
Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and the Executive Committee
of the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)
authorized the release of the Draft 1988 Air Quality Management
Plan (AQMP) for public review and comment.
The purpose of the Draft 1988 AQMP is to set forth a
comprehensive program that will lead the South Coast Air Basin
into compliance with all federal and state air quality standards
by the year 2007. The South Coast Air Basin is comprised of Los
Angeles, Orange, and Riverside Counties and the non-desert
portions of San Bernardino County.
The AQMP proposes an
ambitious set of programs which will have far-reaching effects on
the region, including Santa Monica.
Serious efforts to address this region's air quality problems are
not without a pricetag to everyone in the region, including local
government. Given the severity of the problem and the need for a
- 1 -
b-L
'II}V 1 isg,a
.
.
multifaceted approach to dealing with it, this staff report
recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution supporting
the AQMP and direct staff to prepare appropriate budget
objectives for Fiscal Year 1989-90 addressing the City's
responsibilities under the AQMP.
BACKGROUND
The Draft 1988 AQMP identifies and quantifies all of the control
methods that are needed in order to meet federal and state health
standards by the year 2007. Control methods are categorized into
three tiers, depending upon their readiness for implementation.
The three tiers in the plan are:
Tier I Full implementation of known technological
applications and effective management practices.
Tier II - Significant advancement of today' s technological
applications and regulatory intervention where needed.
Tier III - Development of new technology.
contingency measures which will be considered
three-tiered control strategy fail to provide
emissions reductions are also described.
should the
the expected
The District is responsible for adopting the overall AQMP, with
major elements contributed by SCAG and the California Air
Resources Board (ARB). SeAG is responsible for developing
regional plans for transportation management, growth and land
- 2 -
.
.
use. These plans each include strategies that contribute to air
quality improvement, and are included in the AQMP. The ARB is
responsible for developing mobile source control measures, such
as vehicle emission standards and fuel specifications.
Once the 1988 AQMP is adopted locally and approved by the ARB, it
will be included in the state Implementation Plan (SIP) and
submitted to the u.s. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for
approval. It will then serve as the framework for all future air
pollution control efforts in the South Coast Air Basin.
Effect of AQMP on Local Government
The AQMP proposes an array of programs to address air quality
ranging from further restrictions on paints, coating, degreasing,
adhesives, and even underarm deodorants, to controls on grading
operations, waste recycling, paving of unpaved roads and parking
lots, controls on agricultural operations, soil decontamination
controls, tougher vehicle emission standards, use of cleaner
fuels, expanded use of radial tires, further restrictions on
refining operations, efforts towards electrification of rail and
bus operations, and controls on marine emissions. Some of the
technological control measures are likely to increase costs of
certain products used by industry, government and residents of
the region. Some actions may result in shifts in the types of
businesses and industries located in the basin.
- 3 -
.
.
A maj or set of programs would affect local governments. For
example, by 1990, local governments as employers would be asked
to implement programs that would reduce employee work trips by
10%, to adopt ordinances to reduce local government energy demand
by 8%, and to adopt an Air Quality Element into the General Plan.
By 1991 localities would be expected to have adopted trip
reduction ordinances, to adopt al ternati ve work schedules for
their employees, and also to adopt a telecommunications program
to reduce trips by their employees by 20%.
Even to begin implementation of these programs would require a
serious commitment of resources on the part of the City of Santa
Monica and other jurisdictions. The City'S proposed
Transportation Management Plan (TMP) incorporates a number of
programmatic actions which do address air quality as well as
traffic congestion issues. However, the AQMP calls for
addi tional actions not covered in the TMP which might best be
addressed by a comprehensive Air Quality Element of the General
Plan.
The implementation schedule set forth in the AQMP is very
demanding~ given the number of major policy projects currently in
progress in the City and the level of effort and community
involvement which would be necessary for the development of new
air quality programs, meeting some of the AQMP's deadlines will
be difficult.
- 4 -
.
.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT
Although support for the AQMP will not result in budget/financial
impacts, implementation actions required of the City as a result
of its adoption will have budgetary implications in relation to
staffing, professional services, capital expenditures and
operations. The recommendations of this staff report include
direction to staff to assess the City I S responsibilities under
the AQMP as part of the bUdgeting process for FY 1989-90 and to
develop appropriate recommendations for Council consideration.
