CARB tells Arnold to SUCK IT

[Richard Cheese]

http://people.bakersfield.com/home/Blog/noholdsbarred

The Governor is supposed to be the only govt entity that CAN control this rebel group who is hell-bent on single-handedly destroying California

Perhaps I’m hopelessly old school, but if the governor’s office called and wanted me at a meeting, my only two questions would be “What do I need to prepare?” and “What time?”

And I don’t even work for the dude.

(Course, that’d be my response if City Manager Alan Tandy ever called too — sigh! — if only ...)

But not staffers at the California Air Resources Board. No, no, noooo.

The governor’s office asked for a meeting earlier this month with CARB staffers and representatives of the construction industry to go over a report that shows diesel emissions have dropped so much because of the economic slowdown that a new “off-road” rule about to go into effect may not be needed, at least not yet.

Ehhh, CARB said, they might be able to send a low-level staffer, but not anyone in the upper ranks making actual decisions on this rule.

That raised more than a few eyebrows, not to mention hackles, among Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s staff, which promptly canceled the meeting, from what I’m told.

The Associated General Contractors of America then filed an emergency petition with CARB last week asking that the March 1 deadline for the off-road rule (which requires large construction equipment to be retrofitted, repowered or sold out of state to reduce emissions) be delayed since emissions are already below levels targeted in the rule.

CARB has 30 days to respond.

Arguably, the off-road rule won’t hit that many contractors too hard this March. But only because the Legislature put some speed bumps into the rule last year in light of economic realities the industry is facing.

Contractors can get credits if they show their hours of operation, fleet sizes or both were reduced starting in 2006. Since construction has been virtually at a standstill the last four years, most companies are expected to be in compliance based on those credits. No thanks to CARB, of course.

CARB is responsible, though, for the construction industry report that seems to negate the need for its own rule.

In the first phase of the rule, CARB gathered previously unknown data detailing how many pieces of heavy construction equipment are in use in California, how old they are and how many hours they operate to get a baseline emissions inventory.

In September, the Associated General Contractors took those numbers and punched them into CARB’s own emissions generation computer model. Bingo. It shows that without requiring any retrofitting, repowering or fleet reduction at all, the industry will be below target levels for NOx for the next 11 years and below the PM2.5 targets until about 2014.

By that time, manufacturers are expected to come out with engines that burn “as clean as natural gas” on all new equipment, driving down emissions even further as older equipment is retired, according to Mike Lewis, spokesman for Construction Industry Air Quality Coalition.

“We tried to persuade CARB not to go forward with the rule until we had the inventory, but they said ‘No, it’s urgent for public health,’ and went forward with their guesstimates,” Lewis said. “Turns out they were way off base.”

We have fewer pieces of equipment than thought, 102,000 as opposed to the 142,000 CARB staffers had assumed. It’s also newer than anticipated and operates fewer hours.

CARB so far has been fairly mum on the report. When it was brought up at the board’s meeting in December, staffers said they wouldn’t be able to sift through the data and have a response until July.

Huh? That would be six months after the rule goes into effect — under which at least some contractors could suffer steep fines. When the board pushed, they allowed they might be able to give a response by April, but they need to look more closely at the report and might even need more data.

That’s rich.

They rushed to get their regulations approved without even basic data. Now they have the data and they can’t be bothered to give it the once-over. Classic.

I emailed CARB to ask about the AGC report.

Erik White, chief of the heavy diesel strategies branch, wrote back early last week that, “we have little to say about the analysis at this time as we literally just received details regarding their methodology and conclusion.”

They will evaluate the construction industry’s report and then conduct their own in-depth analysis, I was told.

To understand how truly “funny” that is in a maddening way, you have to first know that the diesel health effects report that gave such urgency to imposing this rule on the construction industry was written by Hien Tran in 2006.

Yes, the same Tran who later wrote the 2008 health effects report that was the basis for the on-road (trucks) diesel rule.

Tran was discovered to have lied about having a Ph.D. in statistics from UC Davis and that on-road health report was tossed out at the board’s December meeting. Board members promised to have it redone by a neutral third party. Well then, why not toss out the 2006 off-road health report by Tran, I wondered?

It was peer reviewed, I was told.

So?

It’s now known (though CARB tried hard to cover it up) that Tran played fast and loose with the truth. If his work is suspect in one report, it’s suspect in the rest.

All of which is to say I think it’s “funny” that CARB staffers are so intent on combing through the construction industry’s emissions report and doing their own analysis while they steadfastly refuse to look at their own work and the studies they use with such an eagle eye.

“This board and the chairman need to come to grips with the fact that this whole episode is extremely damaging to the agency’s credibility,” Lewis said.

I don’t know about the board, but given staff’s attitude toward everyone up to and including the governor and certainly the public, it’s pretty clear there’s a tail and a there’s dog — and we’re the ones gettin’ wagged.

Opinions expressed in this column are those of Lois Henry, not The Bakersfield Californian. Her column appears Wednesdays and Sundays. Comment at people.bakersfield.com/home/Blog/

noholdsbarred, call her at 395-7373 or e-mail lhenry@bakersfield.com

[Richard Cheese]

already brought into the light is the fact that CARB has used shotty scientific research. Also, their main researcher was caught with false credentials, saying he had a doctorate from UC Davis, when it is actually from an online college ran by a child molester.

This guy still has a job? he oversaw the offroad diesel study, as well as the newer study that gave way to the new implementation that will destroy the trucking industry in the state of CA

why does this guy still have a job? Why arent the studies he oversaw not being looked at, or re-done?

[Just Mike]

I believe that it is because these CARB people want a reason to exist. With out any issues for them to claim, they have no purpose. I am all for trying to keep the environment clean as possible but to try and cut peoples throat in the process is just ridiculous.

[ltr450rider]

HHmmmmm, I wonder how anything will get built in the entire state of CA if Construction companies have to close down due to extreme fines issued by a group of people whose entire mission seems to be based on emotional biases. Simply put, they want what they think is best in thier own opinions, instead of whats best for the economy and the state.

Construction companies leave CA because they cant operate thier equipment=Loss of tax revenue to a broke azz state.

Construction workers lose thier jobs because thier company shut down or moved=Loss of tax revenue to a broke azz state.

Skilled workers then leave california due to lack of jobs, then california gets sold to mexico where there are no environmental laws, which makes the environmenatlists cause useless.

My hours just got cut to 20 hours a week, I'm not happy about anything that keeps me from working right now.