RECOMMENDATION
It is respectfully recommended that the city Council:
1) Adopt the attached resolution supporting the AQMP~ and
2) Direct staff to develop recommendations as part of the FY
89-90 budgeting process for allocation of resources to implement
City responsibilities under the AQMP.
Attachments: 1) Resolution supporting AQMP
2) AQMP Executive Sum~ary
Prepared by: D. Kenyon Webster, Senior Planner
w/aqmp
- 5 -
>
>
t
,
l
.
,
!
I
I
I
;
i
I
.
.
\
''l'' A ~MP
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
~
EX E CUT I V E . M M Ai:l~- -
- - --.~..
- -
- - j
BACKGROUND
The South Coast AIr Basin, whIch comprises all of Orange County and the
non-desen portions of Los Angeles, RIverside and San Bernardino Counties,
has the worst air qualIty problem III the nation. Despite having put into place
many strict controls, the Basin stIll fails to meet the federal air qualIty
standards for four of the six criteria pollutants.
The Basin is in complIance With federal standards for sulfur dIoxide and lead.
But the maxImum ozone concentratIOns here reach about three times the
federal health standard Carbon monoXIde and fine particulate matter
(PMIO) reach maxImum levels of twice the federal standard. And the Basin
IS the only area in the country that still fads to meet the mtrogen dIOxide
standard.
The Basin's fIrst Air; Quahty Management Plan (AQMP) was adopted In
1979. It contained an early action plan that emphaSIzed control measures
whIch had been targeted by the federal EnVIronmental ProtectIOn Agency
(EPA) and the state Air Resources Board (ARB) as havmg high priority for
Implementation. The Plan also requested an extenSIOn untIl 1982 for
submIttal of a reVISIOn that would address attainment of the carbon
monOXIde and ozone standards.
WIth the better data and modelIng methods available for the 1982 ReVIsion
of the AQMP, it became apparent that the Plan could not demonstrate
attainment by the 1987 deadlme reqUIred by the federal Clean Au Act.
Therefore, the 1982 AQMP ReVISIOn proposed a long range strategy that
could result III attamment III 20 years. In 1987, a federal court ordered the
EPA to dIsapprove the 1982 AQMP Revision because it did not demonstrate
attainment bv the 1987 deadline.
"'
September, 1988
j
.:
DRAFT 1988 .M? -
--"- ~ ---..
-=--- =~ Ij';
.
PURPOSE OF THE 1988 REVISION OF THE AIR QUALITY
MANAGEMENT PLAN (AQMP)
The purpose of the 1988 Revision of the AQMP is to set forth a
comprehensive control program that WIll lead the South Coast Air Basm into
compliance WIth all federal and state air quality standards. This goal has
been set by the Board of Directors of the South Coast Air Quality
Management District (the DistrIct) and the Executive Committee of the
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG).
In 1988. the DIstrict Board adopted a policy callmg for attainment of all the
federal and state health standards at the earhest practIcable date, but no
later than:
December 31. 1996 for nitrogen dioxide.
December 31, 1997 for carbon monoxide.
December 31. 2007 for ozone and PM 10.
The AQMP includes i.nterim goals for ozone and PM 10 to be met by the year
2000. For ozone. the interim goal is to reduce maximum concentrations to
no higher than the Stage I emergency episode level (0.20 ppm). and to
reduce the average per capita exposure to ozone levels above the federal
standard by 70 percent compared to 1985. For PMlO. the Interim goal IS to
attain the federal standards.
The Distnct is responsIble for completing the overall AQMP. with major
elements contrIbuted by SCAG and the Califorma Air Resources Board.
SCAG is responsible for developing regional plans for transportatlOn
management. growth and land use. These plans each include strategies that
contribute to air quality improvement. and are included in the AQMP. The
California Air Resources Board is responsible for developing mobile source
control measures. such as vehIcle emission standards and fuel speCIfIcations.
Once the 1988 AQMP Revision is adopted locally. and approved by the
California Air Resources Board, it wIll be included in the State
Implementation Plan (SIP). It will then serve as the framework for all future
air pollution control efforts in the South Coast Air Basin
ii
September, 1988
EXEC UTIVE eM M-ARY"~
__ ___ ":..': 0 _ .0'
SOURCES AND QUANTITIES OF EMISSIONS
Figure 1 shows the relative contribution of certain emissions from each of the
major categories of sources during 1985, the baseline year used to represent
the current situation. For some pollutants, such as carbon monoxide, the
emissions are overwhelmingly due to mobile sources -- primarily cars. trucks
and buses. For other pollutants. such as reactive orgamc gases and oxides of
nitrogen (the precursors of ozone). the sources of emissions are more
diverse.
Figure 1
Relative Contnbution By Stationary
And Mobile Sources to 1985 Emissions
-=-
87%
9%
CX)
(Tocal: 50430 TOIIIfOay)
ROO
(Total. 1246 Toas/Day)
lD~~
- flESICXJIt4MJIERV
59%
(/\
13%
14%
NOlI:
(Total. lOoW Toas!Day)
a cmER ~
IZ2I ~
iii
September. 1988
~
1
o A AFT '1 98 8 A I,-e 2::;~o r- ~
';=J:.;~-u Xcl)i"Wr
.
The Basin's air quality problem cannot be solved by controlling anyone
category of sources. For example, Table 1 shows the 1985 emissions of
ozone precursors (RaG and NOx) for each of the categories. Even if the
emissions from any two of these categories were totally eliminated,
substantially more controls for the remaining two would be required to
achieve the reductions necessary to attain the ozone standard.
TABLE 1
EmIssions of Ozone Precursors in 1985
(tons/day)
ROG NOx
Residential/Commercial/Services 280 142
Industrial/Manufacturing 310 144
On-Road Mobile Sources 578 619
Other Mobile Sources 78 135
-
Total emissions in 1985 1,246 1,040
I
,
!
;
I
=
I
-
Iv
September, 1988
,
EXECUTIVE & M--ARY~_
.e
FUTURE AIR QUALITY WITH NO ADDITIONAL CONTROLS
The years 2000 and 2010 were selected to be the baselines for emissions
forecasts. These forecasts were denved using the 1985 emissions data,
adjusting them for the projected growth, and assuming full implementation of
all rules of the District and the ARB that were adopted prior to December
31, 1987.
The forecasts show a reduction in emissIOns of most pollutants by the year
2000. But, by 2010, emissions are predIcted to rise nearly as high or higher
than the 1985 levels. FIgure 2 shows this pattern for reactIve organic gases
and oxides of mtrogen. This resurgence in emissions IS due entirely to the
impact of growth, with two-thIrds of this growth due to natural increases
(births over deaths) rather than people mOVIng In from other areas. Almost
all the emission reductions expected over the next few years as a result of the
rules currently In effect will be lost to the Impact of the projected 37 percent
increase In populatIon and the related increases In jobs, hOUSIng and traffic
shown in Table 2.
FIGURE 2
Emi~ions With And Without Growth
20001 ] 1600,
~ OTHER lo4OB1LE ! I D ON-ROAlllo4OBILE J8:iil OTHEFlIolOBILE
. D ON~ I<OSILE
l - RE&/OOIol.../SEFlV e2 INDUlIIMANUF j _ RE8./OOLlIUBERV lZZI INDUS IIoIANUF
WIG
11500. 1039 10SS
1246 W/O r WIG I
T T 1lO4
0 WIG 1164 0
N 101" I N ~
S S W/O 0 w/oa
I w/Oa WIOOI I
0 764 764 0 llO3 603
A - _I A , i ~ _!
v v 600~. i
I' , :
600 I
II ! I , I
I!
I I I ; I
" I I I
0 01 I I ,
1986 2000 2010 1Q66 2000 2010
ROG NOx
v
September, 1988
-, I
j-
DRAFT~988 A MP...-_~
'1 ~- ':::1---;:, ~ - ~ ..
--- - ,-,
=:, -.!.~ 'f"'J ..
.
I
I
I
I
J
j
TABLE 2
Socia-Economic Growth Forecasts
for the South Coast Air Basin
Comparison of the year 2010 to the year 1985
Population 37% increase
Housing Units 46% increase
Total Employment 47% increase
Retail Employment -- 47% increase
Vehicle Miles Traveled 68% increase
Vehicles In Use 35 % increase
Vehicle Trips 72% Increase
Controlhng growth alone, however, will not solve the Basin's air quality
problem. Even if no future growth were assumed, the emission reductions
expected by the year 2010 as a result of existing rules would not be nearly
enough to bring the Basin into compliance with the alr quality standards for
ozone, PM10 and carbon monoxide.
:I
Forecasts for the year 2010 show that the distribution of errusslOns
throughout the Basin will change over the years, with a SIgnificant decrease
in emissions in the western part and an increase in the eastern part.
Computer modeling was used to estimate the effect this distribution would
have on air quality. Even though the Basin's total emissions of ROG and
NOx are nearly the same in the year 2010 as they were in 1985. the resulting
ozone distribution is very different. Modeling predIcts that there would be
large scale ( 0.11 ppm ) reductIon in the ozone concentratIons in Los Angeles
and Orange counties, but a corresponding scale of deterioration in the inland
areas. The peak ozone concentration would be reduced by 0.06 ppm and the
affected area would shift eastward and would be larger.
-
I
vi
September. 1988
EXECUTIVE .M~A-Ro'f:_-
=:.
THE ATTAINMENT STRATEGY
In developmg the AQMP, all the potential control measures that could be
available by the year 2007 were identified and, to the extent possible, their
emission reductions were quantified. These control measures were
categorIzed into three tiers, based upon their readiness for implementatIOn.
Tier I - Full implementation of known control technologies and management
practices.
Tier I controls are those that can be adopted within the next five years using
currently avaIlable technological applications and management practices.
Tier I control measures, summarized in Table 3, are expected to be
Implemented by 1993 except for transportatIOn factlity constructIons which
may continue up to 2007.
The total estImated COS! for the Tier I measures that have cost data IS about
$8.0 milhon per day. This represents an average cost of about 6S cents per
day for each reSident of the Basm. Improved technology may reduce the
costs. On the other hand, the estimated air quality benefit is about $2 per
day per capita
Computer modelIng has mdlcated that TIer I measures will brIng the Basm
into complIance wIth the federal standards for carbon monOXIde and mtrogen
dIOxide. AddItIonal control measures are needed to meet the PM 10 and
ozone standards.
Tier II. Significant advancement of today's technological applications and
vigorous regulatory inten"ention.
TIer II measures mclude already-demonstrated control technologIes, but
requue advancements that can reasonably be expected to occur in the near
future. \Vhen necessary, these advancements are promoted through
regulatory action, such as settmg standards at levels that force the
advancement of existing technology, or establishmg a system of ermssion
charges that proVIde an economic incentive to reduce emissions.
vii
September, 1988
f
L
DRAFT 1988 AO'P~'
I _~ ~ ~ h W:it6P
.
,
TIer II measures mainly focus on transponation sources and the use of
coatings and solvents. Tier II measures and goals are summarized in
Table 4. All the TIer II goals are expected to be achieved by 2000 except for
transportation facility construction which may continue until 2007.
Computer modeling indicates that the combination of Tier I and Tier II
controls will bring the Basin into compliance with the federal, but not the
state, standard for PMlO.
To meet the state standard for PM 10, and the state and federal ozone
standards. additional controls beyond Tier II will De required.
TIER III - DEVELOPMENT OF NEW TECHNOLOGY
Tier III programs are designed to bring about major technological
breakthroughs to further reduce emissions of reactive organic gases. Unlike
the fIrst two tIers, which focus on implementing and strengtherung known
control measures, Tier III promotes research, development and widespread
commercial application of technologies that may not exist yet, but may be ~
reasonably expected given the rapid technological advances experIenced over
the past 20 years.
Although no specifIC control measures can be summarized for Tier III. the
programs included In thIS tier are directed primarily at further reducing
ROG emissions from solvents and coatings, and from motor vehicles.
Possible Tier III control strategies for solvents and coatings mclude further
improvement in water-based products, ultraviolet-curable coatmgs, two-
component coatings. and non-reactive solvents. These strategies, along WIth
the prohibition of certain coating processes, offer the promise of almost
complete elimmation of ROG from solvents and coatings.
With respect to clean-fueled vehicles, recent progress in fuel cells, solar cells,
storage batteries, and superconductors offer the promise of eliminating
combustion processes from motor vehicles almost entirely.
viii
September, 1988
EXECUTIVE. M MARY
-.
If sufficient technologies to achieve the standards are not identifiable by the
mId-nineties, a contingency plan will be developed for replacing high-
polluting industries with low-polluting industries having equivalent
employment potential.
Modeling indIcates that a further 90 percent reduction of ROG from solvents
and coatings, and total converSIOn of the vehicle fleet to clean fuels, can
brIng the Basin very close to the federal ozone standard with a Basin peak of
12.6 pphm.
There is some uncertainty In the ozone model at low ozone concentrations.
ThIS uncertainty, along with the inability to predict the future for technology
that does not yet eXIst, must be taken into account when trying to determine
the possIble air qualIty Improvement associated with TIer III. Further study
will be required to determine if, or how much, addltiopal control WIll be
necessary to meet the federal and state ozone standards
Modeling indIcates that to meet the state standards for PMIO and ozone, we
will require further technology advancement than just solvent substitution
and clean fuels.
ix
September, 1988
-
.
.
DRAFT 1988 AQMP-
.
--- _i ~~ ?
PREDICTION OF AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS
The air quality improvements predicted as a result of each of the three tiers
of the attamment strategy are shown in FIgure 3.
Figure 3
Projection of Future Air Quality in the South Coast Air Basin
in Comparison with the Most Stringent Federal Standards
(%)
'OOf
350
300
250
200
150
100
00
0
N02
i
PM10 OZONE co
POLLUTANT
_ leB5
o TIER:
~ 2000
o TIER'I
o 2010
1m!! TIER III
To estimate the degree of aIr qualIty improvement expected before TIer III
measures are put into effect, an evaluation was made for the year 2000,
assuming maximum implementation of the control measures in Tiers I and II.
The results are;
1. ComplIance with all federal and state standards for carbon monoxide,
2. Compliance with all federal and state standards for nitrogen dioxide,
3. Compliance WIth the federal annual and 24-hour average PMlO
standard, but without any safety margin,
4. Basinwide peak 24-hour average PMlO concentrations would be
about 2.4 times the state standard, and the annual average PMlO
concentration would be about 1.5 times the state standard,
x
September, 1988
EX E CUT I V E S & Alt'V:::: =- ~
- - -<-.
-- -- -
-- - -=---
-_ - -I
~
I
i
5.
Peak ozone concentrations will be lowered to the level of the Stage I
Episode ( 0.20 ppm),
--
;~
!
6.
The Basinwide average per capita exposure to ozone levels above the
federal standard will be lowered about 90 percent from the 1985
average.
,!
SCHEDULE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF ATTAINMENT
STRATEGIES
The schedule for implementation of each tier of the attainment strategy is
shown in FIgure 4. The nnlestone for complete adoption of Tier I control
measures IS 1993. Tier II goals for emission reduction are expected to be
achieved b~ 1998.
FIGURE 4
Attainment Strategy Timetable
1988
1993
~ooo
200)
2007
~ ~ T
k'O:rkpl et.e .!Idoptlon !
b.L.Iier 1 Cont:.ra 1s I
eV18W and I.pleaent ehlev.
iar II , III Proarams ~iar n Goals
l · ~
ceelerate I_pl..entatlon
! Tier III S~rateaies
TIER
I
L.. ....DOPTION
r:::::: IMPLEHElITATIOIl
I = =- =- _- _ ___ := .:: :: :: ~ -= :: ~ ~ ~ ::: =~- ~ = ~]
__IMPLEMENT....TION
I
__ I ~~~~-=-~:::::=---:J
.
t
t
I
I
RESEARCH , DEVELOPMENT AND FORMULATION
TIER
II
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
TIER
nI
COMMERCIALIZ....TIOll
IKPLEItENTATION
. ....cti~iti.. r.l.t~ to transportation tacility construction
uill continu. until ~007
xl
September, 1988
DR AFT 1 988 A& P =-~ ~ 3- ~ -=- . ~ ~_... t'-"-"r~~ p .
,
t
Achieving the Tier ill emission reduction goals depends largely on research
and technological breakthroughs that may reasonably be expected to occur
during the next two decades. But actual implementation of Tier III measures
is projected to begin as the Tier II goals are achieved in 1998. The Tier III
measures will then be implemented on an accelerated schedule intended to
achieve attainment by the year 2007.
Progress toward attainment will be tracked in annual status reports to the
District Board. Additional control measures will be proposed, or others
advanced. as necessary or appropriate.
RESPONSIBiliTY FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF ATTAINMENT
STRATEGIES
Tier I control measures can be implemented by eXIsting agencIes using their
existing authority. The priority for each measure's implementation is based
on the following criteria:
Potential for reducing emissions
TIme required for implementation
Technical and legal readiness for implementation
Cost effectiveness of control
Availability of financing
Short term benefit in relation to long term goals
Number of years benefIt would accrue
Based upon the above criteria, the responsIble implementing agencies, the
adoption dates, and the associated activities have been identifIed.
Tier II control measures are primarily extensions of Tier I measures. but with
more stringent requirements. Tier IT goals are heavily dependent on
research and development to facilitate their commercial application and
widespread use. The technology advancement and demonstration projects
xii
September, 1988
EXECUTIV& M MARY
-.
needed to ensure meeting the Tier II goals are provided along with the
responsible agencies and the time frames for each measure's implementation.
The District will be responsible for implementing all measures related to
stationary sources. Growth management measures wIll be the primary
responsibility of local governments, but there may be some involvement WIth
such regional organizations as SCAG and the District. Local transportatlon
commissions, along With Caltrans, WIll be responsIble for Improvements to
transportation infrastructure. Further controls on motor vehicles, mcludmg
alternative fuels, are the responsibility of the ARB with the asSIstance of the
Distnct.
In some cases, regulatory actions such as technology-forcmg standards,
emission charges, and growth-management measures will be needed to bnng
about the technology necessary to achieve Tier II goals The regulatory
actions that require legislatIOn along WIth the responsible agencies have been
proVIded.
The strategIes necessary to achIeve Tier III goals are the responsibility of the
District, in conjunctlOn with the state Au Resources Board, and local and
regional transportation and planning agenCies. A task force should be
formed to coordinate necessary regulatory actlOns and to mOllIter progress
toward meeting the Tier II and Tier III goals.
XIII
September, 1988
-
DRAFT 1988 A.P
- -: "i-?
.
,
TABLE 3
SUMMARY OF TIER I CONTROL MEASURES
Controls on the use of coatings and solvents
Twenty-two control measures such as using low voc paints and solvents, higher transfer efficIency
methods for applying coatings and controlling fumes from coating operahons. Aho, reducing
emisslQns from consumer products such as aerosol sprays and underarm deodorants
Controls on the production, refining, and distributrioD of petroleum and gas
Fifteen control measures to control emlSslons from n~finery heaters and boilers, od field steam
generators, valves, pumps and compressors, and improve vapor recovery systems
Controls on industrral and commercial processes
Ten control measures such as reducmg emIssions from small sources whIch Me exempt from
existing rules, controlling emISSIOns from boilers and mternal combustion engines
Controls on residential equipment and public senices
Nme control measures such as reducUlg mtrogen OXIde emISSIons from water heaters and furll.,ices,
controlhng fugItive emISSIOn!> from pubhdy-o"-'TIed wastewater trealment plants, contfolhng dus'
from roads and parkmg lots, and transportmg solId wastes out of the Basin for dIsposal
Controls on agricultural source!>
Three control measures to reduce reactive emiSSiOn., from pestICide apphcallons, amm(1DIJ from
IJvestock wastes, and fugitIve dust from farmmg operatIons
Controls on other stationary sources
Ten control measure such as requmng use of Best Available Retrofit Control Technoloh'Y for dll
eXlstlOg sources, ughtenmg requirements for New Source Re"'cw, reqllmng !ow-emlsSlDn ITl.lfc.ru!..,
for bUlldlllg constructIon, and phasmg out use of fuel 011 and coal by statIOnary sources
Controls on motor ,,-eludes
Nmeteen control measures such as reqmnng stncter emission control standards for nc\.... \"clud"s,
dean fuels for fleet vehJcles. Improved Inspecuon and mamtenance progr<lms and conlrols OJI
diesel powered buses and trucks
Controls on transportation systems and land use
Twenty-(wo control measures to reduce vehicle use, Improve traffic flow, Improve public tranSit,
and manage growth
Control on other mobde sources
Thirteen control measures such as reducmg emiSSIOns from aIrcraft. ShIPS, locomotives,
constructiOn eqUIpment, pleasure boats and off-road motorcycles
XIV
September, 1988
EX E CUT I ve U M M A R~Y;
- -e
TABLE 4
SUMMARY OF TIER II CONTROL MEASURES AND GOALS
Convertmg 40 percent of the passenger vehicles and 70 percent of the
freIght vehicles to operate on clean fuels (e.g.. methanol, fuel cells, or
electrIc power). All dIesel-powered transit buses sWitched to clean fuels
(e.g., methanol or lIqUId propane gas)
Reducmg the remammg emissions from other mobIle sources (aircraft,
ShiPS, locomotlves, constructlon eqUIpment) by 50 percent
Reducmg the remammg ROG emIssions from solvents and coating by 50
percent.
Reducmg the remammg ROG emiSSIOns from consumer products by 50
percent
MInlmlzmg potentl3lmcreases In emISSIons from eXlstmg statIOnary
source~
)0/
September, 1988
---
BE~~RE DISTRiBUTION CK CONTENT OF ALL
CISTRIBUTION OF RESOLUTION ~ 77/ b
COUDell Iv1eetlng Date ~~/I /
Agenda Item ~ ::: L
Was l t amended? /'f (J
FOR CI
LERK'S ACTION
ORDINANCE If.
Introduced:
Adopted:
ALWAYS PUBLISH ADOPTED ORDINANCES
Cross out Attorney's approval
VOTE: Afflrwatlve:
Negat:l..ve:
Abstaln:
Absent:
PROOF VOTES WITH ANOTHER PERSON BEFORE ANYTHING
DISTRIBUTION: ORIGINAL to he slgned, sealed and flIed ln Vault.
7-0
NEWSPAPER PUBLICATION (Date:
Department orlglnatlng staff report( Laurle Lleberman)
Orctlnances only for Attorney ( Claudla Thompson) 2
~anagement Servlces Lynne Barrette ORDINANCES ONLY 1
Agency mentloned ln document or staff report
(certlfled?)
SubJect f11e (agenda packet) 1
Counter flle 1
Others:
(Review for departments who need to k~ow).
Alrport
AudltorlUI'"
BUlldlng Dept.
C!ED
Parklng Auth.
Personnel
P.::n
Plannlng
Pollce
.-!--
Flnance
Purchaslng
Recr!Parks
Transportatlon
General Servo
Llbrary
Hanager
Treasurer
?lre
SEND FOUR COPIES OF ALL ORDINANCES TO:
CODED SYSTEMS
120 !'<laln Street
Avon, New Jersey 07717
4
SEND FOUR COPIES OF ALL ORDINANCES TO: 4
Debra Myrlck
Santa Monlca Munlclpal Court
1725 Maln Street, Room 118
Santa Monlca, CA 90401 Total Coples
--,
_~5
...... ~
.
.
RESOLUTION NO.77l6
City Council Series
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
SUPPORTING THE ADOPTION OF THE DRAFT 1988
AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN
WHEREAS, the South Coast Air Basis has one of the most
pronounced air quality problems in the nation; and
WHEREAS, of the standards established for six criteria air
pollutants in order to protect public health, the Basin currently
complies with only the lead and sulfur dioxide standards; and
WHEREAS, monitored ozone levels are nearly three times the
national standard, carbon monoxide and fine particulate levels
are nearly twice the national average, and the Basin is the only
area in the nation that still exceeds the nitrogen dioxide
standard; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of the Air Qual i ty Management Plan
(AQMP) is to provide a regional plan to bring the Basin into
compilance with federal and state air quality standards,
protecting the public health and welfare; and
WHEREAS, the private and public sectors need to join
together to address the Basin's air quality problems; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Monica, as an employer and a
local government entity should take appropriate actions within
its powers to address the problem of air pollution,
- 1 -
.
. ...
.
.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The city Council hereby expresses its support
for the adoption of the 1988 Air Quality Management Plan as a
major step forward in improving regional air quality.
SECTION 2. The city Clerk shall transmit a copy of this
resolution to the South Coast Air Quality Management District and
the Southern California Association of Governments.
SECTION 3. The city Clerk shall certify to the adoption of
this Resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be
in full force and effect.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
~~~
ROBERT M. MYERS a
City Attorney
legaljaqrnp3
- 2 -
.
~ -- --1 .
.
.
Adopted and
~
I hereby certify that
was duly adopted by the Cit
foregoing Resolution No. 7716(CCS)
the City of Santa Monica
at a meeting thereof held on November 1, 1988 by the following
Council vote:
Ayes:
Councilmembers:
Finkel, Jennings, A. Katz, H.
Katz, Reed, Zane, Mayor Conn
Noes: Councilmembers:
None
Abstain: Councilmembers:
None
Absent: Councilmembers:
None
tll' -
:. '
ATTEST:
\
" .
I,
'j
I
\
I
,1 \ 1 \ ')